Showing posts with label Size Charts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Size Charts. Show all posts

December 28, 2006

Comparing Butterick 6030 neckline measurement

An example of a well fitting boys shirt

I didn't realize I had so many boys' shirts in my stash! Each shirt has a slightly different construction technique. They range from casual to dressy. Some have a convertible collar with a facing and others have a traditional 2-piece collar. This is a great resource for me to figure out more of what is wrong with the Butterick pattern.

The first thing I did was take some key measurements off of the size 24M shirts. The button bands averaged 1.125" and I adjusted my new pattern accordingly. The second measurement was the necklines. Both 24M and 2T shirts measured 12 inches, which I think is right on target. Compare these numbers:

Actual neck measurement = 10.125"
Butterick neck measurement = 15" (4.875" of ease!)
My pattern measurement (1st attempt) = 14" (3.875" of ease)
Both RTW shirts neck = 12" (2" of ease, right on!)

To draft the neckline of the pattern small enough, I need to have a basic 24M block made up. I am not going to keep guessing -- it just wastes too much time. This is enough motivation for me to work on my basic blocks again (My New Year's Resolution!). I pulled them out yesterday and made some important decisions. I can officially announce I have a basic bodice block that I like. The next step is to figure out my grade rules and grade my basic block up to a 24M.

Figuring grade rules and grading my blocks will take me some time, so the shirt project will be put off for a little while. In the mean time, I may get back to my promised grading blogs. Hopefully, you won't get too bored by it. Grading is as dry and boring as a topic can get.

November 15, 2006

Creating a grading standard pt. 3

2019 notes - The original images for this blog entry have disappeared and I haven't had time to recreate them. I do have more complete examples in my ebook, The Organized Fashion Designer.  
 
I finally made my example measurement/grading charts. It took a little dancing as I had to create them in a spreadsheet, export them as a PDF and then convert them over to a jpg. Before I get too far, it may be helpful to review my previous blogs on grading: Creating a grading standard and Creating a grading standard part 2. You should have your own measurement charts handy. BTW, the measurements in my charts are real. I found them from the Sears website. I do not necessarily endorse Sears measurements as the industry standard - they were just handy (To be fair, their measurements are pretty good). Your own measurement charts should be far more complete and detailed than these for pattern development and actual grading anyway. This is the first step I take in developing actual grade rules.

Right off, I hope you notice a few important things. First, I have clearly marked my sample sizes. In this example they are sizes 10 and 10+. Each chart is labeled clearly. You would think these things should be obvious, but you would be surprised at what I have seen. Hanging off of the left side are numbers. These numbers are points of measure and should correspond to a How to Measure diagram (a future blog) and are not relevant for the immediate discussion. Also notice that my size ranges differ. The regular sizes run 7-16 and the plus sizes run 8+ to 18+. This is a fairly typical difference between the two groups. Also notice the difference in the measurements. There should be some obvious differences between a Misses and a Plus sizes chart too.

Usually, I have my grading chart separate from my measurement chart. I combined them here so you could more easily see how I am developing my grading rules. In the column for my sample sizes, I have placed a zero. A sample size is also called a base size in grading. It is your starting point and each subsequent size will grow or shrink proportionally off your base size. Next I subtract the difference between the base size and the next largest size. In the regular size chart, you will notice there is a 1.5" difference in the chest measurement from a size 10 to a size 12. This difference is called a grade step. Next I subtract the difference between a size 14 and a size 12. I don't subtract Size 14 from a size 10 because that is not the next grade step. Continue to subtract the next larger size with the previous size.

To calculate the grade for your smaller sizes, subtract your sample size from the next smaller size. Be sure to add the negative sign, which indicates the grade is getting smaller. Repeat by subtracting each size with the next smaller size. Create a grade for each measurement on your chart.

You will notice that the measurements and grades all have beautiful numbers. The measurements increase or decrease proportionally causing the grades between sizes to be relatively the same. This is where the art of grading and measurements come into play. I can guarantee that actual body measurements are not this pretty or consistent. These numbers have been averaged and rounded and are based on a large body measurement sampling. The numbers have been intentionally made easy to work with. Your measurements should be easy to work with too and you can adjust them as necessary.

What about accuracy? Rounding does introduce inaccuracies in your measurement charts, but only a little. If you look at growth charts, you will find that certain measurements will fit 50%, 80%, 95% or 97% of girls. If you adjust your numbers up or down, you will want to make sure those numbers fall into the 95% percentile. Adult measurements and sizing are similarly developed. Because these measurements are based off of measurement studies, it means a real girl will pick the size that most closely matches her measurements. Your measurement numbers just need to fall within the highest percentage category. You can round to the nearest 0.5" or 0.125", or whatever. Adjust your measurements so that you get a relatively consistent and even grade across the sizes. In my regular sizes I have a consistent 1.5" chest grade and a 2" grade for my plus sizes. Sure, you could throw in what ever grade steps you choose as long as you have justification for it.

