Pages

Showing posts with label random thoughts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label random thoughts. Show all posts

Monday, June 18, 2012

Please Reissue: Simplicity listened!

Seems like we've gone several new pattern releases without Simplicity putting out a new re-issue of a vintage pattern.

Well, it seems they read my first "Please Reissue" post, because they've put out a new 1940s dress pattern... and it's AWESOME looking! They even styled the model with victory rolls!

Simplicity 1777 is a sweet 1940s dress with gathers down the front and long sleeve or three-quarter sleeve options:
Simplicity circa 1943 Misses' retro dress includes front inset with V or jewel neckline with button detail, front bodice ruching and pleated front slim skirt. Dress can be made with long or 3/4 sleeves. Simplicity archives vintage pattern.
The red and black contrast one is a little Star Trek looking for me, but I'm loving it made up in the floral like the brown one on the model. I can't wait to buy Simplicity 1777!

Just on an aside, nothing else from the Simplicity Early Autumn 2012 Pattern Collection really jumped out at me... what about you? It's probably a good thing, my pattern stash is overflowing as it is.

Thursday, June 7, 2012

Please reissue more...

I shouldn't be complaining, really.

Us vintage fans are lucky that the big four pattern companies re-issue patterns at all. But I've noticed a certain... propensity... of said pattern companies to mostly stick to the slight variations of the same full-skirted 50's dress. Even the ones they label circa the forties seem to have the same silhouette.


Don't get me wrong, I love the full-skirted 50s dress as much as the next gal. And clearly, so do most other sewers, as they're pretty much the most popular pattern reissue I see sewn up again and again.

Or is the 50s dress sewn up so much because that's the most easily obtained vintage/retro pattern re-issue? It's like the chicken or the egg question.

So I'm calling on the big four to add more variety to their pattern re-issues. Something besides dresses, jackets, dresses, suits, and oh yeah, dresses. And something more than a bunch of 50s, with a couple of 30s, 40s, and 60s thrown in for good measure.

I suppose you're wondering why I just don't do like everyone else in the online sewing world wander on down to my local thrift shop and pick up a vintage pattern. That's all well and good if I'm looking for a 90s patterns fit for Elaine Benes (I complain a LOT about my local thrift stores, in case you're not a regular reader). Or you may be wondering why I don't buy what I'm looking for on eBay or Etsy. And I tell you because they either don't have my size, or the pattern costs too much, or both. In some cases, the pattern maker didn't even originally make my size. And as for grading-- I don't want to spend 15 bucks on a pattern only to have to adjust it.

And as long as I'm on the subject, why doesn't McCall's have any reissues? Two others under the McCall's umbrella do (Vintage Vogue and Butterick Retro). And while Simplicity is the only one who's at least provided us with some fun pants and tops in it's Simplicity Retro reissues (in fact, they currently only have one 50s pattern and it's not a full-skirted one), it's total number of retro offerings are scarce at best.

Of course, I'm not talking about the indy brands. There are a few indy brands that specialize in new patterns modeled after vintage looks, including Wearing History and Decades of Style. And it's widely accepted that Colette Patterns are contemporary clothes with vintage flair. If you're new to sewing, the "Big Four" I've been referring to are McCall's, Vogue, Butterick, (Kwik Sew is under their umbrella as well), and Simplicity (which includes New Look and Burda). Burda does have a small handful of reissues as well.

So, at the risk of sounding like I'm giving a 4-H presentation... in summary, the major pattern conglomerates should include more variety in their re-issues because of...

  • Cost - Hey, it's no secret that Simplicity, McCall's, and Butterick can be nabbed for $.99 to $1.99 a piece during sales at a certain chain, while sale Vogues can run you $3.99. Real vintage patterns, on the other hand, can sometimes command a hefty price on eBay, Etsy, flea markets, and other outlets.
  • Size availability - Am I the only one who can never find vintage patterns in my size? Seems like they're mostly in the 32-36 bust range. Petite girls and fuller girls alike enjoy vintage styles too. Not to mention, we're larger than we were back then. And I don't mean fatter. Each generation gets taller as well.
  • Availabilty in general - There were only so many patterns made back in the day-- before they became "vintage". There isn't an endless supply of patterns from the 40s, 50s, and 60s, and they're bound to become more and more scarce. Re-issues are like history books come to life, enabling individuals to experience fashion from the past.
So, I had planned on making this a single post with a list of specific patterns and styles I wished the biggies would reissue. But I just kept thinking of more and more patterns, and decided to make this a series on my blog. There's one specific pattern I'll be discussing at length, that when I asked Simplicity's Facebook (that's a hint) to about reissuing it, tons of people chimed in and agreed.

