Frock Chick

I am also finding it hard to trust all staged images, as there is a tendency to pouff out draped fabrics when they should fold inwards. I wonder how many people remember the infamous natural form pattern?

The Simplicity 4244 pattern with the paniers turned out and padded?

The original has the area padded out in display, though not turned inside out:

http://www.victorianbridalmuseum.com/about/index5.phtml

I would love to see this updated, polonaise style princesse dresses are a staple in the pattern books of the era that it’s nice to see real examples whenever possible. Seriously, every book has at least one princess and at least one is really a polonaise.

And if the Met can have a garment padded in inverse to what would be expected, then yes it’s very easy to to!

Centraal Museum too! (but this is another good example of the mid-late 1880s shape to the skirt, the pouffing over the hips and of the little puff over the bustle.. not really feeling it. But yeah, that’s another Sunburst reference!)

This is simply more a case of feeling too full at the front hip. But I have seen more extreme forms of firm support in contemporary photos.

But I was looking at a gown I adore but feels later than the date as well, and I am trying to tease out whether it is staged or original to the gown.

So what is it that makes this feel later than 1875?

Simply put the shoulders. They are very square. Very square indeed and that is not because the mannequin has square shoulders. The sleeve shape also is very angular, another feature of mid to late 1880s patterning.

Compare the shoulders to this very definitely mid 1870s garment:

See the slope of the shoulder, more obvious from the back. The front arm seams are further under the arm than above too. But this is a very well made example of the time so the structure is a bit firmer and so holds a firm line compared to other examples of this decade.

The split and pointed tails of the scaled gown can also be seen right through to early 1890s in Worth garments (see the silvery blue gown also from the met on this page.)

But this is why I am devouring everything I can find about what is absolutely known as far as dates of garments. There are a few garments dated to mid 1880s that have a very gored skirt shape that is, as above, original shaping. Even the above has a mix of gored and flat panels. So it may be that the house was experimenting in shifting fullness around very early. That though is proving difficult.

Anyway if anyone would like to sponso a trip to see the Worth Archives- maybe a month stay to be able to actually go through all documents then maybe my mind would be rested!

I already know the pattern books and periodicals do not show the flared gored skirt shape earlier than the early 1890s. I have gone through every single issue of Der Bazar that has plates and patterns, I have random patterns from other periodical, and of course the cutting books. In fact skirts go extremely boxy before they get pulled to the back and then the hem flares out again. But again Maison Worth was known to anticipate fashion as well as push it in a direction most especially in cut.

So yes. Grubby mitts on the archive. Well very well cleaned and gloved mitts.

Tags: sunburst, worth

So my books are already winging their way from Central Basement (where all the cool books live.) and I did fond at least one maybe two online references from the Worth bibliography.

Still no sign of The cloud patten nor The ray pattern. There are stars though (yuss!!) but the clouds prove eluxive.

And then I saw an ad on facebook.

By Kara Woolery January 11, 2017 In DIY Reception Ideas, Weddings

How To DIY a Balloon Garland

And this is lovely, I’ve seen them before and like the idea of one like this with pastels and…..oh dear.

I can no longer unsee.

 

No but seriously the cloud patterns used on other garments use tapering scrolling ahapes. So the hunt for the orgiginal design continues!

Tags: cannot unsee, sunburst

I wound up breaking out the overlocker all day instead of working on horns. Which was probably wise. The rain is still leaving everything damp so curing would be risky.

So I zipped around the edges of my Worth sunburst skirt (the satin is so perfectly buttery that it was just nice to do!) and used the drafted bodice pattern from the 1876 tool to trace a new pattern for my new Phantom wedding dress bodice. I did use the vintage organza after all so that leaves some of the crepe for a potential Moulin Rouge dress. If I ever find a trim that works!

So that was tracing and transferring the pattern to a layer of twill, a layer of calico, and a layer of organza then overlocking all the edges tidy.

And then finally I cut the trim for my Cleves sleeves having removed the colour from the silk. And that leaves some softer trim for the undersleeves.

And finally, my last cast from my Ahsoka molds finally worked!

While I was at the library the Ultimaker was also there XD It felt brilliant being able to talk historic costume nerding while also talking about the printer and the software to use it. Just fun 🙂 Also it’s a nice size machine so seeing it in person means potentially being able to plan to get my Maleficent horns printed piece by piece.

