have been added to the range of paper Scroop Patterns carried by Wearing History!
Pre-orders for the first print run of paper patterns are now open!
Pre-ordering guarantees that you will get a pattern in the first print run. Pre-ordering closes Monday the 18th, and patterns should be in stock and ready to ship out to you by the 28th.
Hard copy paper Scroop Patterns are printed on high-quality, medium weight bond paper, with easy to use spiral-bound instruction booklets. Both patterns and instructions are in full colour.
Wearing History is based in Southern California, USA, and ships worldwide.
I used a very small group of testers, because the patterns been out for two years, and I know it works – I just wanted to double check the sizing in the expanded size range.
I used a group of local testers when I originally launched the Fantail Skirt, so it’s so exciting to now have an international group, and to see the amazing photos and flavours they bring to the pattern.
Here are the awesome, awesome testers who made skirts:
Emily chose this really fantastic pastel plaid for her Modern Fantail skirt, and I think the stripes give such a fun effect. I originally recommended against strong stripes and checks in this pattern, but now that I see them in action I’ve totally changed my mind!
This whole outfit makes me so happy. It’s like an 1890s Snow White!
The fabric is a cotton/poly/rayon (viscose) blend suiting. It hangs so beautifully. And the pointed belt is the perfect accessory for the Historical Fantail.
Emma chose a lovely floral cotton for her Modern Fantail skirt. It gives it such a great summery vibe. I feel like I’m home in Hawaii looking at her photos!
Many of you loved the Anne reference, but not everyone is a puffed sleeve fan. It lost some points just for the sleeves. And gained some just for the sleeves. And lost some points just for the colour. And gained some just for the colour. The one thing everyone seemed to agree on was a not-sure-ness about the scale of the beading and the chiffon overlay.
The Total: 7.9 out of 10
Well, and improvement on the week before, and almost good enough to count as a proper success.
This week: a 1790s dress and matching fichu
This dress represents a very brief and specific moment of fashion, where the last remnants of 18th century styles, in the form of fichu and an open overskirt, meet the extremely brief bodice of the early Regency/Empire silhouette.
Ensemble, ca. 1798, probably, European, cotton, silk, Metropolitan Museum of Art 1992.119.1a—c
When I say extremely brief, I mean it. The bodice appears to be no more than four inches deep.
Ensemble, ca. 1798, probably, European, cotton, silk, Metropolitan Museum of Art 1992.119.1a—c
It’s a style that appeared for only a few years at the very end of the 18th century.
Ensemble, ca. 1798, probably, European, cotton, silk, Metropolitan Museum of Art 1992.119.1a—c
I imagine that the dress would look quite different depending on the style of stays it was worn over.
Ensemble, ca. 1798, probably, European, cotton, silk, Metropolitan Museum of Art 1992.119.1a—c
The inclusion of a matching fichu suggests that the bodice was usually covered, which changes the silhouette significantly.
Silhouette aside, the clear and obvious star of the dress is the embroidery, worked in twisted silk thread, each mirrored floral motif a unique design.
It’s amazing, given the scale and elaborate attention to detail in the embroidery, and the amount of available fabric to work with in the drsess, that it was not adjusted and re-made to later styles. Instead it remains a perfect example of an extremely brief fashion for extremely brief bodices.
What do you think? As an example of its time and type, is this dress a masterpiece, or a mistake?
Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10
A reminder about rating — feel free to be critical if you don’t like a thing, but make sure that your comments aren’t actually insulting to those who do like a garment. Our different tastes are what make Rate the Dress so interesting. It’s no fun when a comment implies that anyone who doesn’t agree with it, or who would wear a garment, is totally lacking in taste.
(as usual, nothing more complicated than a .5. I also hugely appreciate it if you only do one rating, and set it on a line at the very end of your comment, so I can find it! And 0 is not on a scale of 1 to 10. Thanks in advance!)