Finally, I hope you can see the difference between the regular and plus sizes. Not only are plus size measurements larger, they are proportionally larger (the grade step is larger). This is why you absolutely cannot grade a plus size pattern from a regular sized pattern piece. Keep both categories, pattern pieces, measurements and grades separate from each other. I promise it will save your sanity.

I know this is a lot of explanation for this first step. If anyone has a question about this, just leave them in comments and I will try to answer them. In my next article in this series, I will explain how to create grade rules based off your first grading chart.

April 27, 2006

Children's Sizing and Measurement Standards Vary by Company

After studying and comparing all of my size charts collected from various sources I have come to realize the search for a good standard may be in vain. Here is just a brief example of one meausurement and how it varies among pattern drafting manuals and retailers.

Size 8 child: Major US Retailer
Bicep (inches) : 7.75
Recommended Ease : 1.5-2.0
Draft Line : 9.25-9.75

Size 8 child: Armstrong
Bicep (inches): 8.125
Recommended Ease : 2.875
Draft Line: 11

Size 8 child: Mortimer-Dunn
Bicep (inches): 8.75
Recommended Ease: 1.5-2.0
Draft Line : 10.25-10.75

Size 8 child: Dressform Co.
Bicep (inches): 7.75
Recommended Ease : 1.5-2.0
Draft Line : 9.25-9.75

As you can see there is quite a range in measurements. To fit the most average child, it is best to fall in between the range. But it still begs the question of who is correct? The Armstrong measurement is especially suspect because she recommends far too much ease in her drafting measurement.

For my new blocks, I have decided to use the Aldrich charts. She has statistical data to backup her charts. The US retailer and dressform co. charts are based off of the 1977 study and have been adjusted/updated over the years. I don't know where Armstrong and Mortimer-Dunn got their measurements, but their numbers seem odd. As far as I can tell, Aldrich is fairly close to the Major US Retailer. I am currently in the process of converting her measurements over to inches, to the nearest 1/8". This introduces an error into her measurements, but I am most comfortable using those units. Once I fine tune and tweak the numbers so they look right and are easy to work with, I will then compare my charts to those above and make sure I fall somewhere in the range. And I am still toying with the idea of working in metric anyway. I am unsure how my US customers would respond...

The next step is to draft some basic blocks and sew-up a fit sample.

My sources:
Major US Retailer - Kept confidential. Their size charts were last updated in 1981.

Patternmaking for Fashion Design by Helen Joseph Armstrong (5th edition) - her third edition has an even larger measurement for a Size 8 bicep and still too much ease. I have no idea about the fourth and fifth editions.

Pattern Design for Children's Clothes by Gloria Mortimer-Dunn - the book shows basic pattern drafting skills but her size charts are a bit odd.

Dressform Co. - kept confidential, but they have one of the better charts I have seen for infants.

Metric Pattern Cutting for Children's Wear and Babywear (4th edition) - the best book by far. I have not cited her bicep measurement because I am still studying her charts.

April 19, 2006

Sizing Up Children pt. 2 : How to find size charts for children

"The problem is children’s clothing manufacturers cling to their 30+ year old size charts. They protect their sizing information like a trade secret (not uncommon in every segment of the fashion biz). And while major studies are being done on men and women, they are not being done on children. (If I am wrong, please let me know)."
After doing some more reading at fashion-incubator, I discovered I am only half right. The 30 year old study on children's measurements done in 1975/1977 is publically available here: Anthropometric Data of Children. This is the data that most manufacturers continue to use. Since it is freely available, there is not much incentive to change. I have been using size chart information based on this data for at least 10 years because this is what the companies I worked for used. To be fair, it is still fairly good information.

Another source for sizing information is available from ASTM International. Kathleen Fasanella at fashion-incubator.com lists the documents to search for at her blog: How to obtain sizing and grading info. This data set is updated about every five years or so. Even though the data information is priced fairly, you still need to buy 3 charts to cover all children infant through teenagers, a price of about $90. The other thing to consider when purchasing from ASTM is that you only license the information. Be sure to read the license agreement! You are given permission to download on one computer and print out only ONE copy of the charts. You also give permission to ASTM to come and inspect your company computer and materials at any reasonable time to ensure you are complying.

As a small company, I do not like this license agreement. What if I have two or three technical designers who need access to this chart? My costs for this information multiplies! Plus, who wants to allow some other company/organization to come in and inspect your premises at will?! I wonder if ASTM has ever tried to enforce their license?

I also don't like the propriatary nature of the data. The only way to get cooperation from businesses to standardize is to make the information available for free. I realize as an organization they need to make money to support a needed role. But they could take a hint from other opensource projects and raise money by donation or some other model.

Because of the difficulty with ASTM, I now understand why companies continue to use 30 year old data.