This is why I love sewing with vintage patterns so much more than retro and even modern day patterns. I feel the vintage patterns fit so much better from the get go and I have to alter less than the modern patterns. And that is why I grab any vintage patterns I find while out thrifting, auctioning, and antiquing.
😧 they changed it sooooo much. This was very interesting! Can’t wait to see more of the series! I think the finale should be you making a couple to compare them, maybe just in muslin!
They really did! Thanks for the idea Liz! Maybe one some of the more detailed ones I will make them up so folks get a good idea of what they are looking at.
OK Sephanie, while I love your comparison of the two patterns, I strongly feel the patterns had to be "revamped" for the modern aesthetic. Just like when we get upset when modern undergarments are put under civil war/victorian garments and the person doesn't understand why "It doesn't look right". The same should be said about these styles. Yes there were bras in 1969. But they were made to make the boobs look a certain shape (playtex 18 hour bras) and many times ladies wore longline bras. These bras brought the boobs up much higher. (and the pattern was made for a youthful age rather than a matron) Also the armscye was much closer to the body back then. Our modern "comfort" style has made all armscyes larger mostly due to the T-shirt era and fast fashion. So with the armscye enlarged that shifts where the dart is and the size. I totally agree with you on the neckline. There was not a need to bring up the modern back neckline. Nor change the end ties. Bottom line, you did a great job showing the difference. And shame on Simplicity for not following the true vintage cut. Cant wait to see what you find with McCalls or other Big 4's. Thank you.
Dear MJ Gobet: I thank you so much for your answer. Thats right, nobody sees today that the lines, waists, breasts, armholes, were quite different to today. Which lady today wear fastened strong underwear or has the waistline like in the 50s. Everybody wants to feel sluppy and "comfortly". Even the Wedding-Gowns are not allowed to fit narrow or have weight.
These were my thoughts as well. In addition, Stephanie is assuming that the fit of the original pattern was spot on. In my experience sewing these patterns back then, the fit was often abysmal. So it's possible that in addition to undergarments shaping bodies differently and different aesthetics, the modern changes might have been to correct fit issues. Though the change in the back neckline was a ridiculous one. I'd be interested in seeing both of these patterns made and worn by someone whose measurements are exactly what the pattern calls for.
Yes, I would love to see both these patterns made up in the same size, and modeled on the same youthful figure they were designed for. I do recall, btw, seeing a review of the original pattern some years back that said it had real fit/design issues and wouldn't stay put (something about the ties that held it together in front - underneath - being inadequate -- consequently I never made my vintage copy). Regarding the first comment from two years ago that mentioned the smaller armscyes of that time, yes, that's true, and there are many good points in her remarks, but never, ever did a young person wear a long-line bra. Good grief! Those were for matrons only, well into middle age, and found in the back of Sears catalogs or a section of the lingerie department at a distance from where younger women shopped. Same with Playtex 18-hr bras, unless one was quite busty. I came of age in that era, and while my first bras were made of woven cotton and more structured, it wasn't long before more relaxed synthetics were on the market (late 60s-early 70s). Same with slip styles. While the full-length variety were the standard through much of the 60s, by the 70s half slips had supplanted them -- at least with the younger set. Just a word to those who wish to speak with authority about the styles of decades that preceded you: Please, check and double check! No, you don't necessarily know, and if you have access to people from those eras (and there are plenty of us out here), ask! Also, what demographic is a particular pattern/style designed for? This wraparound dress is obviously for teens/younger adults, and reflects that youthful style and shape. Again, I'd love to see the two versions made up, so we could really see the difference(s).
@@anneburland5306such great comments and insight. I agree with what you’re saying about those who try to speak with authority about decades past. We’re still out there living our best lives, just ask! Our memories are still good hahaha 😂
I’ve made the reproduction walk away dress that everyone seems to have trouble with and it turned out so cute. Admittedly I did my usual 1 1/2 inch removed from the bodice waistline and changed the skirt pieces because I didn’t have enough fabric but I didn’t have to alter the fit otherwise. My vogue 1930s repro dress however is in the naughty bin until I can look at it again 😆
Wow! I agree and thank you for pointing out how we are being duped with new "retro" patterns. I actually have that particular vintage pattern in my collection. Great video!
Thank you! I plan on doing as many of these as I can. I was floored by how different this simple Jiffy was. I am now very concerned about further patterns.
Thanks for this, I became frustrated to the point of not sewing anymore because I wasn't getting the results. Now I know why and you've inspired me to try again.
@@louisegogel7973 Apparently, from what I read in other posts, Vogue and Butterick put out a call to BUY their vintage patterns back, but Simplicity put out a call for DONATIONS of their patterns and when they didn't get many of them, they redrafted the patterns they couldn't get originals of.
@@teresaellis7062 Well, In Swedish we have a saying that translates to "when stinginess deceives wisdom" (när snålheten bedrar visheten). Perfect example.🫤
Vintage person here. I think I made that pattern back in 1969 or something like it. By that time (age 17) I was sewing most of my own clothing. Since I was no longer under the watchful eye of the home-ec teacher and pantyhose had been invented, I probably shortened it by at least 2 or 3 inches. It was the late 1960's and we were showing a lot of leg.
