Back in October, the CSC editors issued an open letter to pattern companies, asking them to re-think their plus size offerings to give curvy women the patterns we want and deserve.
We recently heard back from McCall’s, and we’re pleased to be able to publish a short interview with Carolyne Cafaro, McCall Pattern Company senior vice president and creative director.
Why do some of your patterns go to large sizes and others don’t?
To answer that I need to explain a little bit about what goes into bringing a new pattern to market. Each new pattern has a “master” made for it. A master is a muslin and all the instructions and notes that go along with a particular pattern.
We have two sets of sizes for our patterns: Misses-sized patterns can range from size 4 to 24; women’s-sized patterns can go from 18W to 32W. A “master” is created for each set of sizes, whether it’s Misses or Women’s. When a pattern features both misses and women’s sizes, that means two sets of masters must be created.
Why do we go to the trouble of creating two masters? Because we have to make sure the fit works for both sizes. We can’t just use the misses’ master and cross our fingers that everything will then magically work as a plus size. We have to take the time and manpower to make a plus-size master and put it through the same set of quality-control checks we use for the misses-sized master.
Creating two sets of masters for a pattern obviously requires twice as much work. Our budget constraints require us to predict which new pattern styles will be popular in Women’s sizes and then produce double masters for those.
Why are there such large amounts of ease in each pattern?
Each designer decides on the amount of ease they think best for each pattern they create. We don’t automatically build a set amount of ease into each pattern, and our designers create ease differently for each pattern. So ease can really vary between brands, designers, and individual patterns. And if you think a pattern has too much ease, well, that’s a relatively simple fix for home sewers. Sewing a pattern and then discovering there’s not enough ease usually results in a wadder. And we don’t want you to have wadders. The best thing to do is to read the pattern descriptions we include with every pattern and look for terms like “close-fitted” and “semi-fitted” if you want less ease.
Why are there not more structured sizes (especially ones that emphasize curves vs covering them up) available in plus sizes?
We study the sales of patterns by size, and the ones with more ease sell better in the larger sizes. But we actually do carry a number of more fitted patterns for plus sizes, including M6741, M6958, M6612, M6920, M6713, and M7086. Khaliah Ali just released a really cute jumpsuit pattern. And McCall’s upcoming fall 2015 collection has a plus-size wardrobe pattern. We try our best to think of everybody when we design new patterns.
Why are the patterns graded for a B cup when most women are a D, and many plus-size women are bigger?
A B-cup figure is the industry standard and has been for many years. The time may be approaching when this “standard” needs to be reassessed across the board, and not just by patternmaking companies. In the meantime, we’re addressing the need for more size variation by offering patterns with multiple cup sizes, like Butterick B6167 and McCall’s M7083. We’ll continue to watch the sales of our multi-cup-sized patterns and to listen to our customers, and you may see more multi-cup patterns in the future.
So, what do you think? Do you have further questions or suggestions for McCall’s? Do you think their recent pattern releases reflect their philosophy on plus sizes?
I really don’t like how she dismisses the legitimate question with a statment “And if you think a pattern has too much ease, well, that’s a relatively simple fix for home sewers.” It’s not about ability to sew… obviously the women on the curvy sewing collective have the ability to grade up and down depending on our personal wants and needs. I don’t appreciate being told that it’s a “simple fix” when they’ve made it SO complicated. Complicated enough for us to ask the questions… The fact of the matter is that the American base-size for women is a size 14/XL (generally speaking). Patterns are being created for women upward of this base size that are ill-fitting, DON’T fit the standard body (b-cup, seriously??) on what planet is this the standard? It hasn’t been for 30 years and pattern makers know this. And she’s throwing the designers under the bus? “Each designer decides on the amount of ease they think best for each pattern they create. We don’t automatically build a set amount of ease into each pattern, and our designers create ease differently for each pattern. So ease can really vary between brands, designers, and individual patterns.” It’s the designers, not the company practices? Well, here’s a question… why are you hiring designers who think that women over the size of a 14/XL need to live their lives in an ill-fitting tent even though they’ve opted to actually create their own clothing from the bottom up? Maybe she can blame the hiring manager for the creative team? P.S. – it was really nice of her to explain how paterns are made since we’re all so ignorant to the process?
Jenny- thank you somuch for opening up a dialoge about this and asking the questions. I hope eventually we can shed some light on this and the fashion industry prejudice in general.
