I can't remember if I've already discussed this with you, but a while ago I traced a simple draped Vogue top to compare sizes. I simulated each on a single avatar. (It's Vogue 1902 a 1980s reprint, three pieces plus facings, no darts just a bias front with cowl like drape from shoulder tucks.) The avatar is a European size 38/US size 8. In Vogue that bust would be a Vogue size 12, roughly. The envelope is sizes 6-14, so I looked at the extremes: 6, 10 and 14. The printed pattern is stacked with hems aligned (probably to help distinguish subtle differences at the neck when cutting). Instead I stacked the grade aligning the neck, and it's clear the only thing really going on is a girth grade (tiny bit of length). Tucks are the same across sizes, neck change is minimal. I posted some images (without much commentary, I'm not blogging, mostly using WP for image storage). Here: https://preopatterns.wordpress.com/2023/05/04/whats-in-the-envelope/
The pattern is a cylinder that's supposed to fall from the bust, probably without catching the hip. Above the bust the fabric is pulled into a collar. Given the simple concept that already drapes to fit most, I'm not sure it's a candidate for a FBA. So not too relevant to the discussion. I just tried adjusting avatar bust size, and there's plenty of ease to accommodate a larger bust, and it hangs nicely on a smaller bust. Anyway for this pattern my take away was that picking the size is more personal preference than fit rules, lots of different bodies can wear each of the sizes. The original style was excessive ease.
The diagrams are great and yes, totally agree with the take home message about the subtleties of grading one size up or down. What do you think of the Silhouette patterns approach of just using ease to pick a starting size?
For most people I would guess it's an unnecessary workaround. E.g., the designer should be including sitting ease, so comparing hip measurement to hip chart should already tap into that correctly. If a given person knows they like/need more ease than average somewhere then a workaround is in order, so good reminder. In practice, assessing ease is already a big part of sewing (if the goal is wearing something other than a basic block). More than numbers, just comparing a pattern to an existing garment is so key. I sometimes imagine I'm seeing a fit in illustrations or even photos and I need that reality check. That's what I found interesting about the Vogue pattern.
I did it because I was wondering if such a simple design would simulate well (more than pleased, the folds are as nice as the drawing, IMO). But then looking at the size comparison, I felt it corroborated my approach of sometimes sizing by vibe, not fit. I bought the pattern because I like a shell with neck interest, especially asymmetry (probably will never get around to making it). I like 80s, but that volume is has not returned. I look at the envelope and imagine two things at once. Just making the *wrong* size can achieve that. People shop the same way, they recognize styles that flatter without an FBA, it's not all vanity sizing, but a rack of clothes makes experimenting easier.
I've been comparing grading again, this pattern is textbook: uniform tiny addition to the hem, girth grade at the side seams all consistent with the chart. (Good luck starting with shoulder slope, the front is different left and right. Sometimes a shoulder angle is just the only line that connects the two dots.) My approach is usually respect the balance of the original design initially, then correct.
Totally agree having some good departure points in terms of clothing is easier but that is a catch-22 argument. My experience was that it was only first making garments that fit that cleared the path to this type of approach.
Sorry, just mean like this top, presumably started as a single draped or drafted sample that had been carefully adjusted, then it was graded. That grade will not work for everyone, but it should be neutral, and at least if you pick a straight size from the grade you're getting the original proportions. That's important because there probably was a fair amount of finessing to get this design working. It might be possible to jump in assuming an FBA is needed, and say move the side seams to use a smaller size in back. With some care the excess could be folded into deeper tucks. But bellow the bust the only shaping is possibly tucking it into a waistband. Suddenly you have a large busted woman with even more fabric directly under the bust. The original design, with a more balanced front to back, may well be better.
Agree on the catch-22 but it doesn't have to be a perfect garment, just something to use as a yardstick. Sometimes an example of how much excess is okay is good, too.
I’ve done a lot of FBAs over the years and have had a lot of success with them. Here’s my take. Hopefully this insight/experience is helpful.
It’s not clear from the example if the person needs an FBA or simply needs a larger size. In general, we would compare the upper bust and full bust measurements to decide if the FBA is needed. When selecting a size, I will choose it based on the upper bust. With a larger cup size, this results in “sizing down” but technically it’s starting at the size that fits the back, shoulders and upper chest measurement. The FBA then alters the pattern to fit the bust while the rest is relatively unchanged.
The FBA works for both Big 4 and Indie because it’s not an issue of ease. It’s about fitting the breast and the cup size. A pattern drafted for a B-cup will be very hard to fit to a larger bust without some sort of FBA. In my experience, sizing up or grading to try to fit a large bust means the back is too big, there’s gaping at the armholes and the front hem will rise up. The side seams might also be pulled to the front of the body.