Quick note: the Etsy seller made it right for not disclosing the seam allowance being cut away! If you enjoyed this video I have a whole playlist of other sewing pattern related shenanigans: ruclips.net/p/PLaG2bBTXx7U74Wmx6LkyCC1NVgw6a1PqU
Thank you so much, this was all off the cuff, I had never lined these up before I turned the camera on. And MAN OH MAN... there was so much blank staring at the patterns because I was truly floored with how different this simple pattern was. it makes me nervous for more complicated ones.
I knew it! I knew it! But it is great to see you confirm what I have thought for years! Also great to justify my vintage pattern collection .. the darts alone!
Right!! I was astonished at just how bad this was, and even a Jiffy! Which should’ve been super easy. I am now very concerned about future comparisons.
Awesome video Stephanie! This topic has been really contentious between several of us in our S&B group lately, so it's nice that more of us are discussing it.
I made this style of dress for my daughter. She is 7. She likes it. I didn’t want to make this for me until I say your video. I like the new version better. It will make the full bust adjustment much easier.
I think the bust darts are so radically different because the modern bust is so much bigger than it was drafted for in vintage patterns, which I see as a good thing. However the neckline is a huge issue as well as a flare, I am so glad you covered this pattern so as if we plan to make it we could do alterations to mirror it more like the vintage one. I mean, someone could really make a blog into correcting these patterns to be more like the vintage ones. There's a big shame one which is Butterick Retro B4790, so much of that dress was drafted WRONG even the darts were upside down on it IIRC. When I first started sewing I tried to do it and couldn't figure out why I couldn't even remotely fit my bust in the muslins. It was one of the patterns that made me step away from garment sewing for a few years when sewing due to the frustrations with fit for my body only to find out everyone else had the same problem. The original is Butterick 6015.
I made the reproduction pattern a few years ago for a trip to The Dominican Republic and loved it. I made a size 10 and it fit perfectly. I would have loved to used a vintage pattern but couldn't find one. If it was a more complicated pattern maybe I wouldn't have loved it so much. It is frustrating when look for an original and can't find it. Truthfully you would think such a simple pattern would have exactly the same.
Apparently few of the pattern companies archived their patterns. Vogue and Butterick apparently put a call out to buy vintage patterns. My understanding is Simplicity didn’t. I think instead they redrafted from sketches using a modern body block. They seem to be the biggest offender of the poorly drafted vintage reprint.
They also offended by asking for their vintage patterns to be donated back to them instead of offering to pay for them like the others. That's why the only good ones are the aprons. No one wanted them anymore.
Oh yeah, Simplicity is rough. I still can believe how different this was. I have also heard about the donation call when I did the bigger roast. I still cannot believe it. You want your good patterns back? Pay for them.
Hahaha thanks for another fun video Stephanie, I love this series! Every time I try to sew one of the Big 4 vintage repro patterns, my head is done in...the style lines are off, the instructions are bizarre (e.g. asking you to tack 3 ribbons over the left shoulder to act as shoulder straps...to hold up a trained, floor length evening gown with no structure in the bodice and FOUR INCHES OF EASE)... I hope the Big 4 see these videos and start taking these repro patterns seriously.
Really appreciated this series, while I would love to get the vintage pattern, your video makes it possible to get the reissue and edit to a more vintage style.
This is an interesting project as I think older patterns did fit better than so many of the new ones. Part of that is because of the too-many-sizes fits all approach. What I would really like to see is each one being made using the same measurements, ie the 14 vintage equivalent in today's measurements. I think that would add a great deal to the critiques.
Thank you for the idea, maybe down the line I will do a rehash of this with mockups made. But I had 0 desire to make this in real life and didn't have the time due to heading back to work for a month.
Glad to see this as a series. I have often looked at the repro patterns and thought Did the original fit like that? Is the model too skinny? Did they NOT do any fittings on her? This explains a lot!
@@StephanieCanada I have two for you. Simplicity 1967 (original) and Simplicity 8731. I have the original, and it would be interesting to see the difference.
I just realized- it's a good thing they didn't number the pattern the same- because they're different! The problem is they seem to be drafting based on the line drawings making it more modern... where most people want it less modern hence we choose vintage looks.
Another awesome video I love learning about patterns with you and I honestly thought older patterns would be more confusing! Sewing patterns are honestly scary I’m always confused by the sizing and trying to find out what I need to make the darn thing! I learn a little bit more with every video xx
The craziest thing about some of these changes is that they're from an era where people wore a bra style or bralette or no bra, very similar to our modern day, where the bus line wouldn't have moved. And if anything we've all certainly gotten a little bit bigger then our waify grandmother's. I could maybe see adjusting the bustline and armscye for a 50's dress to a modern interpretation where you're supposed to wear a merry widow and a bullet bra, but something that is essentially an apron to be worn with a modern style of bra is ridiculous to alter this much
I know we've all seen the articles and information that the new releases are re-drafted to modern blocks and not meant to be line by line reproductions of the vintage patterns. The original pattern companies have all stated that they don't necessarily even have copies of the originals, so they're working from the illustrations. Unfortunately modern patterns are generally bigger and looser and have bigger armsyes, so they don't really fit anything like the originals did. A very good reason we all collect vintage patterns so we get the original look and fit!