Anyway, I know the Opulent era well but it’s still really nice to have the luxury of having it at home. Also this is still a gown that keeps leaping up for attention:

http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/155944

Date:1900

Culture:French

Medium:silk, rhinestones

Credit Line:Brooklyn Museum Costume Collection at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Gift of the Brooklyn Museum, 2009; Gift of the estate of Mrs. Arthur F. Schermerhorn, 1957

My scanner has fallen over but The Opulent Era has a strip photo of the beading and it is just clear enough to make out the bead types 🙂 Looks like delica style pearelscent bead which is fabulous! One of the desriptions in the Worth Bio mentions “iridescent” beads which I always take to mean opalescent- rainbow refracted colours very pearlescent but either is of interest to me in terms of materials. I adore AB finish so figuring out an appropriate start date to use it is always of interest.

As a start:

http://blogs.houseofgems.com/index.php/2014/09/sparkle-shine-a-brief-history-of-how-glimmering-gems-and-beads-came-to-be/

Metallic sparkle and shine has long been a favorite among bead connoisseurs. The bead makers of Gablonz first painted metallic finishes on glass beads, including iridescent coatings. Next, they came up with iridized and electroplated glass beads. Iridized glass was glass sprayed with an almost hair-thin vapor deposit of metal oxides. The craze for iridized glass and beads reached its height during the late 1800s and again in the 1950s and 1960s after the introduction of aurora borealis coating.

http://www.karipearls.com/how-pearls-are-made.html

Wax Pearl with Essence Coating and Fragile Glass

Photos thanks to Diane Volkmann

Which I had only heard about, so it’s nice to see (click through.) For an example of the description of this kind of fake pearl:

MAN and SHELLS Molluscs in the History

By Riccardo Cattaneo-Vietti, Mauro Doneddu, Egidio

Though I think this has the closest explanation:

https://www.thespruce.com/stones-in-vintage-costume-jewelry-4026020

Saphiret is type of glass stone with a blue-brown hue used in Victorian jewelry.

This page also distinguishes carnival glass from AB (specially Swarovski method) so I think this one is the lead 🙂

Anyway. My desire for iridescence is generally tempered by being sure it’s slightly out of date for my most loved eras! But

It is real!

http://sewingchest.co.uk/pdf/p19-Interfacing.pdf

Cotton woven with PVC dot resin

is what is commonly called Solidot and

is probably one of the oldest interfacings

still used today.

Woo!!! I am very lucky to have just enough for my Sunburst as what I have I cannot find any more. What I have is a very well woven cotton fabric of a complex weave and a very distinct regular series of opaque dots. The closest I can find is in fact labeled as anti-skid fabric. And yeah. Very similar. But it’s annoying it cannot be found any more.

But I can’t very much info about who produced the stuff and why I cannot find any since about 2010.

So obviously one uses silver lined glass beads and the other uses pearls. Of note, fake pearls. Which is very exciting. Beacuse I have vintage fake glass pearls so I suspect they are made the same way- I think it’s an enamel paint over glass.

Anyway notice the other big thing.

The pearls do not have a shadow line. I was originally working from The Opulent Era which includes a close up of the pink gown that shares photo space with the yellow sunburst. And in that the beads are outlined with fine seed beads. But that is not what is going on!

The yellow sunburst apparently has a silver cord laid down and the silver lined beads sewn around that. You can see the couched threads once you look for them but especially on the cloud circle to the inside of the furthermost star. Also metal would explain how the cord stays so crisp as opposed to a silk over cotton core. Compare how firm they appear compared to the known beads and thread. The gown has a lot of shattering of the silk but how soon did the silver corrode? Was it a factor calculated into the making? Or did the gown get stored in a way that wasn’t completely optimised?

So I suspect the same rational I used to decide the pearls were the better option for me played a part in the original. I think the beads alone were not going to give enough definition so the couched silver does that.

I however love the effect of the the corroded metal! I love how it outlines in such a sharp graphic line. So I am really really torn as to just how “accurate” I want to go. I should only couch cord iff I use rocailles but it should also be silver. Also the rocailles are one size while the pearls graduate… will going for a single sized pearl and dark silver cord work? As somthing that could have been done?