This whole discussion made me chuckle and shake my head. I was a B cup when I was a teenager. Many years later – after children, pounds, and life happened, a B cup wouldn’t hold up my double chin, much less my other doubles. All I can figure is that the folks in the pattern industry aren’t watching the people they encounter on the street – when have they seen a size 24 lady who could possible be a B cup?
I’ve been sewing for a long time, four daughters and myself. We are all tall women and plus sized, except for one. I have kept my older patterns, ranging from size 10 misses to womens 32. Fortunately for us, we’ve been able to wear mostly Vogue and Butterick. Most of the adjustments have been to just lengthen, body, sleeves and hems. I currently purchased some newer vogue , which goes up to size 24. Personally, I prefer Butterick, they have always seemed to have the right amount of ease needed without my adding more. McCalls I use for my tall, thin modern one, current fashion wise. My other daughters are older business persons, who require more office wear. I have tried Burda, they do have plus sized patterns but………. Ali’s patterns for Simplicity I love and have most of them. Ali for McCall’s sucks. Will not buy. When determining what I’m going to sew, I go thru all the files, for all the patterns, pick what I think I want to make, and go from there.
McCalls just gave a big non-answer to the questions asked. As a result, unless my daughter specifies something she saw in McCalls and buys the pattern, I won’t use them anymore.
It might be worthwhile for pattern making companies to consider marketing sizing that specifically calls out if it is in “apple”, “pear”, or “rectangle” proportions and maybe offer a guide to adjust into the other ratios. Has that been considered?
I enjoyed reading everyone’s comments regarding McCalls. Here’s my take on the situation; I rarely find patterns in larger sizes that are suitable for all the women in my life that I sew for. Finding good patterns is incredibly hard, it seems when the ”good” ones are done by the Big4 I am not aware of it, don’t go into the shop, then do find out about it, it is discontinued and the cycle continues. I am not going shopping relentlessly to find patterns.
I will make do with the slim pickings of older patterns. I do think sewists are buying the cheapie patterns in the sales and this is pushing up unit orders making it seem like we LIKE the offerings. I would rather go ”hungry” than buy these patterns which are bla. Now — as to the bla. Some people like room (aka tents). Sometimes the tents are popular (not that hideous circus tent Khaliah Ali did). Some like the fitted and some like to have some parts fitted. The only way companies can satisfy us is to please make variety, kind of like a quota – some fitted and shapely garments in the same envelope if you like. I find too much made for “flatter”” tummies, our fitting issues are around very large tummies (think apple) and xx large thighs.
As for indies – Style Arc is my go-to indie because of the RTW fit and sizing. If Chloe can do it – so can McCalls.
As for cup sizing – enough already about B cup standard nonsense. This is a fast paced world. I am sure McCalls moved into the computer age when computers were available – so move with the times – women are not B cups as average, and haven’t been for a long time. Offer easy cup selection in most of the patterns. Better patterns = better garments = better sales (well maybe if we can encourage the bargain buyers to slow down on the 99c sales).
I know that McCalls have lost most of my pattern dollars. I won’t support any company (indie/Big 4) if the product is not what I need – no matter what the price. Companies other than McCalls will fill the void if we vote with our feet – make what I want or I won’t buy anything. Sadly, most people are shopaholics and can’t say no to a bargain .
We should boycott Mccalls patterns.
Ironically, as someone who pretty much gave up on commercial patterns years ago, this article led me to fall for M7028, which I really like. But as a stretch pattern, it has 3 inches of positive ease! As I am 3 inches bigger than the pattern, I may not have to adjust it. So yes, the only good thing about that ease is it allows someone two sizes bigger than the biggest to fit it.
I’ve been thinking about McCalls ‘response’ to the q regarding ease.
It’s clear to me that when a named designer has a garment featured by *any* pattern company, that there can, and probably will, be a different approach to ease by each designer. Issey Miyake will not have the same ideas about ease as Belville Sassoon, and if we know anything about fashion, we will know this.
However, the great majority of McCalls patterns are not by a featured designer, but by some form
of in-house or sub-contracted design team. I would have thought that in these cases – the majority – there would be agreed sets of standards and guidelines which must be adhered to by the designers, in order to ensure a certain degree of consistency throughout the ranges. Instead, McCalls has – apparently without any embarrassment – admitted their design production is not much better-organised than a bun-fight. Not good enough, when we in the UK are paying such high prices for patterns. Some of them, I am sure, are genuinely ‘not fit for purpose’ and should be removed from sale.
I read each and every comment before responding. I understand the frustrations especially if you’re new to sewing or you’re seeking a particular look. I’ve also railed against some of these concerns too.