Are there any specific patterns, styles, or eras you'd like to see reissued? Remember, if you go too far back in time, some of those patterns are available in the costume section as opposed to the various "Retro" or Vintage" sections.

Thursday, May 24, 2012

Maternity patterns: are they a good idea, and where to buy them?

I've already said that sewing is realy only economical if you're (or the person you're sewing for is) going to remain the same size for a while, and the garment will see years of use.

Still, there's something appealing about sewing your own maternity clothes... at least for me. Being able to choose fun patterns, and lengthen what needs lengthening. So I've been mentally cataloguing companies offering maternity patterns.

But first; if you're not a mom and don't plan on becoming one, I realize this post is about as fun as watching grass grow. So I promise posts like this will be few and far between. Further, I'm not pregnant now, so I'm not going to be going all boring-blogging-only-about-my-baby on you. Although the baby I already do have is the best baby ever. Just sayin'.

I do hope to maybe have another baby in the future, and the problems I had last time I was pregnant were the same ones I always have with RTW. Pants too short, sleeves too short, this too wide and that too snug. You know.

But. Just nine months of wear, or less than that actually, seems like too short a time to put a bunch of work into making a garment. I'd probably rather be sewing for the new or current baby, or nesting, or whatever. Not to mention the cost involved with buying maternity patterns and enough fabric to stretch around that expanding girth. My last preg belly was huh-yuuuuge!

So even though I won't be sewing an entire maternity wardrobe if I become pregant again, I'd probably like to me-make a couple of pieces.

Here's a list of maternity pattern resources! Did I leave any out? Have you made any? Do you think maternity sewing is worthwhile?

BUTTERICK

Of the "big four" pattern companies, they're the ones who seemed to have maternity the longest in recent memory. I was going to complain how kinda boring theirs were, maybe even somewhat dated, until I went to the site just now and saw the one I pinned above. Ruching is pretty typical when it comes to maternity wear, but pretty cute nonetheless!

Butterick's selection was limited to just two patterns and labeled simply "maternity" until recently. Sometime last year they added a second, seperate section called "suitable for maternity", which for some reason has just two of their now four regular maternity patterns, plus some of the more loose-fitting regular patterns. Which I must say, does NOT make me want to buy said regular patterns for non-maternity use. I mean, what non-pregnant person wants to wear a dress that's been deemed "suitable for maternity"?

Butterick Maternity & Suitable for Maternity

McCALL'S

McCall's doesn't have any maternity-specific patterns, but added the same "suitable for maternity" section that Butterick did at around the same time. McCall's section does denote, however, that "Hem adjustment may be necessary."

Again, not too sure I'd wear these regular patterns for normal use. The one I pinned above is great... if you'd like to channel your inner pregnant Nicole Richie.

McCall's Suitable for Maternity

KWIK SEW

Kwik Sew offers the standard, basic, maternity fare and is easy to get your hands on if you live near a Hancock Fabrics.

Kwik Sew Maternity

BURDASTYLE

Burda Style Magazine's popular website BurdaStyle.com is another one I don't remember having maternity patterns until very recently.

The handful of maternity pattern downloads they offer are pretty great; basic maternity staples that, if made properly, could be extremely stylish-- which is just how you want to feel when you're heavily pregnant. And while their downloadable patterns aren't readily available during $.99-$1.99 sales like the above pattern-makers, Burdastyle's maternity patterns are reasonably priced in the $5 range.

Burda Style Magazine/BurdaStyle.com Maternity

BURDA
Burda has a line of already printed patterns as well, which are easily available at Jo-Ann and other retailers.