I’m more confused than normal today, due to back pain, not lack of intelligence. So I will watch this over when I’m better, because I want to make this dress now and not sure why or which pattern to try. ♥️👍🧐
The only thing I can defend from the modern pattern is the belt length. IDK why but belts in patterns are not long enough so I always add a couple more inches. Other than that. Most modern patterns are only good for modern styles or original patterns that look vintage like some of Gertie’s stuff.
Oh but the belt in the vintage was longer by ages! But it is all good. Yes, modern for modern, vintage for vintage. I have never sewn a Gertie before, but I have so many true vintage I don't know when I could even get to it.
They really should market these “reproduction” patterns as “updated for modern styling” because they appear to make changes according to modern preference, like a different size armscye. Then sewists will not have any expectation of the garment being the actual vintage pattern.
I am sure fit models' proportions have changed over time so I am wondering if it was redrafted with different proportions in mind? I do dislike how the the armseye seems to continuously grow over time though
Very possible. But this one should’ve been super easy as the bras weren’t that much different. This was the Twiggy era so I am sure that had a little to do with it. Overall though I still think this was “let’s use a modern block to make this vintage cover art.
Oh I just looked that up and it is a large format vogue number 490. And WHOA is it pretty! Assuming I can ever get my hands on an original, I will add it to the list.
I bought the repro, heard all the negative hype and went searching for the original... apparently, it's in high demand 😔 But if you do acquire it, please please please do a comparison
@@StephanieCanada I am making it from the reproduction pattern now. I am curious to know if the original would present different challenges to my sewing skills.
This is a pattern where I’d love to see the two mocked up to see the fit differences! You stated very reasonably that it’s not worth it for you to make, but maybe it would be worth a collab??
Not to defend the modern take, but I have to say that clothing of that era had smaller, tighter armscyes. Also, bustlines were somewhat higher thanks to the standard shapes of bras.
the repro envelope has pictures and not the og drawings bc theyre different wrap dresses :y two leways i will give the reproduction tho is the hem length and bust darts, as length of the dress has a minimal effects on aesthetic/styling, and the original but darts are probably reflective of the unhealthy 'twiggy' ideal of the era and probably not flattering to most people, both then and now
Hey I have a vintage that I’m curious about… 4722 by watt publishing company. it comes in an mailing envelope. And none of the pieces have markings on them. I would love to share pictures of it 🤷🏻♀️
Yes they are different but without making both, there is no way to tell which one is "correct" or would fit better. Maybe the vintage is "wrong" and the modern one "correct". I guess I would love to see that. Maybe the vintage needed to be changed to fit the body better. Just saying. I have no idea what is "right".
Interesting point. But normally if a vintage pattern was incorrect there would be a separate “revised” notation on the pattern wiki. I see the modern as being incorrect because they deviated so far from the original lines.
You know Sandrea, I don’t know why these companies make these choices. I can only hope that if enough folks as for it to be true to the vintage MAYBE someone will listen.
Modern patterns are the way they are because people do not sew their clothing as they did back in the day. I am a glutton for punishment at this moment. I haven’t really sewn garments for years. I picked up the Simplicity 8846 shirt pattern from the 60’s for 50¢ at a thrift store. Although this pattern is a bit more detailed, it’s pretty confusing. But I’m doing a mock up so I’ll figure it out. I can always ask my mom for guidance. The difference in the patterns is simply people are bigger and we do not wear all the girdles and undergarments women used to wear back in the day. So modern pattern accommodates that for people now. Also, people just simply dress differently. These are just reproductions to get the look but still have what we consider comfort.
This seems like they had the super easy job of tracing the lines on the original pattern but decided to do it the half-assed, not as good hard way. 🤨 But why?
If they had gotten this original I think it would've been closer, but Simplicity opted to ask for "donations" of their old patterns instead of buying them back like Vogue did. So I am POSITIVE this is based off a modern block.
@@StephanieCanada that would explain a lot, but that’s still no excuse for making a sloppy reproduction or lazy drafting in general. I bet if you made up one of each it would be really obvious that there’s no shaping or fitting happening with the modern one.
Now I have to go dispose of half my collection of patterns. Thanks Simplicity. So shady!!. Although recently I purchase one of their 60s hats/berets patterns and it said.... AUTHENTIC... hmmmm
You don’t have to dispose of them. I am trying to share with folks how to make them more original in these. Let me know which ones you were most excited for and I will do my best to find the originals. And what number pattern said “authentic”, because I would be interested to see if it is the same.
I grew up with Simplicity. My grandmother used their patterns and we would often go to the pattern section and look through the books for dresses and costumes. Now that I am older and have a better idea of what patterns are supposed to look like and what authentic cultural and time period clothing is supposed to look like I am quite disillusioned with the company. I do not know if I should be trusting of them and buy any more. Sure I may consider buying a neat looking pattern, but I am aware now that it will not be authentic and it may not work out right. Plus, there is the unethical background of how the pattern was made. Which is really sad.
