Has anyone ever used these? Do the clothes fit well or do they have to be altered?
Printable View
Has anyone ever used these? Do the clothes fit well or do they have to be altered?
I have the 12 dancing princesses and the Today's Wardrobe for 18 inch dolls.
I love them both. They are very easy to follow and fit perfectly. If you look at the link to my craft album you will see a few things from the books.
The only thing that has not fit was the slipper pattern from the 12 dancing princesses book. Everything else is perfect.
I highly recommend them and hope to get some more.
One thing to keep in mind with our 18" chunky dolls, unlike their all vinyl cousins, is that there is considerable variability in size depending on who sewed the torso together, who stuffed it and how much stuffing was jammed into the torso. The best advice in using any pattern is to "measure twice, cut once"....
Taffy
Taffy is very right, and Joan addresses this- recommending ways to alter. Her designs tend to lean towards fitting, but close fitting, on the chubbys and a little loose on the skinnies. (At least of my dolls). I think she measured a ton of them and designed for a little higher than the average.
I too have had quite a bit of luck with her patterns. The adjustment everyone is taking about are very simple, and really apply to any pattern you may get. Since we are seeing such a difference in sizes between the dolls these days...it's a good thing to check before you make somthing. Have fun!
Shelly
I have the Essential Wardrobe & Storybook Wardrobe. These are AWESOME patterns. They are by far my favorite.
Here is Molly in the winter coat & tam from the Essential book:
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...5189464&idx=26
<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 23, 2006 08:24 PM: Message edited by: jrtmom3274 ]</font>
[img]tongue.gif[/img] I would be interested in seeing these patterns. I'm not familar with them. [img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img] skittl I don't know how to view your craft album.
Whoops. Thought I had it public.
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...0560277&idx=32
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...0560277&idx=33
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...0560277&idx=36
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...0560277&idx=37
http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...0560277&idx=43
are all Joan Hinds Patterns.
<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 23, 2006 08:04 PM: Message edited by: Skittl1321 ]</font>
Donna, here's one website for Joan's patterns:
http://www.infinitefreedom.com/index.html
I picked up the two books I have from eBay, brand new, for less than $10 each.
I just love that fuzzy faced puppy in your arms in your avatar! I'd love to see more pictures of him and hear about his fuzzy self!
edited for inaccurate info-- I apologize again!
<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 23, 2006 08:22 PM: Message edited by: jrtmom3274 ]</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Actually, that's not her website. That's the website of a very nice lady named Sally who sells some of Joan Hind's books and also makes and sells some of her own patterns, many of which have smocking which is the primary reason I haven't bought them (I don't have the patience for smocking).Quote:
Originally posted by jrtmom3274:
Donna, here is Joan's website.
http://www.infinitefreedom.com/index.html
Joan Hind's website is
Fancywork and Fashion
I think this is Joan Hind's website.
http://www.fancyworkandfashion.com/best.html
The infinite freedom website just sells herbooks. (It's wear I found the hard to find 12 dancing princesses, thanks to a tip from a board member.) You can find most of them on Amazon for reasonable prices.
Fancywork and Fashion also sells the hard to find things called for in the outfits- like metal cones for a jingle dress!
Edit: Nancy S and I must have been posting at the same time [img]smile.gif[/img]
<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 23, 2006 08:14 PM: Message edited by: Skittl1321 ]</font>
Sorry for the goof-up! I didn't think about it so literally and didn't type specifically enough. I was honestly just trying to get Donna a view of the patterns. I'll edit my post.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Great thing about that website, is it has a view of each outfit, not just the cover. It was a good one to reference.Quote:
Originally posted by jrtmom3274:
Sorry for the goof-up! I didn't think about it so literally and didn't type specifically enough. I was honestly just trying to get Donna a view of the patterns. I'll edit my post.