However, there are two things I think we are overlooking. One we believe that since we are all so internet savvy and computer literate that all sewists are. May I remind you that there is a contingency of sewists that aren’t. Yet they go to Joann’s, Hancocks and WalMart to purchase patterns and sew garments, too. It may be that your computer silent sewing sisters are purchasing those patterns that are hated and sewing them up. There actually may not be a skew to the purchasing its just that silent and unacknowledged majority that is working with those despised patterns.
Two – I’m sorry but I’m still very dissatisfied with the state of indie patterns and the lack of sizing for plus size sewists, as well as a diversity of styles. Not every plus size sewist needs the simple designs that are offered by indie designers. Especially since plus size sewists have different lifestyles and require different wardrobes for their lifestyles and the indies don’t always address those needs.
Finally, they did reply. They are listening and they are attempting to change. Some of the onus is on us. We are going to have to learn to fit our bodies. We are going to have to learn to purchase with discretion and we are going to have to realize that we are a niche market, and here I’m stating all sewists not just plus size sewists.
Of course we should continue to ask for what we want but I don’t think that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.
I think there is something about the non-SBC world. (I’m not going to say they aren’t online or aren’t computer/ tech savvy. They may be. THey just possibly aren’t in the same spheres online as some of us.) I think if someone is really into fashion and style and that interest is part of that person’s sewing it can be easy to forget that some people sew to avoid current styles that are seen as immodest. Tons of ease could help someone who has an approach to modesty that curves need to be obscured as much as possible. From what I’ve seen in my area, outside of quilting, most of the women I see interested in sewing around here are looking specifically for this type of sack design for modest wear. So it does seem there is a market
This is a feeble, milksop response by McCalls to some really fairly easy questions.
I actually thought the answers were well explained and made lots of sense.
ALSO, not buying the patterns leads to fewer and fewer reasons to sell the patterns. I think 1) one HAS to learn to look past the envelope. I have now made two kick-ass garments from Tilton patterns when I completely overlooked them before. 2) Adjustments are a way of life for sewing.
Of the “popular” Indies only Colette offers true plus sizing. Sewaholic has expanded two additional sizes on select patterns. BHL, Grainline, Deer & Doe…none of them offer plus sizes yet I see no complaints about them and people will grade those suckers up and sew ’em.
Far be it from me to defend the Big 4; I am not. Merely stating observations.
I will TOTALLY get behind offering cup sizing on *ALL* tops/dress/jackets.
This is why I love StyleArc so much – they draft all of their patterns up to a size 30. Most big four patterns don’t come near fitting me even in their so called plus size range. Yes McCalls says they have patterns that go up to size 32 but they are few and far between and for the most part hideous.
Personally I know that patterns are meant to be a starting place for fit and understand I will always have to shorten lengths and do a F B A. But truely believe action speak loader then words. I for one just no longer buy from the big4, just that simple.
This bust size/body shape thang that McCalls find so difficult is interesting, isn’t it? Over here in the UK, our ‘Plus size’ RTW store, Evans, has skirts, tops, even JEANS that come in ‘apple fit’, ‘pear fit’, etc. They don’t seem to find it difficult, and there’s one of them in every high street so I’m guessing they have plently of customers, huh? As for the cup size, when I was a youngster and a UK size 10, I was a 32GG. Things have only got bigger. If Simplicity can manage to make patterns for variable cup sizes (in the Amazing Fit range), come on McCalls! Get yer act together! How hard can it be…?
Absolutely…as an “apple” shape, I’m equally frustrated by the train of thought that “curvy” is synonymous with “hourglass” or “pear”. I agree that Evans is really leading the way.
Mmmm….thanks for the pat on the head,McCalls. Those answers fixed my every issue!
In my opinion, McCall’s would have been better off to have NOT responded to the letter…along the lines of “better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
McCall’s is clearly not ready to step outside its comfort zone and go after the growing market of patterns for women with curves. McCall’s has the ability to advise its designers that the trend for more fitted garments for larger women is one to which it wants to cater. It chooses not to.
If McCall’s isn’t going to design for curvy ladies, then Ms. Cafaro should have simply said “McCall’s mass markets traditional sized patterns for young people. We provide extended sizes as courtesy, but designing for larger sizes doesn’t fit our business plan and we don’t see that changing in the near term. There are practical difficulties in drafting a particular pattern so
that it will be flattering to a size 24 “pear” AND a size 24 “apple” without substantial alterations. Those issues are better addressed, in the near term, by independent niche designers.”
