This haul is a bit outdated - by now most (but not all) of them have been listed and sold! What remains can be found in the etsy shop/linked in description. The condition of these ended up being worse than I originally thought, so a lot of them have been sorted into uncounted lots. Including some of the larger size ones. These are on ebay, if you are interested: www.ebay.com/sch/Women/4161/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=&_ssn=angelaclay2017
I m only at the first three patterns and they are fabulous. I love opening used patterns and ironing them out are re folding them. It s just fun to me.
I want to know who was this wonderful woman who made these patterns and where are the dresses? Just how she folded the patterns, you know she had an attention for detail
That isn't true at all. Women's patterns started at a size 10, so a size 12 is equivalent to a modern size 2 which was NOT the norm, even in the 1950s! Some accessory patterns are labeled as small-medium-large and the small is always for sizes 12-14. A 1950s large would be for 38"-40" busts.
@@stache1954 They were, but you just proved my point? Size 10-12 were the smallest sold, definitely not considered large at the time. Anything below that would be children's sizes - the switch to women's pattern/dress sizes starting at 0-2 is relatively new. Because of this a vintage 12 is not in any way comparable to a modern 12, it does however align well with modern size 2 measurements. They were both commonly the smallest size available. In the 1950s plus size was anything OVER size 20. Standard pattern sizing for ladies was 12-20. Size 12 would be for a 30" bust, size 20 for a 38" bust.
This haul is a bit outdated - by now most (but not all) of them have been listed and sold! What remains can be found in the etsy shop/linked in description. The condition of these ended up being worse than I originally thought, so a lot of them have been sorted into uncounted lots. Including some of the larger size ones. These are on ebay, if you are interested: www.ebay.com/sch/Women/4161/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=&_ssn=angelaclay2017
The language you use to describe the patterns might be my favorite part. ❤️
As a tiny person who has a hard time finding clothes and modern patterns in my size, I want all of these.
I’m obsessed with the frog fabric 🥰
I m only at the first three patterns and they are fabulous. I love opening used patterns and ironing them out are re folding them. It s just fun to me.
“I do not trust this woman and her folding abilities”. Lmao.
The dress and jacket at timestamp 15:37 has been rereleased by Simplicity as 8980
So many I have never seen before. Such fun!
I want to know who was this wonderful woman who made these patterns and where are the dresses? Just how she folded the patterns, you know she had an attention for detail
I want to know too! She had excellent taste and must have made some beautiful things!
Hi, your new venture seems to be very successful as to fulfillment , enjoy 🥰🏳️🌈👌🏾🧕🏿🦹🏾♂️👍🌷
At the time 11 and 12 were considered larger sizes, not in the plus size range but the upper limit of 'average' sizes.
That isn't true at all. Women's patterns started at a size 10, so a size 12 is equivalent to a modern size 2 which was NOT the norm, even in the 1950s! Some accessory patterns are labeled as small-medium-large and the small is always for sizes 12-14. A 1950s large would be for 38"-40" busts.
@@countedandcurated6780 So patterns had different sizing than ready made clothing?
@stacheH patterns and ready made clothes are not the same sizes even today.
@@countedandcurated6780 Sears 1955 Missy size breakdown (ready to wear):
Size 10: 32.5 bust, 24.5 waist, 34 hips
Size 12: 34 bust, 25.5 waist, 36 hips
Size 14: 35.5 bust, 27 waist, 38 hips
Size 16: 37 bust, 28.5 waist, 40 hips
Size 18: 39 bust, 30.5 waist, 42 hips
Size 20: 41 bust, 32.5 waist, 44 hips
People were smaller back then, especially in the ribcage.
@@stache1954 They were, but you just proved my point? Size 10-12 were the smallest sold, definitely not considered large at the time. Anything below that would be children's sizes - the switch to women's pattern/dress sizes starting at 0-2 is relatively new. Because of this a vintage 12 is not in any way comparable to a modern 12, it does however align well with modern size 2 measurements. They were both commonly the smallest size available.
In the 1950s plus size was anything OVER size 20. Standard pattern sizing for ladies was 12-20. Size 12 would be for a 30" bust, size 20 for a 38" bust.