I read the pdf. file about the across the chest change. When I do the armhole princess/sloper comparison, the back is right on, but the upper portion of the front is about 3/4" inside the sloper line.
Does that mean that I should increase the across the chest front measurment by 1 1/2"?

Also, I printed out my slopers before and after the update (I'm learning), and there is a significant difference in the overall shape of the pants, especially in the back and especially in the crotch. I now have a good "J" where there was none before.
Since I was not yet happy with my pants sloper, it won't affect me that much, but I didn't see anything on the list of changes that would have done this. Does anyone know what could have caused this. I did nothing else between printings -just the update.

quote:

.. the back is right on, but the upper portion of the front is about 3/4" inside the sloper line..

See my post in the 6.10 back change topic. The Armhole Princess is drafting incorrectly IMO (even in V6.09) so is not a good example.

NO the flag corrected Over logn measurements, not too short measurements.
Mine is also "inside" on the front.

Kaaren

quote:

Originally posted by Kaaren Hoback:
NO the flag corrected Over long measurements, not too short measurements.

Kaaren,

Now I'm confused. My Sloper in 6.10 generated an Across Back width that was narrower than 6.092 causing the Armhole to scoop out more also.

I figured there was flag set previously when the Across Back was too short as well as too long to generate an armhole curve that the program thought was acceptable. This seemed to be the correct interpretation since I can add a smidge to my Across Back and come up with exactly the same Back Armhole/Back Width that I had in my 6.092 Sloper.

If this isn't the case, then the drafting of the Back Armhole did change a little in 6.10 and I may need to make a new sloper.

Vicki

Now I'm confused. My Sloper in 6.10 generated an Across Back width that was narrower than 6.092 causing the Armhole to scoop out more also.

I figured there was flag set previously when the Across Back was too short as well as too long to generate an armhole curve that the program thought was acceptable. This seemed to be the correct interpretation since I can add a smidge to my Across Back and come up with exactly the same Back Armhole/Back Width that I had in my 6.092 Sloper.


I hadnt notice any too shorts being effected....so that means that even running through some 50 charts from my own stash, and the group of etsters I sued for this oen change.we didnt see that.

More research needed .will report!

Im going to the lake to have lunch and swim with grandkids....the answer wont be immediate!

quote:

More research needed .will report!
Im going to the lake to have lunch and swim with grandkids....the answer wont be immediate!

No problem ... enjoy the grandkids.

I need to add between 3/8 & 1/2 inch to my Across Back to get the same Sloper Back as in 6.092. I've only used 1/4 scales and overlayed them. I probably need to print out a full pattern to double check the difference between 6.092 & 6.10.

I just figured that I had over-corrected my sloper by shortening the Across Back beyond what DS was willing to use in its calculations.

Vicki

quote:

I need to add between 3/8 & 1/2 inch to my Across Back to get the same Sloper Back as in 6.092. I've only used 1/4 scales and overlayed them. I probably need to print out a full pattern to double check the difference between 6.092 & 6.10.

I just figured that I had over-corrected my sloper by shortening the Across Back beyond what DS was willing to use in its calculations.

Which 6.10 sloper pattern are you using? The one in Slopers is correct that has a back shoulder dart. The one in Blouses - Bodice Sloper is not drafting properly and should NOT be used to proof your measurements.

This is from a private reponse Bob sent to me after I filed a problem report because I was seeing two different slopers and didn't know which one to use.

quote:

Originally posted by Kaaren Hoback:
I hadnt notice any too shorts being effected....so that means that even running through some 50 charts from my own stash, and the group of testers I used for this one change.we didnt see that. More research needed .will report!

Kaaren -

I printed out full size slopers on 6.092 patch 5 and 6.10 using my measurements file with an Across Shoulder Back of 15" and Across Back of 14.25".

At the Across Back reference line the 6.10 sloper is 1/8" narrower x 2 for both halves totalling 1/4 inch smaller than the 6.092 patch 5 sloper.

At the top of the two armhole notches the 6.10 sloper is 1/4" smaller or armhole more scooped than the 6.092 patch 5 sloper.

When I was working on my sloper I was trying to get the Back narrower and did notice that the last time it didn't seem to move as much as the adjustment I made. With 6.10 changes I figured that I had hit the flag and so it only made part of the adjustment.

For me since the change is relatively small, this isn't a crisis especially with the 1" back ease that is normally built-in. I'll just go upstairs, try on my sloper, and see whether I think a little wide, deeper back armhole would be better or not. If not, I'll just add the 1/4 to my Across Back measurement.

Vicki

I dont know how I did not make this clear enough.But I take the blame for not making it clear enough.

Im gonna use caps to make sure it is clear this time.Im not shouting at anyone......

WE HAD A FLAG that autofixed an overlong across chest

WE REMOVED THE FLAG IN DS6.10!!!

its gone......

if your sloper and therefore garment fit depended on that flag FIX.it aint gonna work any more.

Now you have to have a TRUE number in there to draft to.

An overlong number will make the arm hole bulge

Thats it......
NO OFFENSE to the poster...Im answering this one of several similiar posts.cause it was handy........

Kaaren