I expect it is too much to ask to get a response like:
“That’s a great idea [D cup] that we have been working on and plan on rolling out soon. Stay tuned.”
AND/OR “For many years, curvy women did not have the body confidence to wear garments with less ease. We have noted the demand for more fitted garments in larger sizes and we have asked our designers to meet that demand.”
AND/OR “It is our pleasure to make multiple masters because we appreciate that women’s sizes have been trending up for some time and we want to meet the demand for them in elegant styles that are fitted and flattering.”
AND/OR “We recognize that not all curves are created equal. We have asked our designers for separate designs that fit and flatter “apples” and for patterns that fit and flatter “pears”. These “deluxe” patterns are more expensive, but they include instructions for alterations for a perfect fit.”
I absolutely agree. I for one would rather they say “nope…you’re not our target market” than be patronised with this half-hearted attempt at a response. I also thought it odd that that they were unable to issue brand guidelines so that all the designers were working to the same parameters of ease. Surely that’s a simple thing to implement?
I am not in the industry, but I think it would be extremely simple to implement if there was the will to implement it.
And sadly there seems to be no will to do so.
I think it’s great they’re talking with the Curvy Collective. I’m very glad to have different cup sizes in some of their patterns. I just bought McCall’s shirt dress pattern, and I’m looking forward to making it. I’m sorry to see snarky comments below. Who’s going to chat with the Curvy Co now? The best thing we can do as a community is to speak truthfully and kindly, and BUY the patterns that accommodate. We have to be the market we say we want. That, I think, is the best thing about CC: It’s promoting clothes that FIT. CC is actively creating the market by showing how great well-fitted clothes can be. The McCall’s spokesperson said they make patterns with a lot of ease because a lot of plus size women buy them. We can change that, one blog post at a time!
First, please tell me I’m not the only one who is creeped out by that baby mannequin.
OK– my first comment will probably not be popular, but are we as curvy sewists disincentizing pattern makers from sizing up and giving great offerings? Look through some of the reviews. How many are sized up from the highest drafted size? I haven’t counted, but there are many– The new Itch to Stitch dress, the recently reviewed palazzo pants, the Colette Clovers, some indie knit top (Greenstyle, maybe?). Go through reviews here, at blogs, at pr. How often are we seeing some BHL, or Grainline, or Deer and Doe, or older Colette or Sewaholic sized up? I’m not trying to bash indies for their limited sizes. After all, some of these are really small companies with limited funds, varied levels of experience and education in drafting and designing, etc.
But is it that surprising if pattern companies from the tiny to the big are staying (by and large) with their way of doing things when they see us willing to drop the money they ask for for a pattern that we generally know will need to be resized? It really takes away from our complaining/ commentary if we say we want them to size up if we go ahead and do it ourselves. As suffrage activists used to say: deeds not words. Both matter.
Second– I know Khalia Ali hasn’t been at M very long, but she had better stuff and more diversity at Simplicity. Why? I get that different designers and their aesthetics are distinct (like the Tiltons or Koos or Miyake have such unique perspectives) so will have their own schtick on ease, etc. But why did she go from really cool stuff with her last Simplicity to that awful sack with her first at M? There’s no continuity in the aesthetic except multiple. layerable pieces.
Third- why has Butterick dropped so many of the non-Crawford larger designs? I get it that she has her own vision, and her own line she sells as an indie is similar, but her designs are shapeless, sack-like, billowing elastic waists, etc. So why did they cut back on the better stuff?
I agree that Khalia Ali’s designs were much better at Simplicity.
And at least Simplicity shows many of their designs that are available in plus sizes on plus sized models, as well as standard sized models.
I think I understand your first point, but I’m not sure what you’re suggesting we do about it – do you mean we shouldn’t buy patterns ever, because otherwise there’s no way to change? My thinking is that we should encourage brands to make bigger sizes, and then we should buy them to show that they can be popular.
But if we say make bigger sizes and then buy the pattern anyway? What’s the message? We’ll buy the pattern anyway, so we want larger sizes, but we’ll buy it anyway. If we buy it anyway, we’re making brands popular without getting them to rethink their sizing practices. If we say we want something but buy it anyway, the companies don’t have to rethink or eventually do anything. Because we’ll buy it anyway.
I’m not saying never buy a pattern again. Buy them judiciously in relation to thinking about how to work with these companies to get them to expand size options and styles in larger sizes. Maybe we should focus on making and reviewing patterns that are actually in the sizes we wear. Where are the pattern companies that actually make stylish and fashionable patterns in larger sizes like Style Arc and Hot Patterns on the CSC? If other companies see larger sewists featuring and focusing on those companies that actually make larger sizes, that might inspire other companies to follow suit, if nothing else out of fear of losing market share.