Ok i need the fabric of your top.. where did you find that? Oh by the way, my six year old hears you and thinks you are hilarious and loves the screaming goat in some of your videos.
Not too hard. I have a couple :) Butterick original is 6015 and they repro'd it as 7500, then later as B4790 (I *think* I got that all right). Would love to see this! Of course, I have an illness--sewing pattern madness--and have way, way, way too many patterns!
CountryShadeRanch what is so funny is I haven’t seen one come up in ages. THEN I found one lurking on eBay for a decent price. So now, 6015 is on the way!!
perhaps Simplicity listened to the original complaints about the pattern from the women (girls) who made it and corrected the new copy. having someone make both and try them on with appropriate undergarments would be interesting. you don't know how it will fit until you make it up!
It looks like either they drafted the reproduction based on the illustration of the envelope or the schematics that 99 of the times doesn't have the actual proportions, and to think these companies used to make really good patterns, geez
Also be aware that they use cheap labour - patternmakers barely out of college, rather than highly trained experts from industry. I always find commercial patterns are full of errors, shortcuts and poor fit, and part of the problem is that today's home sewers do not have the skills of women back in the 40s and 50s so the patterns have to be dumbed down somewhat. Frustrating for those of us who have skills and want a vintage fit and detail.
I can't help but feel a little cheated in these modern times when the same exact pattern (reproduced) is over 3 times the cost of the original with INFLATION INCLUDED. That same pattern would be $5.50 in today's money... and yet it is almost $18. I totally get this isn't the only thing different from the vintage pattern.... but the vintage pattern is usually better and it was a fraction of the price even back in the day.
I know understand why no patterns actually fit me. They really don’t care about making patterns consistent with measurements. How can I trust a modern pattern if they don’t reproduce vintage ones properly.
I find that Simplicity patterns never fit anyway. I feel like their CAD system is either awful or their modern base body block was poorly mathed. Or both.
The medieval "reproductions" are just as bad or worse as construction of garments has changed over time. The dress with the fitted arms that are more of a straight jacket than sleeves? It is because the arm holes are lower in modern dresses than they were in the past and that greatly changes the fit. Tailor the arm holes higher and you can suddenly reach forward and up. I watch a lot of historical reproduction videos and it is fascinating how sewing techniques have changed over time.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Roc Steady (feat. Flo Milli) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HozPPyqW0dY/mqdefault.jpg)
This is why I love sewing with vintage patterns so much more than retro and even modern day patterns. I feel the vintage patterns fit so much better from the get go and I have to alter less than the modern patterns. And that is why I grab any vintage patterns I find while out thrifting, auctioning, and antiquing.
Yup! Same here!
😧 they changed it sooooo much. This was very interesting! Can’t wait to see more of the series! I think the finale should be you making a couple to compare them, maybe just in muslin!
They really did! Thanks for the idea Liz! Maybe one some of the more detailed ones I will make them up so folks get a good idea of what they are looking at.
OK Sephanie, while I love your comparison of the two patterns, I strongly feel the patterns had to be "revamped" for the modern aesthetic. Just like when we get upset when modern undergarments are put under civil war/victorian garments and the person doesn't understand why "It doesn't look right". The same should be said about these styles. Yes there were bras in 1969. But they were made to make the boobs look a certain shape (playtex 18 hour bras) and many times ladies wore longline bras. These bras brought the boobs up much higher. (and the pattern was made for a youthful age rather than a matron) Also the armscye was much closer to the body back then. Our modern "comfort" style has made all armscyes larger mostly due to the T-shirt era and fast fashion. So with the armscye enlarged that shifts where the dart is and the size. I totally agree with you on the neckline. There was not a need to bring up the modern back neckline. Nor change the end ties. Bottom line, you did a great job showing the difference. And shame on Simplicity for not following the true vintage cut. Cant wait to see what you find with McCalls or other Big 4's. Thank you.
Thank you so much, yes there is a lot to be said for our modern "comforts" and how it has changed the fashion we make. Thank you for your insights!
Dear MJ Gobet: I thank you so much for your answer. Thats right, nobody sees today that the lines, waists, breasts, armholes, were quite different to today. Which lady today wear fastened strong underwear or has the waistline like in the 50s. Everybody wants to feel sluppy and "comfortly". Even the Wedding-Gowns are not allowed to fit narrow or have weight.
These were my thoughts as well. In addition, Stephanie is assuming that the fit of the original pattern was spot on. In my experience sewing these patterns back then, the fit was often abysmal. So it's possible that in addition to undergarments shaping bodies differently and different aesthetics, the modern changes might have been to correct fit issues. Though the change in the back neckline was a ridiculous one.
I'd be interested in seeing both of these patterns made and worn by someone whose measurements are exactly what the pattern calls for.