Burda actually has one of the more decent-sized selections of maternity patterns when it comes to the major pattern retailers, and certainly the best selection under the Simplicity Creative Group umbrella. That's because Simplicity and New Look don't currently offer maternity patterns.

Burda's patterns tend to look cute in the thumbnails on the Simplicity website. Then you click on them and they... don't. Their maternity patterns are no exception. Case in point, the pattern on the left above, which, once I clicked on it, turned out to be some sort of a belly-baring maternity crop top over a satin jumpsuit. If you say so.

The one on the right, a bonus pattern image to illustrate my point (plus I was too embarrassed to actually pin these to Pinterest), it's likewoahmaternitygeniepants. Not the most flattering look on anyone, let alone a swollen-ankled pregnant lady. Note to Burda: it's not the mommies who need the diaper allowance.

Still, don't let these patterns fool you. Burda offers a couple of great maternity basics, including a winter coat and a maxi dress. At least that's how the thumbnails look...

Burda Maternity Wear

MEGAN NIELSEN

Fear not, Colette, Sewaholic, and Pattern Runway fans! There's an indie pattern company for the pregnant set, too!

Megan also has some of the absolute best DIY maternity wear tutorials on the web on her sister blog, DIY Maternity.

DIY AND UP-CYCLING

There are a whole host of maternity wear how-to's online... in fact, too many to list. Megan Nielsen's site that I mentioned above is a great starting point. You could also check Pinterest or simply Google "maternity tutorials". Some of my favorites include the various maxi skirt tutorials and ruched T-shirts. There are also various methods to alter non-maternity patterns to include a wider front and longer hem.

VINTAGE PATTERNS
Source: etsy.com via Elisha on Pinterest

Just because some of the big pattern companies don't currently offer maternity patterns, doesn't mean they never did. The usual suspects, Etsy and eBay, are great places to start if you'd like to purchase some of these.

Friday, March 30, 2012

The Pinterest Problem: an update

Apparently I'm one of the only people to talk about Pinterest's copyright issues and other problems, or one of the first to anyway, because my October 2011 post "The Pinterest Problem" continues to get hits-- especially as the site grows.

And apparently it's a hot topic, because Pinterest has updated it's Terms of Service.

Of note, an update relevant to my previous post:
We released simpler tools for anyone to report alleged copyright or trademark infringements.
They're also apparently outlawing Thinspo or Pro-Mia type pictures (I did notice some of those disturbing pics on there last year, amid the chevron-print cookies and DIY chair makeovers) and paving the way for private pinboards. Private pinboards, that annoys me... isn't the point of Pinterest to share and discover new things that others have pinned?

Finally, they pulled a reversal on their previous "NewsCorp buys MySpace" type of service term:
Our original Terms stated that by posting content to Pinterest you grant Pinterest the right for us to sell your content. Selling content was never our intention and we removed this from our updated Terms.
I'll end this post by first pointing out that the site is now getting much, much more attention from mainstream media as opposed to just from shelter, fashion, food and tech blogs. I now have twice as many Facebook friends on Pinterest compared with when the year began. Changes are bound to come with such attention.

And, since I hate doing posts without pictures, here are some of my most recent pins:



Saturday, October 22, 2011

Is sewing cheaper than buying?


Is sewing cheaper than buying?

The general consensus on the Internet seems to be "no", not at all. They'll tell you to buy clothes instead at WalMart, JCPenny, Target, or the thrift stores. They'll tell you patterns and fabric cost too much, not to mention the notions. They say they buy a shirt on clearance, only to go to JoAnn and find the same fabric going for the full price of the shirt!

I disagree. I believe these people have only slightly looked into sewing, or not at all.

My answer to "is sewing cheaper than buying?" is: IT DEPENDS.

Many of those in the "no" camp seem to be frugality and money bloggers as opposed to sewing and craft bloggers. And they're definitely taking the wrong approach to sewing.

Here's what I mean by the wrong approach to sewing: it seems those who say "buying is always cheaper than sewing, no matter what" are picking out a pattern, and then picking out full-priced fabric. Many times this pattern/fabric combo is based on a shirt or dress they've already seen that they're trying to duplicate. Instead, those interested in sewing to save money should be stocking up on patterns while they're on sale, and matching fabric as they come across it.

