How to use wigan
Posted by Kathleen Fasanella on Jul 30, 2008 at 5:40 am / Sewing, Tutorial / Trackback
Note, I am away……
———–
Stuart has requested a tutorial on the proper use of wigan in jacket sleeve ends and hems. As per my usual, I thought I’d dispensed with the topic here but obviously not because Stuart is quite brilliant. Stuart amended his request with these questions:
- Should wigan edge at the hem line, or fold the wigan over at the hemline? If the latter, how much overlap (just a seam allowance worth?) Any special consideration when using facings versus a self-hem?
- Is there any particular relationship between inside hem/facing length and wigan width when linings are in use (like, stop wigan below the lining/facing seam, or extend wigan 1″ above, or doesn’t matter, or …)? Catch the upper edge of the wigan in a seam to the inside hem/facing, leave it loose to move?
- Given a (costume) style with hemlines that are more like bias than cross-grain, just keep running wigan parallel to the hemline, or should the interfacing always be cut to remain “on bias” relative to the shell grain? (Yeah, I know angular hems can require “interesting” self-hem/facing shapes.)
- In what circumstances would a different type of interfacing be more appropriate than wigan in hems? Or, when is it most appropriate to use wigan rather some other form of interfacing?
- In that old entry, the wigan ended at the hem and was flush with and sewn to the top of the inside hem. Is that “the way to do it” or is there a range of common industry practices?
Thankfully, J C Sprowls lightened the load with some comments which will be interspersed with mine. Why duplicate information? For that matter, why should I pass on the opportunity to provide contradictory advice? Heh. Don’t you just love this business? There’s a broad range of useful experiences to draw from. J C opens with:
From the sounds of it, you’re using a baste-in wiggan. The “traditional” method hand tailors use is to attach it to the shell using a blind stitch so 1″ of it crosses over the hem fold line. {Consider: this is why hems are 2″ wide and wiggan is 3″ wide}. In machine or industrial tailoring, the wiggan is set precisely like Kathleen’s tutorial – it’s caught in the seam where the lining is joined to the shell. In the tutorial, Kathleen is using canvas wiggan. There are other weights and varieties; but, the application is the same.
Two things to consider in addition to application method in reference to the above. Wigan comes in different weights and widths. I’ve only worked with the narrower (1.5″ wide) and heavier wigan. If you’re using lighter weight wide wigan, I can’t see a reason why the wigan shouldn’t cross the hem fold line. Heavier wigan for heavier fabric weights (18+ oz meltons or leathers) poses a problem. It’d make a bulky fold line at the hem if it crossed the line. It depends on the look you want and the weight of goods. If you want a creased hard fold on lightweight wools, the wide 3″ wigan crossing the fold is good. I don’t think tailors also fuse the hem area. If you want a softer, elegant fold on lighter wools, use narrow wigan and fuse the hem area, being certain to cross the fold line with the fusible. For this effect on heavier wools, the only difference is using heavier weight wigan. Alternatively if you wanted a crisp hard fold on heavy goods, you should use 3″ wide of the heavier wigan and set it to cross the fold line. It depends on the look and styling you want.
Regarding the grain of setting the wigan, JC says:
To answer your question about matching the grain of the shell. No, you don’t do this. The purpose of the wiggan is to interface the hem fold and to provide a surface to “hang” the hem edge onto. If you’re hand tailoring and the hem is following a curve, use a lot of steam and crease the hem edge and “full in” or shrink the cut edge of the hem before you baste in the wiggan and catchstitch the hem edge to it.
The only thing I’d add is for people who don’t know, is that wigan is already bias cut. It’d largely be impossible to match wigan grain to the garment grain.
JC adds:
There is a fusible wiggan (I know, Kathleen’s gonna shoot me!). It’s also called “strip fusible” or “sleeve hem interfacing”. It comes on a roll in 2″ or 3″ widths. Frankly, I use this more than anything – even on custom suits. I rarely use baste-in wiggan anymore. Why? Cuz everybody wants a handmade suit; but, nobody will pay for it.
Kathleen’s not going to shoot JC. I think use of the strip fusible depends on -again- application and desired effect. Since I like to make mostly heavier outerwear, I don’t find the fusible strip useful as a stand alone solution. It’s too light weight for my use. If I had some, I’d use it in addition to heavy wigan. The reason I can’t use the strip fusible is because it is cut straight and the pattern hems of my sleeves rarely are. I know you can meld the strip fusible wigan to match the curves but I don’t like that. I don’t want to stretch or shape the fusible because I don’t want to distort the fusible so I cut actual pattern pieces for the fusible to match the sleeve hem shaping precisely rather than straight. If the strip is not forced to shape while flat, the potentiality of its recovery and give is retained to do it’s work of shaping the hem after the sleeve has been sewn up.
—————-
Oh, and about the spelling of wigan vs wiggan. People will argue endlessly about this as we have here in comments. It depends on how you learned it as to what you prefer but either is acceptable meaning everyone knows what you’re talking about. I don’t care either way but purists will bolster their argument based on the spelling of
the town of Wigan in the UK where wigan is presumed to have originated.