Yes, I would love to see both these patterns made up in the same size, and modeled on the same youthful figure they were designed for. I do recall, btw, seeing a review of the original pattern some years back that said it had real fit/design issues and wouldn't stay put (something about the ties that held it together in front - underneath - being inadequate -- consequently I never made my vintage copy).
Regarding the first comment from two years ago that mentioned the smaller armscyes of that time, yes, that's true, and there are many good points in her remarks, but never, ever did a young person wear a long-line bra. Good grief! Those were for matrons only, well into middle age, and found in the back of Sears catalogs or a section of the lingerie department at a distance from where younger women shopped. Same with Playtex 18-hr bras, unless one was quite busty. I came of age in that era, and while my first bras were made of woven cotton and more structured, it wasn't long before more relaxed synthetics were on the market (late 60s-early 70s). Same with slip styles. While the full-length variety were the standard through much of the 60s, by the 70s half slips had supplanted them -- at least with the younger set.
Just a word to those who wish to speak with authority about the styles of decades that preceded you: Please, check and double check! No, you don't necessarily know, and if you have access to people from those eras (and there are plenty of us out here), ask! Also, what demographic is a particular pattern/style designed for? This wraparound dress is obviously for teens/younger adults, and reflects that youthful style and shape. Again, I'd love to see the two versions made up, so we could really see the difference(s).
@@anneburland5306such great comments and insight. I agree with what you’re saying about those who try to speak with authority about decades past. We’re still out there living our best lives, just ask! Our memories are still good hahaha 😂
I’ve made the reproduction walk away dress that everyone seems to have trouble with and it turned out so cute. Admittedly I did my usual 1 1/2 inch removed from the bodice waistline and changed the skirt pieces because I didn’t have enough fabric but I didn’t have to alter the fit otherwise. My vogue 1930s repro dress however is in the naughty bin until I can look at it again 😆
Oh I am so glad that you didn’t have to alter that one too much. I have heard absolutely horror stories.
Wow! I agree and thank you for pointing out how we are being duped with new "retro" patterns. I actually have that particular vintage pattern in my collection. Great video!
Thank you! I plan on doing as many of these as I can. I was floored by how different this simple Jiffy was. I am now very concerned about further patterns.
Thanks for this, I became frustrated to the point of not sewing anymore because I wasn't getting the results. Now I know why and you've inspired me to try again.
I think they just didn't have the actual vintage pattern and they just drafted the new one based on the images.
Simplicity definitely did that.
But if Stephanie and others can get the old patterns, why couldn’t they???
@@louisegogel7973 Apparently, from what I read in other posts, Vogue and Butterick put out a call to BUY their vintage patterns back, but Simplicity put out a call for DONATIONS of their patterns and when they didn't get many of them, they redrafted the patterns they couldn't get originals of.
@@teresaellis7062 Well, In Swedish we have a saying that translates to "when stinginess deceives wisdom" (när snålheten bedrar visheten). Perfect example.🫤
Vintage person here. I think I made that pattern back in 1969 or something like it. By that time (age 17) I was sewing most of my own clothing. Since I was no longer under the watchful eye of the home-ec teacher and pantyhose had been invented, I probably shortened it by at least 2 or 3 inches. It was the late 1960's and we were showing a lot of leg.
Quick note: the Etsy seller made it right for not disclosing the seam allowance being cut away! If you enjoyed this video I have a whole playlist of other sewing pattern related shenanigans: ruclips.net/p/PLaG2bBTXx7U74Wmx6LkyCC1NVgw6a1PqU
Woof, this is the snarkiest one yet and I LOVE IT!! You make me so happy, and I love watching everything you do.
Thank you so much, this was all off the cuff, I had never lined these up before I turned the camera on. And MAN OH MAN... there was so much blank staring at the patterns because I was truly floored with how different this simple pattern was. it makes me nervous for more complicated ones.
I knew it! I knew it! But it is great to see you confirm what I have thought for years! Also great to justify my vintage pattern collection .. the darts alone!
Right!! I was astonished at just how bad this was, and even a Jiffy! Which should’ve been super easy. I am now very concerned about future comparisons.
Awesome video Stephanie! This topic has been really contentious between several of us in our S&B group lately, so it's nice that more of us are discussing it.
Thank you so much! I am looking forward (I think) to doing more of them.
I made this style of dress for my daughter. She is 7. She likes it. I didn’t want to make this for me until I say your video. I like the new version better. It will make the full bust adjustment much easier.
I think the bust darts are so radically different because the modern bust is so much bigger than it was drafted for in vintage patterns, which I see as a good thing. However the neckline is a huge issue as well as a flare, I am so glad you covered this pattern so as if we plan to make it we could do alterations to mirror it more like the vintage one. I mean, someone could really make a blog into correcting these patterns to be more like the vintage ones. There's a big shame one which is Butterick Retro B4790, so much of that dress was drafted WRONG even the darts were upside down on it IIRC. When I first started sewing I tried to do it and couldn't figure out why I couldn't even remotely fit my bust in the muslins. It was one of the patterns that made me step away from garment sewing for a few years when sewing due to the frustrations with fit for my body only to find out everyone else had the same problem. The original is Butterick 6015.