[img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img] thanks so much girls. I book marked it so I can go back to it. I will probably get some of them [img]tongue.gif[/img]
I bought the Today's Fashion book at Jo-Anns and used a 40% coupon on it so it made it very reasonable. I found it last September and it was the only one they had at the time. I think I'll look again and see if they have any others by her. I do like the book and the patterns are very cute.
I bought mine at Joann's also. I love that 40% coupon, then add the 10% teacher's card on top of that and I'm almost giddy!!
BUT, check yours for the pattern packet. Mine didn't have it and I had to go through the publisher to get it. It took a month. They said that a lot of the books went out without the pattern packet accidently. They'll send it to you for free, it just took a while. But the price was good enough for me to wait on it. We LOVE this book. So far, the patterns have fit my chubby PM dolls.
Stacird
I have been vocal about this before, but I hate these patterns. If you are learning to sew, or are just inexperienced it would be better to pick up a simplicity or mccalls pattern.
The reason is as follows. Hind patterns ignore basic sewing techniques often in favor for more complicated techniques. In other words, how the pattern instructs you to set a sleeve or make a pleated skirt may not carry over to another pattern.
Flat construction technique, invaluable in doll clothes making, is outright ignored in her methods.
Also the fit is blocky, difficult to adjust, and all the creative elements of a design seem to rely on trim rather than cut or design.
Look for basic wardrobe shapes with other patterns. You'll be better served building a collectin that way. The instructions will be clearer, the patterns more versatile and the fit will be easier to deal with.
One exception is Voque. Vouge 18 inch patterns are designed for a stuffed doll. Depending on the style, Vogue patterns need serious altering to look appropriate on AG's.
Just my two cents
Nann
I have never used any of Joan Hinds patterns, but I found that my local library has one of her books. I will have to check it out.
Also, I have been meaning to ask if the Vogue patterns with the Patsy dolls (#7892, 7655, 7565) on them fit AG. I think these dresses would look so cute on Kit.
http://store.sewingtoday.com/cgi-bin...I=20016&page=3
http://store.sewingtoday.com/cgi-bin...I=20016&page=4
Has one used these patterns? If so, how well do they fit?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I sooooo concur with this. Attempting to follow construction techniques common with big people's clothing on doll clothing drives many folks away from making doll clothing. A lot of the techniques just don't scale down well at all, creating frustration for the sewist.Quote:
Originally posted by Nann:
Flat construction technique, invaluable in doll clothes making, is outright ignored in her methods.
If you are going to use a sewing machine for making doll clothes, look to flat construction wherever possible...
Taffy
It might just be my inexperience showing, but I have made two dresses from "historical" McCalls patterns, and quite a few of the patterns from the Joan Hinds books I own. I have never noticed a difference in the construction.
What is flat construction? Do you recommend a book that explains it?
It appeared to me that the McCalls patterns had the same construction as adult clothing, as did the Joan Hinds.
I really enjoy sewing but I also love looking at pictures of other peoples work. I find that I don't usually stick to the pattern or directions anyway. All one really needs is a basic good fitting body pattern and the rest can be created as you go along.
Flat construction is, (for example), sewing in sleeves before the side seam is sewn up, or sewing on cuffs before side seam. finishing any part possible on a flat piece is a lot easier than trying to fit it into a hole. [img]wink.gif[/img]
See, that 's the part I don't understand about Nann's compaints about the Joan Hinds books. All of the Joan Hinds books I have are all flat construction, except for attaching the skirt to the bodice. I don't have any of the earlier ones, so maybe that's something that changed due to complaints or something. I just know that I don't get that criticisim of their work.
Okay, I don't get the uneccisarily complex either, but I'd rather line something than try to put in a facing, especially at doll scale. I do get the blocky and relying on trim for variation though. <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Flat construction is as Dollymama explained, sewing as many seams flat (ie not set in) as possible. The Hinds patterns I have investigated have nonconventional construction techniques and do not take advantage of flat constuction. I don't know how to be clearer, other than saying often times the outfit is assembled backwards, or not in a way a seamstress would go about making a garment. Usually this is most apparent in necklines, cuffs (if there are even real cuffs) and the back closures of a garment.
