You must comprehend pattern measures if you want to learn how to make antique clothing. Because 1950s sizes are different from modern sizes, using historical patterns will be different. The McCall’s pattern magazine that I mentioned in my last post is where I got this 1950s measuring chart. I reasoned that this chart could assist to clarify how the fit of dresses from the mid-1950s differs from gowns now.
The choice of a vintage design might also be aided by using this antique measuring guide. It’s simpler to determine what adjustments might be necessary to make the design suit you better by comparing the measurements to your own.
The simplest way to choose a vintage pattern size is to start with the bust dimensions and then adjust the hip side seams and waistline darts to match your current size. Even though their measures are very similar, you might have noticed that modern sizes often have greater measurements. For example, a fashionable size 6 now can be a size 18 in older designs.
EXAMPLE:
1950’s- pattern size 18 = 36″ bust / 30″ waist / 39″ hips
current size 6 or S size = 35.5″ bust / 28″ waist / 38″ hips
HIPS Alteration: subtract 1″ from hips by taking in side seams 1/4″
BUST Alteration: subtract 1/2″ from bust line by taking in side seams 1/8″
WAIST Alteration: subtract 2″ from waist by taking in side seams 1/2″
Compare the size chart from 1956 above to the one from today, which shows measures that are frequently used by labels like Banana Republic, J.Crew, and others in the modern era. This makes it simple to see how the fit varies.
It’s crucial to note that there are no standard sizes in US clothing, despite the fact that the current table above shows sizes and fits that are similar to various companies.
Each manufacturer in the US is free to create any style to suit their specific target market and label their clothing with any size they choose. This indicates that it is incorrect to say that a person should wear one size. This is crucial to know: that fit and size for each brand or store are exclusive.
