The reply was to Jaqui.if you know what default does and you have a tool and a chart and feel you want somethign different CHANGE the numbers.

Use the tool OR chart to get what you need.

DID the thigh measurement or even hip measurement get taken early morning or 4Pm after a full day of sitting/eating and drinking?

BIG difference especially for some!
Did the bicep get taken with a flexed "muscle" or at rest?? whats the difference on you.it can range from none to 5-6 inches on some.


Theres a pant class next week...Im not "doing classes" on the bbs but do offer FREE ONLINE CLasses. When they are available in article form there will be a charge for the series.

ALL too often theres a mistake on the chart.Not necessarily that you can not read a tape measure or type in a correct number,but you are not measuring where the program calculates from.

OR you simply do not understand how the program calculates a curve or a line.

My question ismplified is if one result is 9.125 and another is 9.325 what is it thats desired? 9.25?9.625

Can it go that close?

some areas it can go to 1/100ths.......some areas due to smoothing NO WAY. Smoothing happens on every pattern and theres NO way to calculate how much change will occur because of it till you look at the draft.

The front drafts to front numbers, the back to back numbers.then they smooth.

The collateral ease added to smooth a curve can make a significant difference in the draft.


what exactly is the difference going to make on an around upper thigh for instance of 3/8ths of an inch on the total around leg.

When does an 1/8th of an inch matter?

or more likely WHERE does an 1/8th of an inch matter?

Not a squigh on a hem circumference of a flared skirt but maybe some on an arm hole depth.

The goal is clothes that fit , look nice and are comfortable.
The body is assymetric the pattern will fit one side better than another from a technical stand point.

IF it looks good everywhere (being technically better on one side versus the other) IS the Goal.

Kaaren

quote:

I believe the Problem Report filing form provides blanks for both name and email address. Users need to complete both.

Very good suggstion, Diane. Had not thought of that one myself. But, this one turned out to be a web service error, not anything that any user could possibly have avoided or predicted. Wish I knew enough about email services to have spotted it. Always something new to learn more about...

quote:

The reply was to Jaqui.if you know what default does and you have a tool and a chart and feel you want somethign different CHANGE the numbers.

Use the tool OR chart to get what you need.

DID the thigh measurement or even hip measurement get taken early morning or 4Pm after a full day of sitting/eating and drinking?

This particular discussion is a good example of one that should not be conducted by email. I did receive Jacqui's problem report yesterday and have replied to it. If Kaaren (or anyone else) was able to draft a pants pattern with Jacqui's measurement set, the problem is readily apparent and and is a good example of collateral ease. I'm going to try to link to a couple of pictures in this response to see if that works, as they may help show one of the causes of collateral ease and why it is difficult or even undesirable to avoid.

First, the picture of the front of Jacqui's fitted pants with two waist darts (the back has even more collateral ease, but the front shows the issue easily).



The outseam hits the hip line perfectly, as well as the waist width plus dart allowance. But, there is a gap between the outseam and the ab line and no dart there to eat up that excess fabric. That is "collateral ease" that is created by having a single smooth curve correctly hit waist and hip measures.

The second picture shows how the pattern would have to draft to eliminate that collateral ease.



Dress Shop patterns do not draft snaky lines that hit every measurement. Dress Shop outseams attempt to draft outside all body measurement lines but actually hit only the key widest measures along the way from top to bottom (in this case, waist to hip to hem). We try to insure that this line is always outside every measure, but we DO NOT try to bend inwards at each marker position and try to hit the minimal width at each and every point. It makes nasty patterns.

I do not think any written description of the numbers used can make this issue as obvious as a picture of the draft. We can only get those when we have the full measurement set and can duplicate the draft and see it. Kaaren's classroom with its white board is another good way to see these issues.

Emails and postings just can't show it well...

I did not see any specific response to Gayle's post about the back ab measurements in fitted pants. I see the same thing, both in Misses RTW 12 and in my own measurements: the back ab drafts too small by the amount of the dart uptake. In this case, it is not an issue with ab averaging or collateral ease.

For example in Misses RTW 12:
Fitted front ab 19 1/4 (actual body measurement 18 1/2)
Fitted back ab 17 1/4 (actual body measurement 18 1/2)
Total 36 3/4 (actual body measurement total 37)

The fitted pant back is too small by the measurement of the dart intake through the ab. In this case, it is off-set by the larger front ab measurement (due to collateral ease, not ab averaging). I see something similar in my own measurements in the back (too small by the width of the dart uptake), however, my front ab has no additional collateral ease to allow for this. So my overall fitted pants are too small through the ab by the amount of the dart take-up.

I had beautifully fitting pants from DS 5 with the correct ab measurement, but this new draft seems to have appeared sometime before 6.09. I would greatly appreciate any advice/ input/ research into this issue.

Thanks!

Karen in PA

DSPro 6.13 (w/Oct 4 patch) Fashion Designer 1&2, Fit Tool, Princess Designer, Spring/Summer 2005, Illusions, Ultimate Outerwear, Ultimate Pants, Windows XP