Of course, my sewing machine was a gift, but I've seen them pretty cheap at garage sales and thrift stores,  and even free on Craigslist. The following lists assume one already either has a sewing machine or access to one.

SEWING CLOTHING IS CHEAPER WHEN:
You're into runway and high fashion.
Couture is expensive. Sewing can be, too, but rarely will you drop hundreds or thousands on an outfit. Hands down, the most inexpensive way to get a custom, made-for-you outfit is to sew it yourself.

You're into more expensive clothes in general.
Even if you're not into one-of-a-kind, custom clothing as above, but are into pricier items such as vintage clothing or clothing from places like Anthropologie, sewing can be cheaper.

You want quality clothing.
This assumes you're a talented sewer or the potential to become one. I LOVE Target, but one my $5 clearance maternity tops started coming apart after one wash. I'd like to think I could sew a top that will hold together much better for about the same price in fabric.

You're a unique size or shape.
I recently took my back waist measurement, and it was a good two inches longer than even the largest pattern size. I guess I should add that I'm pushing 6-feet-tall. That means that anything I buy off the rack runs the risk of showing my midriff or having the waist part fall way above where it should be. That's just the start of my problems; my figure is also rather manly. If you have shorter legs, a deep crotch, or a tiny waist and big bust, sewing may be for you. Especially if you buy clothing only to run to the tailor to have it altered.

You like to be "different".
Unless you're copying a look or using an inspiration piece, sewing guarantees you have a one-of-a-kind dress that no one else will have-- without having to, again, spend the custom price.

You purchase fabric on clearance, from thrift stores, or garage sales.
Or you buy sheets, tablecloths, or curtains on sale at the thrift store or from garage sales to use as fabric. This requires patience and an open mind. You can save bundles on material by waiting for the right material to come along, instead of seeking out a specific fabric based on print and color.

You live in an area like mine, where thrift stores are scarce and overpriced.
I've addressed this before: often, buying clothing from a number of Bay Area thrift stores will be just as expensive as purchasing it from Target or Ross. And nine times out of ten, the dated thrift store clothing won't fit me properly anyway. Our thrift stores are paying higher rent, and, thanks to our proximity to Silicon Valley, those working there are very Internet savvy and can quickly find the value of things (that's why I saw a tiny Pyrex dish for seven bucks yesterday). Depending on what part of the country you live in, thrifting your clothes may indeed be a better buy. For me, I'll stick to thrifting for just home goods and furniture.

You buy patterns on sale.
Most of the time it is easy to buy them for 99 cents. I read one account by a person who said she saved by making her own patterns from paper grocery bags; if only she'd known how cheap an actual pattern can be! You can't even buy the paper for 99 cents sometimes. If your pattern isn't on sale, find a similar one that is. Keep in mind a pattern is usable more than once.

You enjoy dresses, skirts, and slacks more than jeans and T-shirts.
If you work in a dirty environment where your clothes get thrashed, it's probably not a good idea to invest a lot of time into making them.

You want to be green.
I'm not saying all sewing in greener. That new fabric at the craft shop has to manufactured in some factory, and shipped in on big boats or trucks. But if you're using thrifted fabric, old sheets or curtains laying around, or up-cycling thrift store buys, then yes, you're giving new life to an old item. This is the slow clothing movement, and it can be much cheaper than buying bamboo T-shirts (which are very expensive even wholesale, as I recall from when hubby worked as a screenprinter) or hemp dresses. Of course, buying clothes from the thrift store is pretty green too. But, even if you're buying new fabric, you can rest assured that your garment isn't being made in a sweatshop, like most ready-made clothing items.

You are a creative type, or you have "the eye".
It doesn't matter how straight you can sew, how cheaply you buy the material, or how talented a seamstress you become. If you can't match co-ordinating fabric or pick out the correct color bias tape for your garment, you're not going to end up with something pretty, and it may be better to just buy off the rack. This is subjective, of course, and as long as your happy with your finished product, that's all that matters. But you're not going to save any money by sewing if you don't like what you've sewn and always leave it hanging in the closet.