A lot of patterns, even Big 4, are starting to add the upper bust measurement to the size chart which makes it a lot easier to select the correct size.
Btw, if I was going to try to apply TDCO to the bodice, I would start with shoulder slope. It’s an easy and impactful adjustment. And then of course, the FBA if needed.
Big thank you to you and all the designers who make patterns that have options for different bust darts throughout the range of a pattern. Truly size inclusive!
Thanks so much for sharing your take, great points. In this example the size was selected by the upper bust and then a FBA to add for the larger full bust measurement which is the conventional approach. But in terms of the shoulders and neck there is minimal different between sizes so the FBA together any other adjustments needed could have been made on the toile of the larger size. This keeps down the number of potential pattern adjustments as many people need more than one.
Many people find they need the FBA but the label "bust dart" makes us focus on the breast tissue and cup size body parts although we can place the dart in any position. For example I have a 1.5 inch difference between upper and full bust and need an FBA which makes no sense. Other people report that they have larger breasts, they measure carefully and do the FBA but find then there is too much fullness.
TDCO is for fitting pants. What I need to do more is explain how TDCO works. I sometimes wish I had not called it TDCO because that makes people think it is all about hanging from the waistband when that is just the readout of the fit. But I was trying to find a way to get people to take the waistband seriously instead of just a bit of string or elastic.
But regrets aside, the aim of this series of posts is not about applying TDCO to bodice fitting but about how initial size selection can influence the fitting process. Not even a concern for people who do not use commercial patterns. I recently signed up to the Arkdefo mailing list and there are good arguments to be made for bypassing commercial patterns altogether!
I'm curious, are you saying that selecting size based on upper bust measurement will result in unnecessary fitting adjustments? What would those unnecessary fit adjustments be? Why perform an FBA on the size that matches the full bust? The overall fit would be too big, especially in the back.
For example, what if someone has a G cup? Their upper bust, shoulders and back may fit a size 10 but the full bust measurement would put them in a size 20. In that scenario the shoulders, neck and back are significantly different. The back is a very crucial pattern piece when selecting size for a larger bust and I believe the main reason for starting with a smaller size before doing an FBA. If this person starts with a size 20, the pattern will be much too large. That seems more of a problem than a benefit.
On a related note, I've been curious for a long time if there are alternate ways to measure cup size, for example by using the under bust, as is done with bra sizing. The upper bust measurement does not seem to work for everyone.
I'm curious, are you saying that selecting size based on upper bust measurement will result in unnecessary fitting adjustments?—Yes, unless one can be guaranteed that those fitting adjustments are critical it can waste time and prevent an unbiased evaluation of the toile. One hs to adjust the pattern after the toile anyway, there must be a significant advantage in order to do this twice (at least)
Why perform an FBA on the size that matches the full bust? —Because then there is one round of adjustments happening on the toile and the FBA if needed can be integrated with other adjustments.
The overall fit would be too big, especially in the back. The key question for me is what is the easiest and most reliable?
What if someone has a G cup?—Absolutely! Let’s say you are Madonna wearing a cone bra, so the front needs extra room (both length and width) to make room for the part of the chest that projects outward. Depending on the design and how close the desired fit it could be adjusted several different ways but yes one needs more and/or bigger darts. And if we have a top that already fits without the cone bra we could know exactly how big to make those darts. But with an unknown body and style it is important to have sufficient fabric to cover the body and allow for adjustments, then also to decide which adjustments require more or less fabric. For example if one starts with a larger size one needs more fabric to make the neckline smaller and to go from a smaller neckline to a larger neckline involves removing fabric. It is a decision that depends on the design. For pants, I would go by the hip measurement even if the waist is in a category five sizes smaller. And if the waist is five sizes bigger I would still go by hip size but make sure I have enough fabric to accommodate the waist circumference.
The upper bust measurement does not seem to work for everyone—yes, this is a fairly common phenomenon as I point out in the post. What I am suggesting is not that better measurements or measurement methods are needed but better explanations for those examples that don't "work". Sometimes anomalies in the data are just that, measurement errors, or sometimes they let us know that assumptions need to be evaluated to provide more inclusive explanations.
That's an interesting perspective. In my personal experience, I have a much easier, quicker time achieving a good fit when I select my size based on the upper bust measurement. I'm curious to see where you'll take this approach and to see it in practice.
I actually have had experience of needing an FBA on my full bust-determined size with both Marfy and Burda shirt patterns- it's just about how the fabric is distributed and guided around the body as I understand it from Ruth.
Do you mean when you use upper bust measurement and then combine with FBA? For all pattern companies or only select ones? I was just looking at the advice in the blog for the Lou box top and the post recommends choose by bust size unless there is a 4 inch difference between HB and B then choose by HB.