Oh 6015 is on its way to me in both forms, and I don’t intend on mincing my words.
I made the reproduction pattern a few years ago for a trip to The Dominican Republic and loved it. I made a size 10 and it fit perfectly. I would have loved to used a vintage pattern but couldn't find one. If it was a more complicated pattern maybe I wouldn't have loved it so much. It is frustrating when look for an original and can't find it. Truthfully you would think such a simple pattern would have exactly the same.
Oh interesting! Thank you for your insight.
Apparently few of the pattern companies archived their patterns. Vogue and Butterick apparently put a call out to buy vintage patterns. My understanding is Simplicity didn’t. I think instead they redrafted from sketches using a modern body block. They seem to be the biggest offender of the poorly drafted vintage reprint.
They also offended by asking for their vintage patterns to be donated back to them instead of offering to pay for them like the others. That's why the only good ones are the aprons. No one wanted them anymore.
Oh yeah, Simplicity is rough. I still can believe how different this was. I have also heard about the donation call when I did the bigger roast. I still cannot believe it. You want your good patterns back? Pay for them.
Hahaha thanks for another fun video Stephanie, I love this series! Every time I try to sew one of the Big 4 vintage repro patterns, my head is done in...the style lines are off, the instructions are bizarre (e.g. asking you to tack 3 ribbons over the left shoulder to act as shoulder straps...to hold up a trained, floor length evening gown with no structure in the bodice and FOUR INCHES OF EASE)... I hope the Big 4 see these videos and start taking these repro patterns seriously.
Oh that would be funny if my tiny little channel got noticed by the big pattern companies.
I’m currently making this(the modern) dress. I’m so glad I made a mock up. Has to do a serious full bust adjustment and add serious length.
Really appreciated this series, while I would love to get the vintage pattern, your video makes it possible to get the reissue and edit to a more vintage style.
Thank you! I honestly hadn't even thought of it that way before. I am so glad to help however I can.
This is an interesting project as I think older patterns did fit better than so many of the new ones. Part of that is because of the too-many-sizes fits all approach. What I would really like to see is each one being made using the same measurements, ie the 14 vintage equivalent in today's measurements. I think that would add a great deal to the critiques.
Thank you for the idea, maybe down the line I will do a rehash of this with mockups made. But I had 0 desire to make this in real life and didn't have the time due to heading back to work for a month.
@@StephanieCanada Not all things can be done, and this dress just ain't your style anyway!!
Glad to see this as a series. I have often looked at the repro patterns and thought Did the original fit like that? Is the model too skinny? Did they NOT do any fittings on her? This explains a lot!
That is what I am hoping to crack through. Let’s get these modern reproductions out and on the table (literally).
@@StephanieCanada I have two for you. Simplicity 1967 (original) and Simplicity 8731. I have the original, and it would be interesting to see the difference.
Love this!! Thank you for doing this comparison.
Happy to help! Plus, always taking suggestions for more comparisons if there is one in particular you have wanted to see done.
I just realized- it's a good thing they didn't number the pattern the same- because they're different! The problem is they seem to be drafting based on the line drawings making it more modern... where most people want it less modern hence we choose vintage looks.
Another awesome video I love learning about patterns with you and I honestly thought older patterns would be more confusing! Sewing patterns are honestly scary I’m always confused by the sizing and trying to find out what I need to make the darn thing! I learn a little bit more with every video xx
Hooray! I am so glad I am slowly clearing out the fear! You can DO IT!
@@StephanieCanada I’m getting there for sure xx
The craziest thing about some of these changes is that they're from an era where people wore a bra style or bralette or no bra, very similar to our modern day, where the bus line wouldn't have moved. And if anything we've all certainly gotten a little bit bigger then our waify grandmother's. I could maybe see adjusting the bustline and armscye for a 50's dress to a modern interpretation where you're supposed to wear a merry widow and a bullet bra, but something that is essentially an apron to be worn with a modern style of bra is ridiculous to alter this much
Agreed.
Yesssssss, get 'em, Stephanie! Love the sass
Thanks!! Trust me, I have plenty more where that is coming from.
Interesting! Some of those changes seem counter productive to each other.
Absolutely they are!!
I just found your channel and am enjoying it! I have some of these patterns and was afraid they were changed to be too modern.
I know we've all seen the articles and information that the new releases are re-drafted to modern blocks and not meant to be line by line reproductions of the vintage patterns. The original pattern companies have all stated that they don't necessarily even have copies of the originals, so they're working from the illustrations. Unfortunately modern patterns are generally bigger and looser and have bigger armsyes, so they don't really fit anything like the originals did. A very good reason we all collect vintage patterns so we get the original look and fit!
Right! I love the true vintage pattern fit!
I’m more confused than normal today, due to back pain, not lack of intelligence.
So I will watch this over when I’m better, because I want to make this dress now and not sure why or which pattern to try. ♥️👍🧐
The only thing I can defend from the modern pattern is the belt length. IDK why but belts in patterns are not long enough so I always add a couple more inches.
Other than that. Most modern patterns are only good for modern styles or original patterns that look vintage like some of Gertie’s stuff.