You view sewing as a hobby.
How much money are you plunking down on new Apple gadgets, only to find them obsolete next month? Do you get to wear that photography hobby out to dinner? Will that vacation to Costa Rica provide you years of wear? Didn't think so. Sewing is a hobby, for many, a rewarding one. If you look at the money you're spending as hobby money, it shouldn't bother you so much. Especially when you realize that with this hobby, you're given something tangible and useful.

BUYING CLOTHES IS CHEAPER WHEN:
You're buying clothes for children...
who will outgrow the clothing quickly, and you don't have to worry as much about quality. You saw my story about my Target maternity buys above. My son grows out of clothes so quickly, the seams don't even have time to come apart. Plus, I can buy most of his stuff on clearance at Target for under $3. There's no way I can match that. I, on the other hand, stay close to the same size, so I can wear my sewn garments for some time.

You're a jeans and t-shirt kinda guy or gal.
Or sweatshirts and overalls. You get the idea. Sewing clothing should be for those who work in an environment where they're expected to wear nicer clothing, or for those who prefer to wear skirts, dresses, etc.

You're sewing for a man.
Let's face it, I'm not going to be able to, nor do I want to, duplicate my husband's cutoff cargo shorts and Danzig shirt. When he does need button downs and slacks, he'll get a much better buy at Ross or TJ Maxx.

You need maternity or other temporary wear.
Sewing can save you money when you can wear the garment for a long time, and get a lot of use out of it. For the same reason I advise not to bother sewing for children because they'll outgrow it quickly, it's probably best to save money by not sewing adult clothing that won't be used more than once or twice, or will be used for just a few months. The exceptions would of course be costumes and formal wear.

You're in the market for sturdy handbags and other accessories.
Some of the complaints I read about sewing not being all that frugal said that the individual started off by sewing purses and found that buying them would be cheaper. So stop sewing purses.

You don't like to sew!
No amount of money saved is worth frustration and tears if you're not going to enjoy yourself. It's a hobby. But it may not be for you, especially if you see it as a chore. If that's the case, save yourself the headache and stick with off-the-rack!


My answer on the economics of sewing bedding, curtains, and other home decor is the same: it depends. If you need a duvet cover, or your tastes run more expensive, I recommend sewing, especially if you have unused materials laying around such as flat sheets. I, however, will never sew a fitted sheet. It of course can be done, but I won't be bothering with that for the price I can find nice, high thread count fitted sheets for at stores like Marshall's. But I plan to sew most of our curtains (I can do these Anthro ones for much cheaper and with much cuter fabric), so our home linens will be a mix of purchased and sewn.

Still not sold? Just check out some of the garments Mena from The Sew Weekly whips up. I use her as an example because she provides the total price of each garment, sans labor time (remember, it's a hobby). We're talkin' six bucks, fourteen bucks, and thirteen bucks. These are entire dresses. There are a couple of exceptions (66 bucks, yikes)!

Bottom line: if you're a "clothes make the man" kinda guy or gal, a good shopper, and think you have the ability to sew well, sewing clothes may be cheaper for you. If you're a jeans, sweats, tees and basic tops kinda person who has a fit-model type of body that is easy to find clothes for, off-the-rack is for you. On home items, a pretty, high-quality duvet cover and curtains will almost always be cheaper to sew, while fitted sheets and pillow cases may be better to purchase.

Do you agree with me?

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

The Pinterest Problem

Maybe it's just my journalistic training, but I tend to be pretty hardcore when it comes to ethics in media. I like to give credit where credit is due.

Which is why it didn't surprise me that one of Pinterest's "Pin Etiquette" guidelines is to "Credit Your Sources":
Pins are the most useful when they have links back to the original source. If you notice that a pin is not sourced correctly, leave a comment so the original pinner can update the source. Finding the original source is always preferable to a secondary source such as Google Image Search or a blog entry.
The emphasis in bold is mine, because it's one of the guidelines I stick to pretty rigidly.

