![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This weekend's patterning
Sep. 24th, 2012 08:19 pm- Interestingly enough, the skirts of the Cherry Hill gown and the first gown I did were both cut in curves on the front corners. Neither were polonaises or had loops to pull up the skirt. Also, they're self-fabric trimmed down the front and just around the curves.
- I have something to add to my usual caveats about trusting museum-given dates. Today I looked at a closed-front en fourreau gown in a striped floral fabric that was marked "1760-1770, remade 1780" - because the fabric is early-looking and the general thought is that fourreau gowns are earlier, and so if you have that plus closed front it must have been remade. But there's no indication that any seams have been changed at all. It's patched, but under the arms, where it was worn. So what I'm saying is, don't assume remodeling when a museum's database/catalogue says so and back pleats go later than most people think.
- I touched a pair of sleeves from the 1720s or 1730s today. With my hands.
- Another gown has nine (original) loops down the inside of the skirt for drawing it up - not something I can find in Arnold or Waugh - and they skew at the top towards the front. I need to mock that up somehow and see what the end result would be so I know what to draw.
- Very, very happy to say that pretty much everything I've worked on for the whole project so far has at least one attribute that makes it worth inclusion. Most have two.
- It seems kind of common for lining and silk sleeve seams to be sewn together, the front or back folded under and lapped around the other, then sewn all the way through. Baumgarten mentions lapping, but not the sandwiching. So that is a plus to learn.
Still would like to find a riding habit, a round gown, and a full waist seam, but
Fixing dates on paintings came up naturally in conversation, and I was able to tell Doug I thought the Zoffany was dated too early! I've been sitting on that since December. The best bit was that after I said it and explained about the woman's dress, he admitted that he'd thought the man's uniform was later! He also suggested I try the Schenectady Museum for clothing. I'd previously counted them out because they're a science museum with a planetarium, but apparently they used to be a local history museum, and they kept their costume collection when they changed their mission.
( Power of Three )
- I have something to add to my usual caveats about trusting museum-given dates. Today I looked at a closed-front en fourreau gown in a striped floral fabric that was marked "1760-1770, remade 1780" - because the fabric is early-looking and the general thought is that fourreau gowns are earlier, and so if you have that plus closed front it must have been remade. But there's no indication that any seams have been changed at all. It's patched, but under the arms, where it was worn. So what I'm saying is, don't assume remodeling when a museum's database/catalogue says so and back pleats go later than most people think.
- I touched a pair of sleeves from the 1720s or 1730s today. With my hands.
- Another gown has nine (original) loops down the inside of the skirt for drawing it up - not something I can find in Arnold or Waugh - and they skew at the top towards the front. I need to mock that up somehow and see what the end result would be so I know what to draw.
- Very, very happy to say that pretty much everything I've worked on for the whole project so far has at least one attribute that makes it worth inclusion. Most have two.
- It seems kind of common for lining and silk sleeve seams to be sewn together, the front or back folded under and lapped around the other, then sewn all the way through. Baumgarten mentions lapping, but not the sandwiching. So that is a plus to learn.
Still would like to find a riding habit, a round gown, and a full waist seam, but
Fixing dates on paintings came up naturally in conversation, and I was able to tell Doug I thought the Zoffany was dated too early! I've been sitting on that since December. The best bit was that after I said it and explained about the woman's dress, he admitted that he'd thought the man's uniform was later! He also suggested I try the Schenectady Museum for clothing. I'd previously counted them out because they're a science museum with a planetarium, but apparently they used to be a local history museum, and they kept their costume collection when they changed their mission.
( Power of Three )
