Comments on: The birth of size 10? http://www.fashion-incubator.com/archive/the_birth_of_size_10/ How to start a clothing line or run the one you have, better. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:30:46 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jessica http://www.fashion-incubator.com/archive/the_birth_of_size_10/comment-page-1/#comment-26096 Jessica Sat, 18 Sep 2010 16:22:35 +0000 http://www.fashion-incubator.com/2007/08/the_birth_of_size_10/#comment-26096 My grandmother's wedding dress was a 1940's size 10. It was designed to fit with a few inches of ease, and the actual dress measures about 31" in the bust and 21" in the waist. This seems smaller than a size 0 would be today, actually. My grandmother was 5'7" tall, for reference, so not diminutive even if she was slender and small-boned. My grandmother’s wedding dress was a 1940’s size 10. It was designed to fit with a few inches of ease, and the actual dress measures about 31″ in the bust and 21″ in the waist. This seems smaller than a size 0 would be today, actually. My grandmother was 5′7″ tall, for reference, so not diminutive even if she was slender and small-boned.

]]> By: Lisa Bloodgood http://www.fashion-incubator.com/archive/the_birth_of_size_10/comment-page-1/#comment-7877 Lisa Bloodgood Sat, 18 Aug 2007 08:05:03 +0000 http://www.fashion-incubator.com/2007/08/the_birth_of_size_10/#comment-7877 Well, as many probably already know, sizing for home sewing patterns is different than RTW. It was different back then than now, too. For example, several patterns I have from the '60s and '70s have size 14-16 bust 34-36. A new pattern says sizes 14 and 16 have bust measurements 36 and 38, respectively, and bust 34 is a size 12. So there is a 1 size difference there. Maybe I have to go back and read some of the stuff about sizing, but if size 10 is the 2 of today, I don't understand why the numbers were changed. Well, as many probably already know, sizing for home sewing patterns is different than RTW. It was different back then than now, too. For example, several patterns I have from the ’60s and ’70s have size 14-16 bust 34-36. A new pattern says sizes 14 and 16 have bust measurements 36 and 38, respectively, and bust 34 is a size 12. So there is a 1 size difference there.

Maybe I have to go back and read some of the stuff about sizing, but if size 10 is the 2 of today, I don’t understand why the numbers were changed.

]]>