If I see an image on a blog that I'd like to pin, I try to click through to the original source and pin it from there.

If I see something I'd like to repin on Pinterest itself, but notice the link seems fishy (like "Google.com" or an expensive magazine-looking image from a Blogspot domain), I try not to repin it. I also don't leave a [douchey] comment for the original pinner asking them to correct the source, as Pinterest suggests. Instead, I again try to click through to the original source and pin from there, even if it takes some detective work.

What do I mean by detective work? Take this pin:

That image is all the heck over Pinterest, with the sources being random Blogspot, Tumblrs, and image searches. I tried Tineye and Google's reverse image search and still could not track down the original source.

I eventually found the image on House of Turquoise, where Erin went above and beyond and provided the architectural firm, designer, and photographer responsible. She also named the book it was published in. After checking the websites of all three responsible parties, as well as the book author, I found the image on the photog's page (I would've been satisfied with crediting anyone involved with designing or documenting the room), where I ultimately pinned it from. Right now, while that picture has been pinned and repinned dozens of times, I am one of just two people who've pinned it from the photographer's page.

This pin is another example:

I spotted this one on Pinterest and again could not find the original source. Using the same detective (broadcast reporter?) hunting skills as above, I tracked it to a book. While the author/designer didn't have the image on his website, I did find a blog that included the image in a review of the book and credited the image well. I pinned in from her blog.

So, why is this an issue? There are a couple of reasons, and the first one that comes to mind is copyright law. Before I signed up, I wondered how Pinterest skirted the copyright laws, but have since learned that they at least appear to take the matter somewhat seriously. Separate from the "Pin Etiquette" page I've already linked to, the site has a Copyright page, which details the dispute process and even gives the contact info for their Silicon Valley "Copyright Agent".

There's also the point Pinterest itself makes in the quote at the beginning of this blog post; Pins are the most useful when they have links back to the original source. That is, what is the point of having a pretty pin of a product to buy floating around, when one can't figure out how the heck to buy it? Or a pin of a DIY or craft project when there is no link to the how-to? Pins lacking their original sources make it difficult for those using Pinterest to discover new things.

And for me, perhaps those most annoying reason pinners need to find the original source is to avoid falling into the traffic-seeking trap that some bloggers have begun abusing using Pinterest for. Returning again to Pinterest's "Pin Etiquette" page, Pinterest suggests that users "Avoid Self Promotion":
Pinterest is designed to curate and share things you love. If there is a photo or project you’re proud of, pin away! However, try not to use Pinterest purely as a tool for self-promotion.
Like Pinterest mentions, I have no problem whatsoever with a blogger who creates a totally awesome project, takes photos and uploads them to their blog, and then pins from their blog. I also don't have a problem with a blogger who posts images to their blog from other sources, and even though they give full credit to their sources, their readers pin from their blog anyway. The bloggers have no control over that, and blogging about images from other, fully-credited sources, is standard practice.

I do have a major problem with a blogger posting images from other sources to their blog, and then pinning the image from their own blog when they clearly know the original source. This bugs me even if they've properly sourced the image on their blog, because this move is designed solely to drive traffic back to their own website by using someone else's beautifully photographed image. It's unethical.

And in that same vein, it's also unethical to post stolen images from other sources, either not source them or give a half-hearted sourcing attempt, and then invite people to pin the pictures. That's the problem I've encountered with this image, which I repinned anyway in order to demonstrate why I'm uncomfortable with this practice:

You'll notice that in the caption right there, Pinterest's embed code gives the source as the blog that this image was pinned from. The problem is that when you click through to this blog post, the blogger starts out with essentially a call to action to pin by saying "all apologies if your pinterest button bursts into flames- jk..not sorry haha". Then comes the parade of pictures, none of which are captioned, then comes the sourcing info at the very bottom. Just one of the sources listed is an actual link, and none specify which photo came from where. I'm not saying this blogger did this as a means to drive traffic; it quite honestly could just be a lack of knowledge on internet and blogging etiquette.

Or it could just be that I'm the only one who's really concerned with the ethics behind Pinterest. But I'm sure there's a photographer or crafter out there somewhere who appreciates my zeal.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...