Friday, October 31, 2014

Clothes That Are Too Tight

 I don't know whether to apologize for not posting yesterday and promise to do better or be realistic and say that right now, it's highly unlikely I'll post every day unless I've accomplished something postable. There's no point in nattering on about nothing and I am sure you're not interested in what I ate for breakfast. Wednesday, I mostly knit. Yesterday, I did some sewing and mostly knit. Knitting is hard to post, especially when you're designing your own sweater. The process is incremental and so often one row forward and two rows back that progress is hard to detect. More on that later.





This picture is blurry. That's the best I could do with the mirror shot and there was no one around to take the picture. The pants are unfinished - Vogue 9035 - WITHOUT the zipper or the 1" waistband and at the original pattern length. As you can see, they are too short and too high. I'd need to shorten the crotch depth by at least an inch if I wanted to add the waistband which is actually typical for me but I wanted to see what the pattern as is would look like.





The pleats are a bit tricky but otherwise the design sews together nicely and I really like the French seams only the points are more pointed than the pattern envelope allows you to believe. The above pleats are the soft version and....





... this image shows the pleats pressed and top-stitched. If you go to the Vogue web page, you'll see that there are no picture of the pressed pleats front on. I hadn't expected them to be quite this pointy and I don't think the points - plus the fact that I could have gone up a size - are flattering to me right now. I have to say that an anti-anxiety drug that causes weight gain seems counterproductive to me because my increasing weight is surely causing me a lot of anxiety - LOL. If it doesn't reverse itself soon, I'll be making some changes HOWEVER... until then...





... reality is that clothes that are too tight only make you think about how heavy you are and are not - IMHO - flattering or conducive to losing weight. Clothes that fit flatter. Clothes that sausage don't. The pants above are Burda 8157 - a classic, straight leg, trouser style that I find...





... looks good on me and feels comfortable. I decided to sew it in jean yesterday and when I pulled out the fabric folded inside was the front already cut out in the size I wanted. I vaguely remember changing my mind because I'd lost weight earlier this year and they were going to be too big. The pair above are a size smaller than the ones I'm sewing now. I'll take this half cut project as a blessing.






I've shown this Vogue Knitting Fall 2005 Cropped Cardigan a few times. It's the pattern I'm working from although I'm only following the general outline. It's written with a chart and while a lot of people like working from a chart, I haven't found that rhythm yet especially when the symbol means this on the front and that on the back. Since the front rows are read left to right and the back rows are read right to left and you know you're on the back I don't understand why it can't be what it actually is without double checking if you need to do the opposite. I'm just saying.... why make it complicated? ANYWAY... I'm changing things.




Instead of the rolled edge, I used a Sea Scallop edge which has a gentle waving look and then, instead of the stockinette stitch band at the bottom, I used...





... a horizontal twisted rib stitch with nine repeats. I really like both the look and the stability of the stitch only my sample gauge and my real life knitting didn't match out mathematically and when I took the piece off the needles to test fit it, it was too short so I measured it, calculated how many more stitches I needed to add, and have started over. Naturally, I was knitting it all in one piece so I didn't just shorten the back or one front, I shortened both fronts and the back. And that's okay. It doesn't bother me to have to take this out and rework it. I like the challenge of figuring out a pattern.

SO... I'm not sure what to say to those of you who were looking forward to seeing Vogue 9035. On my body, as is, right now, it's not flattering and it's too short. I've put all the parts and pieces aside and when I'm down at least ten pounds, I'll pull it out again and see what I think then. If it's doable, I'll alter the crotch depth by moving the yoke down and add the zipper and waistband. In the image above, they're already hemmed the 3/4" suggested in the pattern. If you sew the pants, I'd love to see a picture.

Talk soon - Myrna

Grateful - finding the jeans almost already cut out was encouraging to my sew the size you are and you'll feel a lot better belief.

Dress shabbily - or too tight - and they remember the dress; dress impeccably and they remember the woman.
- Coco Chanel

6 comments:

  1. I don't know if you are open to feed back. If not, delete this now.

    In my opinion you look much slimmer now in the clothes you posted above than you do at your lighter weight but wearing some of the shapes that are typical of Marcy Tilton's patterns. You might want to try some different styles because I truly believe you aren't showing yourself to your best advantage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not a problem at all. I appreciate the feedback. It's so hard to see myself objectively. I'd appreciate more specifics. Do you mean I look slimmer in the Burda jeans than other Marcy garments? Any other examples? If you have time to provide more info, I'd really like to think about what you see and what I could do with that feedback. I've been exploring garments with more interesting architecture but I want that architecture to benefit me.

      Delete
    2. Just jumping in here to say that part of what's going on is the pose and angle of the model to the camera. The 'mirror shot' is straight on (so you will look your widest) while in the outdoor picture you are at a three quarter angle to the camera. You see the 3/4 angle quite a bit in modeling as it shows the clothes whilst making the model appear slimmer.

      Nest, camera height. In the mirror shot the camera is right at hip level - whatever is closer to the camera will appear bigger, thus the height of the camera is exaggerating/emphasizing the width of the hips.

      In the outdoor shot it looks like the camera is at bust height or possibly a bit higher - this height will emphasize the bust/shoulders over the hips.

      Most people will prefer the look of a classic/close fit in classic shapes over volume added (especially at the hips). So you may indeed prefer the flattery of the pants in the outdoor shot (i personally think you look just great in a straight trouser!). But i wanted to point out that the pose and camera height is exaggerating whatever's going on in these two pics - if you really want a side by side use the same camera height and pose to compare.

      And thanks Myrna for the knitting report! I've done no knitting or crochet, so it's fascinating to see all that goes into it. The part you've done so far looks really pretty and also easy to wear. Yay! have fun, steph

      Delete
    3. AND... the other part that's going on is... I'm fifteen pounds and 3 1/2" of hip smaller in that Burda jean picture. It was taken earlier this year before the sudden surge.

      I think you'd enjoy knitting Steph. It's like slow sewing and very meditative with plenty of room for individuality and creativity. Right up your alley.

      Delete
  2. I will spend some time looking. It's an observation I've had over some time so I don't think it has much to do with current weight fluctuations. More later or by email.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. I'm looking forward to your thoughts.

      Delete

Thanks for commenting. I appreciate the feedback and the creative conversation.