1. Gosh, how much fabric did that second dress eat up? Nice print and good job. Having gone to your blog, you remark that it doesn't give you the nipped in waist the pattern envelope promises. What you have to remember is that a) the illustrations are heavily stylised and often impossibly proportioned, and b) ladies would wear waist cinchers to help achieve that effect. Can't quite comment on the front/ back view or which is preferable as the photos are a little too small. The back view does look nice and if that's what you feel comfortable with, I'd go for it. The only thing is presumably there are bust darts which you might need to remove from the official front (if you haven't trimmed them), or minimise them, and add a small bust dart to the official back turned front.

  2. officially that dress takes 4.8m I think I did my version shown earlier on the blog in about 4m.

    I know the drawings are stylised, but the dress truly is boxy, even with a cincher. Personally I think it is because of a lack of shaping in the lower bodice by darts. There are two thin darts on the back but no darts at all on the front, the bust shape comes souly from the gathering on the neckband.

  3. @Angelic Cow – if there are no darts on the official front, then I'd definitely reverse it as it looks very pretty that way. And if you need a little more definition to the new front, you can probably add a couple of small darts without it leading to too much alteration. If not, then just wear it as is, it looks great and nobody will guess that's not how it was originally designed to be worn!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.