I can't remember if I've already discussed this with you, but a while ago I traced a simple draped Vogue top to compare sizes. I simulated each on a single avatar. (It's Vogue 1902 a 1980s reprint, three pieces plus facings, no darts just a bias front with cowl like drape from shoulder tucks.) The avatar is a European size 38/US size 8. In Vogue that bust would be a Vogue size 12, roughly. The envelope is sizes 6-14, so I looked at the extremes: 6, 10 and 14. The printed pattern is stacked with hems aligned (probably to help distinguish subtle differences at the neck when cutting). Instead I stacked the grade aligning the neck, and it's clear the only thing really going on is a girth grade (tiny bit of length). Tucks are the same across sizes, neck change is minimal. I posted some images (without much commentary, I'm not blogging, mostly using WP for image storage). Here: https://preopatterns.wordpress.com/2023/05/04/whats-in-the-envelope/
The pattern is a cylinder that's supposed to fall from the bust, probably without catching the hip. Above the bust the fabric is pulled into a collar. Given the simple concept that already drapes to fit most, I'm not sure it's a candidate for a FBA. So not too relevant to the discussion. I just tried adjusting avatar bust size, and there's plenty of ease to accommodate a larger bust, and it hangs nicely on a smaller bust. Anyway for this pattern my take away was that picking the size is more personal preference than fit rules, lots of different bodies can wear each of the sizes. The original style was excessive ease.
The diagrams are great and yes, totally agree with the take home message about the subtleties of grading one size up or down. What do you think of the Silhouette patterns approach of just using ease to pick a starting size?
For most people I would guess it's an unnecessary workaround. E.g., the designer should be including sitting ease, so comparing hip measurement to hip chart should already tap into that correctly. If a given person knows they like/need more ease than average somewhere then a workaround is in order, so good reminder. In practice, assessing ease is already a big part of sewing (if the goal is wearing something other than a basic block). More than numbers, just comparing a pattern to an existing garment is so key. I sometimes imagine I'm seeing a fit in illustrations or even photos and I need that reality check. That's what I found interesting about the Vogue pattern.
I did it because I was wondering if such a simple design would simulate well (more than pleased, the folds are as nice as the drawing, IMO). But then looking at the size comparison, I felt it corroborated my approach of sometimes sizing by vibe, not fit. I bought the pattern because I like a shell with neck interest, especially asymmetry (probably will never get around to making it). I like 80s, but that volume is has not returned. I look at the envelope and imagine two things at once. Just making the *wrong* size can achieve that. People shop the same way, they recognize styles that flatter without an FBA, it's not all vanity sizing, but a rack of clothes makes experimenting easier.
I've been comparing grading again, this pattern is textbook: uniform tiny addition to the hem, girth grade at the side seams all consistent with the chart. (Good luck starting with shoulder slope, the front is different left and right. Sometimes a shoulder angle is just the only line that connects the two dots.) My approach is usually respect the balance of the original design initially, then correct.
Totally agree having some good departure points in terms of clothing is easier but that is a catch-22 argument. My experience was that it was only first making garments that fit that cleared the path to this type of approach.
What is "the balance of the original design"?
Sorry, just mean like this top, presumably started as a single draped or drafted sample that had been carefully adjusted, then it was graded. That grade will not work for everyone, but it should be neutral, and at least if you pick a straight size from the grade you're getting the original proportions. That's important because there probably was a fair amount of finessing to get this design working. It might be possible to jump in assuming an FBA is needed, and say move the side seams to use a smaller size in back. With some care the excess could be folded into deeper tucks. But bellow the bust the only shaping is possibly tucking it into a waistband. Suddenly you have a large busted woman with even more fabric directly under the bust. The original design, with a more balanced front to back, may well be better.
Agree on the catch-22 but it doesn't have to be a perfect garment, just something to use as a yardstick. Sometimes an example of how much excess is okay is good, too.
I’ve done a lot of FBAs over the years and have had a lot of success with them. Here’s my take. Hopefully this insight/experience is helpful.
It’s not clear from the example if the person needs an FBA or simply needs a larger size. In general, we would compare the upper bust and full bust measurements to decide if the FBA is needed. When selecting a size, I will choose it based on the upper bust. With a larger cup size, this results in “sizing down” but technically it’s starting at the size that fits the back, shoulders and upper chest measurement. The FBA then alters the pattern to fit the bust while the rest is relatively unchanged.
The FBA works for both Big 4 and Indie because it’s not an issue of ease. It’s about fitting the breast and the cup size. A pattern drafted for a B-cup will be very hard to fit to a larger bust without some sort of FBA. In my experience, sizing up or grading to try to fit a large bust means the back is too big, there’s gaping at the armholes and the front hem will rise up. The side seams might also be pulled to the front of the body.
A lot of patterns, even Big 4, are starting to add the upper bust measurement to the size chart which makes it a lot easier to select the correct size.