As far as over complicating techniques, I do have an example. In one of her patterns, a box pleated skirt for a brownie uniform is made with a silly series of various sized rectangles. Now box pleat folds are not exactly second nature for people, but the quality of a pleated garment, rather than a seamed garment is undeniable. I think it was an attempt to make the garment construction easier for the end user, but the result is cheap looking and actually requires more finishing work.
Professional/commmercial patterns are based on a series of basic garment shapes called slopers. Slopers take a series of measurements into account, not just a few and adjust the shape of a pattern to account for fabric drape, wear ease etc. A garment constructed from a sloper based pattern, rather than a hand drawn pattern, will not have a blocky look as long as you follow the fabric recommendation guidelines. In the doll world, that usually means not using a knit fabric with a pattern designed for a woven fabric.
Lining a bodice, rather than putting in a facing is not only easier, but a nice mark of quality. Hinds doesn't lead the end user wrong when she suggests or instructs to line over face.
So that's my piece. Some people have great enjoyment of Hinds patterns. I find them annoying. I highly recommend simplicity patterns as an alternative to her modern offerings. The same styles are available and often cheaper if you wait for a fabric store sale.
Nann
Christine M- I have made several of those dresses for my Kit. I love them, but a couple have turned out a little short for my tastes. I have started adding 1-2" to the hem if it looks like it will be short. I love the patterns otherwise.
I'm not trying to be beligerant, I'm trying to understand, so bear with me. [img]smile.gif[/img] I realize that this is a "to each her own" situation, but I'm still confused on the patterns not being "flat construction"
All of the Hinds books I own follow the same basic steps for making a bodice. They are (grossly simplified)
Sew front to back at shoulders
Repeat with lining
Sew bodice to lining up the back opening and around the neckline.
If sleeve is cuffed, gather lower edge of sleeve (if needed) and sew on cuff
Gather shoulder ease on sleeve and sew to shoulder of bodice.
Sew side seams of bodice and under-arm seam on sleeve as single seam.
All of this is falls under my (non-professional) understanding of "flat construction", and appears in all of the books I own (most of which are post 12 Dancing Princesses and her professional separation from Jean Becker.)
As for the brownie outfit, I think I saw that in one of the newsletters, and I was completely baffled by the directions, deciding to do regular pleats instead if I ever made it. I can see how that was needlessly confusing. However, allow me to say that the patterns in the Newsletter are generally not designed by Joan Hinds. They are Guest Designers. At least in every issue I own, they are other people's designs. I'm not saying that there aren't other uneccisarily confusing directions in her books, just that I haven't found them, and when I do find them in the newsletter, they aren't her designs.
The peices are very basic, as the Simplicity ones are. Once I realized that I was basically buying the same pattern over and over, I scaled back on buying patterns and transfered the measurements into my computer, using them to make my own patterns (in a CAD/mapping program).
ETA: I'm only being so insistant about this because I want to improve my own skills, and the best way for me to improve is to ask and to read.
<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 25, 2006 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Nancy S ]</font>
You are not being beligerant or misunderstanding [img]smile.gif[/img] The directions you list are flat construction.
If you find this the norm among her patterns, I am surprised.
However, most of the examples I have are apparently earlier or as you mention newsletter examples. Especially the brownie one. This could be the reason for the contrast. I am glad you also were baffled by the skirt constructin lol.
I guess that is my point with Hinds. I consult the examples, look at the pieces and directions and find myself saying "now why would I do it that way?".
I highlight flat construction in my arguements because it is the most basic method that I often see missing from created (Hinds and others) patterns I have seen or own. I did look at what I think was the latest book, the modern designs and was still unimpressed. I must be biased though [img]smile.gif[/img]
Drafting your own patterns with CAD is the way to go. You are lucky to have that skill.
Nann