Comments on: Grading for height when you nothing about grading

By: Fashion Incubator » Patterns must grow longer based on girth

Fashion Incubator » Patterns must grow longer based on girth — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:34:50 +0000

[...] Grading for height when you know nothing about grading Pop Quiz #482 pt.2 addthis_pub = [...]

By: Jill Homiak

Jill Homiak — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:39:29 +0000

I really enjoyed this post, even though I have no knowledge of grading. That thing I find interesting about it is that I DO NOT FIND that many of the clothing I try on is grading appropriately! Pants are longer, but sit too low on the hips, so they fit incorrectly; short sleeved blouses fit everywhere besides the shoulders & chest; and tank tops can be too short.

Maybe it’s just me though!

By: Diane S.

Diane S. — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:30:06 +0000

I read once that the foot is a standardization of the biblical cubit. A cubit was the measurement from the wrist bone to the elbow, which is also equal to your foot. I don’t have anything to cite, but perhaps you can find something. That would also make sense about the inch being the thumb joint.

By: Sandra B

Sandra B — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 03:43:46 +0000

I’m always amazed at how you often seem to write a post that’s exactly relevant to one of my current projects. I’m testing as many of my drafting methods as I can (I collect them) as preparation for a class I’ll be teaching soon. One of the texts is a method developed in the 1970’s for use in the New South Wales technical training system. (It was, I suspect, an in-house textbook, and so I’ve never seen another copy, or even heard of it before.) At the time, this was acknowledged as the best in Australia. It uses 1/4 height for the nape to waist, as you’ve said, and that does generally work. (I really like this book, it explains proportions so simply) Then FW Morris, available at vintagesewing.net, gives a formula for how much is added when the flesh size is disproportionate to frame size. From memory, it’s 1/8th inch per 2 inches of bust size over 34″. Most other methods give a set of standard measurements, with no explanation of why they are anything other than the results of averaging lots of direct measures into a table. The more drafts I test, the more I appreciate the proportionate systems over the direct measurement methods.
I agree completely about using imperial for body measurements. Even born and bred with the metric system, I prefer to measure in inches. The inch, I understand, was based on the length of the last thumb joint, so it makes sense that it relates to the human body. Wasn’t the metre more or less an arbitrary length originally?

By: Leslie W

Leslie W — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:12:38 +0000

I, novice-at-grading that I am, sort of instinctively know this; seems common sense to me. I have only just recently begun to study grading (thanks to all the posts here with good info too), but, have done custom clothing. Like Maura, when you are making clothing for a variety of heights and sizes this is just something you learn.

Certainly this instructor should know better. Maybe the instructor needs a refresher course, or a continuing education class or two.

By: Maura Townsend

Maura Townsend — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 07:03:05 +0000

Said instructor was not grading for length in the neckline but was adding 1/4 to the armhole length and then again, nothing from armsyce (armpit) to the waist so it was easy for graders to see, without having a pattern for comparison, that this wasn’t the best way to go about it.

It amazes me that anyone does this. How can you not tell that different heights have a different length between armpit and waist? I’ve known that since I began drafting, adjusting for height/proportion was one of the first things I was taught (I was assisting a custom bridal designer and seamstress, so perhaps that would be why the emphasis was so much on this factor).