Btw, if I was going to try to apply TDCO to the bodice, I would start with shoulder slope. It’s an easy and impactful adjustment. And then of course, the FBA if needed.
Big thank you to you and all the designers who make patterns that have options for different bust darts throughout the range of a pattern. Truly size inclusive!
Thanks so much for sharing your take, great points. In this example the size was selected by the upper bust and then a FBA to add for the larger full bust measurement which is the conventional approach. But in terms of the shoulders and neck there is minimal different between sizes so the FBA together any other adjustments needed could have been made on the toile of the larger size. This keeps down the number of potential pattern adjustments as many people need more than one.
Many people find they need the FBA but the label "bust dart" makes us focus on the breast tissue and cup size body parts although we can place the dart in any position. For example I have a 1.5 inch difference between upper and full bust and need an FBA which makes no sense. Other people report that they have larger breasts, they measure carefully and do the FBA but find then there is too much fullness.
TDCO is for fitting pants. What I need to do more is explain how TDCO works. I sometimes wish I had not called it TDCO because that makes people think it is all about hanging from the waistband when that is just the readout of the fit. But I was trying to find a way to get people to take the waistband seriously instead of just a bit of string or elastic.
But regrets aside, the aim of this series of posts is not about applying TDCO to bodice fitting but about how initial size selection can influence the fitting process. Not even a concern for people who do not use commercial patterns. I recently signed up to the Arkdefo mailing list and there are good arguments to be made for bypassing commercial patterns altogether!
I'm curious, are you saying that selecting size based on upper bust measurement will result in unnecessary fitting adjustments? What would those unnecessary fit adjustments be? Why perform an FBA on the size that matches the full bust? The overall fit would be too big, especially in the back.
For example, what if someone has a G cup? Their upper bust, shoulders and back may fit a size 10 but the full bust measurement would put them in a size 20. In that scenario the shoulders, neck and back are significantly different. The back is a very crucial pattern piece when selecting size for a larger bust and I believe the main reason for starting with a smaller size before doing an FBA. If this person starts with a size 20, the pattern will be much too large. That seems more of a problem than a benefit.
On a related note, I've been curious for a long time if there are alternate ways to measure cup size, for example by using the under bust, as is done with bra sizing. The upper bust measurement does not seem to work for everyone.
I'm curious, are you saying that selecting size based on upper bust measurement will result in unnecessary fitting adjustments?—Yes, unless one can be guaranteed that those fitting adjustments are critical it can waste time and prevent an unbiased evaluation of the toile. One hs to adjust the pattern after the toile anyway, there must be a significant advantage in order to do this twice (at least)
Why perform an FBA on the size that matches the full bust? —Because then there is one round of adjustments happening on the toile and the FBA if needed can be integrated with other adjustments.
The overall fit would be too big, especially in the back. The key question for me is what is the easiest and most reliable?
What if someone has a G cup?—Absolutely! Let’s say you are Madonna wearing a cone bra, so the front needs extra room (both length and width) to make room for the part of the chest that projects outward. Depending on the design and how close the desired fit it could be adjusted several different ways but yes one needs more and/or bigger darts. And if we have a top that already fits without the cone bra we could know exactly how big to make those darts. But with an unknown body and style it is important to have sufficient fabric to cover the body and allow for adjustments, then also to decide which adjustments require more or less fabric. For example if one starts with a larger size one needs more fabric to make the neckline smaller and to go from a smaller neckline to a larger neckline involves removing fabric. It is a decision that depends on the design. For pants, I would go by the hip measurement even if the waist is in a category five sizes smaller. And if the waist is five sizes bigger I would still go by hip size but make sure I have enough fabric to accommodate the waist circumference.
The upper bust measurement does not seem to work for everyone—yes, this is a fairly common phenomenon as I point out in the post. What I am suggesting is not that better measurements or measurement methods are needed but better explanations for those examples that don't "work". Sometimes anomalies in the data are just that, measurement errors, or sometimes they let us know that assumptions need to be evaluated to provide more inclusive explanations.
That's an interesting perspective. In my personal experience, I have a much easier, quicker time achieving a good fit when I select my size based on the upper bust measurement. I'm curious to see where you'll take this approach and to see it in practice.
I actually have had experience of needing an FBA on my full bust-determined size with both Marfy and Burda shirt patterns- it's just about how the fabric is distributed and guided around the body as I understand it from Ruth.
Curious how you determined the FBA was needed, was it through fitting the toile? Did you make any adjustments beforehand?
Do you mean when you use upper bust measurement and then combine with FBA? For all pattern companies or only select ones? I was just looking at the advice in the blog for the Lou box top and the post recommends choose by bust size unless there is a 4 inch difference between HB and B then choose by HB.
Insightful
Thank you!