Adaptivity of pattern making methods to garments for varying body dimensions

Abstract

Purpose To suggest a garment for a wider market, the purpose of this paper is to assess the appearance of garments manufactured by a combination of four methods of flat pattern making and four dress forms from different countries. The paper also compares Japanese and British women’s evaluations of these garments’ appearances. Design/methodology/approach The authors made 16 garments by combining 4 pattern making methods with measurements from 4 dress forms and evaluated their appearance. The four dress forms were from Japan (Kiiya, called “Kii”), France (Siegel & Stockman, called “St”), the UK (Kennett & Lindsell, called “KL”) and the USA (Wolf Form, called “Wo”), and the four pattern making methods were from Japan (Bunka), Italy (Secoli), France (ESMOD) and the USA (Fashion Institute of Technology, called “FIT”). The authors captured 64 sets of pictures of the 16 garments with the 4 dress forms from the front and the side. The authors then showed images of the four garments made using the same pattern making method with measurements from the four dress forms to subjects for assessment. The subjects – 15 Japanese and 11 British women in their 20s – ranked the pictures in descending order of appearance. Findings Subjects from both countries rated garments manufactured using the Bunka and Secoli pattern making methods with the Kii and KL dress forms, and those made using ESMOD and FIT with St and Wo as the highest, even though the dress forms used for pattern making and those for wearing were not coincident. On the contrary, many garments made using Bunka and Secoli with St and Wo, and those made using ESMOD and FIT with Kii and KL were rated lowest in terms of appearance, even though the target dress form and wearing dress form were coincident. Therefore, there are appropriate body measurements for each pattern making method that can render the relevant garment more attractive, likely because these measurements are derived from assumed body proportions in the pattern making method of each country. Originality/value Although the evaluation of the appearance of garments is an important factor in garment manufacture, scant research has addressed this issue. Moreover, the comparison between Japanese and British women provided here will help manufacturers make garments that are more attractive to people in both countries.

Developing a basic pattern for a design based on the comparison of four basic pattern approaches

“…It is thus possible to make clothing with a required silhouette by adjusting the amount and allocation of ease and the size and allocation of waist darts even when using different basic patterns. Kim et al (2019) previously found that Japanese people prefer the BUNKA basic bodice for Kii dress form. However, when viewing developed fitted bodices from the front and back, the Developing a basic pattern shape with a clear constriction at the waist and rounded hips such as that for ARMSTRONG was preferred.…”

“…Kim et al. (2019) previously found that Japanese people prefer the BUNKA basic bodice for Kii dress form.…”

“…Fujii et al (2017) investigated the effects of combining patternmaking methods and dress forms on garment appearance. Kim et al (2019) investigated the adaptivity of patternmaking methods to garments for varying body dimensions. They found that differences in the appearance of basic patterns affect the impression of the made clothing.…”

“…(2017) investigated the effects of combining patternmaking methods and dress forms on garment appearance. Kim et al. (2019) investigated the adaptivity of patternmaking methods to garments for varying body dimensions.…”

Suitable ranges of ease allowance for appearance of women's shirts of fit and straight styles

“…The appropriate amount of ease allowance varies according to the purpose of wearing and type of clothing. The amount of ease allowance varies with the pattern maker (Fujii et al , 2017; Kim et al , 2019a). It is set based on training and experience, and the setting method also varies with the pattern maker (Kim et al , 2017a).…”