But the same can be said of the sequins. I will likely use modern non tarnishing sequins so will that affect how this changes over time?

And now I am remembering why I stalled the last time! My historic gear is rarely a copy. I much prefer to do as was done which is to take a fashion plate or photo of a celebrity and say “I like this, but do this” as is how the pink version came about anyway! But I love so much about the yellow (with hints of pink and green and bright yellow).

 Contemporary style:

I did find a few more examples of a the tablier style covered in beads. But I need to explain what a tablier is.

It means apron. But it is important to understand what an apron in fashion in the natural form and sencond bustle era looked like. It was plain and pulled back. So it’s basically a plain skirt front as opposed to one covered in drapery or rushing etc.

There was some exploration of asymmetry of these overlayers of beaded silk especially when on a delicate fabric.

I adore these oversized pearls on thin silver beaded loops. Some of the other gowns how tassels and loops made from matching pearl beads (see garment immediately to right), but this is quite a statement.

And then we come to the two Sunburst gowns. Worth regularly repeated his designs, with some adjustments based on the new client.

This just happens to be a very obvious copy due to the single large stylised motif across the entire skirt. These just stand out a mile away!  These do also make use of cut work and so perhaps represent an early start to the later gown with heavy use of cutwork. They certainly show more in character and line to the vertical plant motifs than the layers of net and beads.

And that seems to have lead to experimentation with full skirt length motifs.

(BTW that shape of the wheat sheaf gown is well represented in other garments Worth created especially in velvet or fabric a la disposition.)

And what can we say about this gown that has not already bean said:

Still no luck tracking down the book so I went looking on  Worldcat

So this allowed me to look for a book published between 1970 and 1996 (the year I know I saw it) that is about wedding dresses and probably by a museum. I though Museum of London based on the format I had in my head but well:

Wedding dress : 1740-1970

Author: Madeleine Ginsburg; Victoria and Albert Museum.

Publisher: London : H.M.S.O., 1981.

Edition/Format: Print book : National government publication : English

This sounds like the puppy!!!. And it is still available at the library I know it was from. And I recall the production I was in that caused the book to be at a rehersal:

Trial By Jury! Yes, a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta about a bride and with all her bridesmaids in tow! I then requested a whole lot of other useful book s 🙂

Help. Obsessed. There may have been a Pinterest board created and it may be strictly properly sourced and maybe just updated with a gown that is included in one of the few Lafayette photos to have lots of close views. Such bliss.

LANGTRY, MRS

Neg. No: 2194

Neg. Size: 15″X12″

Neg. Date: 10-11-1899

Sitter: Lillie Langtry (stage name) Lady De Bathe, née Emilie Charlotte Le Breton (1853-1929).

I think this may be my favourite of all the gowns Worth produced like this. Though that may be because it’s Lily Langtry!

Yes, I often combine my interest in theatre, costume, and stage so of course I have a lovely file archive of Mrs Langrty.

I know a lot of people have been inspired by RedThreaded’s Worth gown, but there may be some weird web archiving glitch so here it is for anyone not yet seen!

I apologise! This image has been very hard to source. This is the other woven velvet/satin gown that is also absolutely taken up brain space!

Worth, Tea gown, 1895 © Photograph rights reserved / Mairie de Paris

This has horizontal bust darts! As well as curved bust seams and a waist seam to get that beautiful shaping of the velvet.

But all this has been part of my life tidying that has been happening- organising books, papers, digital files. SO this has meant reorganising my patterns and WIP and thus my recent flurry of posts.

I’ll be trying to get all my Mina posts from before the website changeover, but that may be a bit difficult!

Yep, the stand is padded because I want the idealised figure and while I am from the neck up and the ribs down, it’s that middle section that needs period accurate help 😉

Yes. This is good. Might not work with the princesse as I hoped but well it was probably a bit much to hope for too many multi-purpose uses out of a thing with a train!

So nice to get back to this era 🙂

2008? (not even going to say how old the other one is)

2004?

2009?

Spot the totally ridiculous mistake(s) to have made on the Sunburst. 2009 and I was a bit heartbroken so it got put away. I have salvaged a lot of the silk though. It’s still quite gold but not much can be changed about that 🙂

This section of my portfolio is lacking as I really need to find the original photos and tweak them to look good and in higher res.