Oh but the belt in the vintage was longer by ages! But it is all good. Yes, modern for modern, vintage for vintage. I have never sewn a Gertie before, but I have so many true vintage I don't know when I could even get to it.
When I sew, I read directions. Then I sew it my way. Hope for the best
SAME!
Hello!! Nice video 🤗
They really should market these “reproduction” patterns as “updated for modern styling” because they appear to make changes according to modern preference, like a different size armscye. Then sewists will not have any expectation of the garment being the actual vintage pattern.
RIGHT?! And now there is another line of “authentic” from Simplicity. Of which I can’t wait to get my hands on.
I am sure fit models' proportions have changed over time so I am wondering if it was redrafted with different proportions in mind? I do dislike how the the armseye seems to continuously grow over time though
Very possible. But this one should’ve been super easy as the bras weren’t that much different. This was the Twiggy era so I am sure that had a little to do with it. Overall though I still think this was “let’s use a modern block to make this vintage cover art.
Would love to see the simplicity mens cabana set, original no. 2080, reissue no. 8659
Oh thank you for the suggestion! I will add it to my list.
Can you do the V1669 from Vogue? It's a 1949 coat.
Oh I just looked that up and it is a large format vogue number 490. And WHOA is it pretty! Assuming I can ever get my hands on an original, I will add it to the list.
I bought the repro, heard all the negative hype and went searching for the original... apparently, it's in high demand 😔
But if you do acquire it, please please please do a comparison
Will do! I have my pattern friends on it.
@@StephanieCanada I am making it from the reproduction pattern now. I am curious to know if the original would present different challenges to my sewing skills.
This is a pattern where I’d love to see the two mocked up to see the fit differences! You stated very reasonably that it’s not worth it for you to make, but maybe it would be worth a collab??
Id love to see simplicity 4868 (1943 vintage apron pattern) compared with the reproduction simplicity 8571
Not to defend the modern take, but I have to say that clothing of that era had smaller, tighter armscyes. Also, bustlines were somewhat higher thanks to the standard shapes of bras.
Oh no, I agree that the armseye are smaller and the busts a little higher. .
Girl, your videos crack me up!!!
Thank you so much!
Me too!
the repro envelope has pictures and not the og drawings bc theyre different wrap dresses :y
two leways i will give the reproduction tho is the hem length and bust darts, as length of the dress has a minimal effects on aesthetic/styling, and the original but darts are probably reflective of the unhealthy 'twiggy' ideal of the era and probably not flattering to most people, both then and now
You have a point on the Twiggy influence of the original and how much a sketch artist can make it feel different than a completed garment.
Hey I have a vintage that I’m curious about… 4722 by watt publishing company. it comes in an mailing envelope. And none of the pieces have markings on them.
I would love to share pictures of it 🤷🏻♀️
Just found this channel. Subbed after the first video!! Can you review the popular simplicity 30’s overall reproduction 😍
Welcome to my tiny corner of the internet! I am so glad you enjoyed it. I am actually working on that EXACT acquisition. Keep an eye out!
🤔It makes me wonder how different is the fit once it's made up?
Maybe. I don’t usually do that yet. I probably will for future videos.
Love it.
Yes they are different but without making both, there is no way to tell which one is "correct" or would fit better. Maybe the vintage is "wrong" and the modern one "correct". I guess I would love to see that. Maybe the vintage needed to be changed to fit the body better. Just saying. I have no idea what is "right".
Interesting point. But normally if a vintage pattern was incorrect there would be a separate “revised” notation on the pattern wiki. I see the modern as being incorrect because they deviated so far from the original lines.
@@StephanieCanada i would love to make them. Not my size. My 14 year old would fit in that size. Its a cute dress
Thank you. I don’t think I’ll ever trust the modern versions. What is so hard about just copying the originals?
You know Sandrea, I don’t know why these companies make these choices. I can only hope that if enough folks as for it to be true to the vintage MAYBE someone will listen.
Modern patterns are the way they are because people do not sew their clothing as they did back in the day. I am a glutton for punishment at this moment. I haven’t really sewn garments for years. I picked up the Simplicity 8846 shirt pattern from the 60’s for 50¢ at a thrift store. Although this pattern is a bit more detailed, it’s pretty confusing. But I’m doing a mock up so I’ll figure it out. I can always ask my mom for guidance. The difference in the patterns is simply people are bigger and we do not wear all the girdles and undergarments women used to wear back in the day. So modern pattern accommodates that for people now. Also, people just simply dress differently. These are just reproductions to get the look but still have what we consider comfort.
I love your stumped faces.
There were definitely lots of those this video. 🤣🤣🤣
what is the pattern you are wearing please
This one is from the brand Vixen by Micheline Pitt. I love this dress but didn't make it.
Oh my word wtf modern pattern?! Actual trash. I loved this! It’s fascinating to see the differences.
Right!!!
I prefer 1/4 seam allowances. I'm too broke to cut more than I have to.😊🎉
If I could sew a straight line I would agree! 🤣
This seems like they had the super easy job of tracing the lines on the original pattern but decided to do it the half-assed, not as good hard way. 🤨 But why?
If they had gotten this original I think it would've been closer, but Simplicity opted to ask for "donations" of their old patterns instead of buying them back like Vogue did. So I am POSITIVE this is based off a modern block.
@@StephanieCanada that would explain a lot, but that’s still no excuse for making a sloppy reproduction or lazy drafting in general. I bet if you made up one of each it would be really obvious that there’s no shaping or fitting happening with the modern one.
The two patterns are different but I think I like the new one better.
Now I have to go dispose of half my collection of patterns. Thanks Simplicity. So shady!!. Although recently I purchase one of their 60s hats/berets patterns and it said.... AUTHENTIC... hmmmm
You don’t have to dispose of them. I am trying to share with folks how to make them more original in these. Let me know which ones you were most excited for and I will do my best to find the originals. And what number pattern said “authentic”, because I would be interested to see if it is the same.
I grew up with Simplicity. My grandmother used their patterns and we would often go to the pattern section and look through the books for dresses and costumes. Now that I am older and have a better idea of what patterns are supposed to look like and what authentic cultural and time period clothing is supposed to look like I am quite disillusioned with the company. I do not know if I should be trusting of them and buy any more. Sure I may consider buying a neat looking pattern, but I am aware now that it will not be authentic and it may not work out right. Plus, there is the unethical background of how the pattern was made. Which is really sad.
Ok i need the fabric of your top.. where did you find that? Oh by the way, my six year old hears you and thinks you are hilarious and loves the screaming goat in some of your videos.
"What are my takeaways?"
Mine are 'yikes'
SAME!
Do the Walkaway dress!
Oh man. Finding an original for that one is hard. But I will give it a shot
Not too hard. I have a couple :) Butterick original is 6015 and they repro'd it as 7500, then later as B4790 (I *think* I got that all right). Would love to see this! Of course, I have an illness--sewing pattern madness--and have way, way, way too many patterns!
CountryShadeRanch what is so funny is I haven’t seen one come up in ages. THEN I found one lurking on eBay for a decent price. So now, 6015 is on the way!!
perhaps Simplicity listened to the original complaints about the pattern from the women (girls) who made it and corrected the new copy. having someone make both and try them on with appropriate undergarments would be interesting. you don't know how it will fit until you make it up!
You are my idol, I want to be a shady bitch tooooooo 🤣🤣🤣
Nicely done. Modern patterns generally such. Good to see details on how.
As long as you have facts behind you I find being a shady bitch works. And thank you! I am looking forward to doing as many of these as I can find.
Hi Stephanie, I’m also a seamstress’s but need to find a job, Can You help me…
16:02 Here is a comment for the algorithm.
It looks like either they drafted the reproduction based on the illustration of the envelope or the schematics that 99 of the times doesn't have the actual proportions, and to think these companies used to make really good patterns, geez
Yup. I agree entirely. And truly it wouldn’t be that hard to purchase back your old patterns to properly copy them out.
Also be aware that they use cheap labour - patternmakers barely out of college, rather than highly trained experts from industry. I always find commercial patterns are full of errors, shortcuts and poor fit, and part of the problem is that today's home sewers do not have the skills of women back in the 40s and 50s so the patterns have to be dumbed down somewhat. Frustrating for those of us who have skills and want a vintage fit and detail.
Hmm, I hadn’t heard about the younger age of the draftspeople. Interesting.
Love this series 👌🏾🌷🦹🏾♂️😍🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈
Thank you so much!
I can't help but feel a little cheated in these modern times when the same exact pattern (reproduced) is over 3 times the cost of the original with INFLATION INCLUDED. That same pattern would be $5.50 in today's money... and yet it is almost $18. I totally get this isn't the only thing different from the vintage pattern.... but the vintage pattern is usually better and it was a fraction of the price even back in the day.
I know understand why no patterns actually fit me. They really don’t care about making patterns consistent with measurements. How can I trust a modern pattern if they don’t reproduce vintage ones properly.
I find that Simplicity patterns never fit anyway. I feel like their CAD system is either awful or their modern base body block was poorly mathed. Or both.
Oh I don’t know. Maybe it is. One day I would love to be able to interview folks there and ask why they make these decisions.
@@StephanieCanada 😳 Yessss! That's an awesome idea!
But both gala and granny Smith are better than red delicious.
Hi Stephanie.....The length of modern instructions and there confusing talking in circles drives me crazy!!
Right! They really are ridiculous and a waste of paper because they didn’t use the space smartly.
The medieval "reproductions" are just as bad or worse as construction of garments has changed over time. The dress with the fitted arms that are more of a straight jacket than sleeves? It is because the arm holes are lower in modern dresses than they were in the past and that greatly changes the fit. Tailor the arm holes higher and you can suddenly reach forward and up. I watch a lot of historical reproduction videos and it is fascinating how sewing techniques have changed over time.
I think the modern retro pattern is disappointing. It would not give you the Style you are expecting.
Easy cut, easy sew, will you let me sew, BISMILLAH NO