We gladly welcome submissions of Pattern Reviews to be posted here on the CSC. If you’d like to submit an article reviewing a Style Arc or Hot Patterns (or any other pattern company) pattern, please contact us at: mail@curvysewingcollective.com
If I ever have a chance to sew again, I’d love to! It has been an insanely hectic and busy time for several months. Especially for skirt month. I like skirts and somehow most of my skirts that fit have disappeared. I have an idea but it involves a conspiracy between socks and the dryer…
So…. who would own the copyright on a pattern that had been graded up a number of sizes from the original pattern?
Perhaps if those graded-up patterns were out there to be freely downloaded by others, or even bought, the money going to the person who graded it up, I suspect that would make pattern companies suddenly realise there’s a huge market out there that they HAVE to tap into, or lose out.
I’m not plus-sized, but I’m getting mightily annoyed with finding it hard to teach plus-sized people to sew because it’s impossible to find nice, appealing patterns that don’t need to be graded up hugely even before the person has learnt how to lay a pattern on fabric.
I see some big 4 bashing, but the Indy companies are nearly as bad. Yes, they will draft a larger bust size, but you have only to look at the recent makes on Curvy to see that their patterns also have to be graded up. A cute dress name doesn’t cut it. If I have to grade up anyway I might just as well buy the big 4 misses size and catch the pattern on sale for $1.99.
Well now…we shant talk bad about the Indies so…
I get so tired of bad, bad BMV
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that indies don’t have the exact same problems with sizing. Saying one company could improve doesn’t mean no other company has to…
And in my post above I mentioned that no one ever gripes about having to grade up Grainline or Sewaholic (she’s only recently expanded sizing and it’s only on select items) or other “popular” Indie brands…but there is ALWAYS a complaint about BMV.
It is always easier to criticize a seemingly distant large-ish company than the small underdog. Try as BMV or Simplicity might, they don’t have that same level of personal interaction. They haven’t cultivated the same level of community or even created a corporate persona or personality like some of the indies have. They’re large enough to hire design school grads– multiple design school grads even– and have teams of paid professional sample makers and testers. they can hire a company or do professionally managed in-house focus groups if they desire. They can contract specialty designers for specific lines. Even larger indies will face limitations with all of those things depending on their own size, financial strength, length of time in business, the education/ background/ skills of the principal designer, etc.
All those issues regarding money aside, I think a major reason is about how some of the indies interact with the SBC. The more the company tries to be part of and have its own community, the more it appears to become a “sacred cow” that shouldn’t be criticized. I mentioned Style Arc and HotPatterns in a previous post– 2 indies that have fairly inclusive sizing and a wide range of styles. they aren’t perfect. They have their problems, like all pattern companies. But I have noticed it is basically fair game to dump on them in ways that get people snarked and nastied if the same comments were made about Colette, Sewaholic, etc. (note: these comments aren’t just at one space, like pr or here, but more generally in the sewing blogosphere. HP and SA are also 2 companies that don’t have nearly the level of sewing community and persona that some other indies have. Food for thought…
I agree, and I think it’s a real shame – not just because there ARE real people behind BMV and they’re probably not making as much as people think; but also because blind loyalty to indie brands can be harmful.
I’ve got a Style Arc pattern to make but I have to re-print it (the format and my work printer didn’t work well together), I’ll make sure I post it when it’s finished!
I’ve never purchased an indie pattern so I can’t complain; don’t know what they don’t carry.
Some of my purchased are big 4, most of my patterns are vintage Lutterloh and the French counterpart from ’38-’54.
I’ve seen plenty of complaints about having to size up those designers. As in: people either complain about grading up indies AND BMV, or they don’t complain about either.
Well, I sure don’t agree with all McCall says. I do find more in my size in their patterns than others but still is the factor just like in the stores, a lot of the patterns I’d like to have in my size aren’t and a lot of the ones that are, are just butt ugly….
Realistically, there will never be a day when the majority of us who sew, will be able to do so straight out of the envelope. I have accepted that as a fact. It has been a long time since I have looked at a pattern as a set in stone proposition. I just bought designer Joi’s new fitting book. I tried to take her Craftsy class and it was too chatty so I got bored. Her method of fitting is more along the lines of grading. I know nothing about grading, but at this point am keen to learn. If you have the patience to learn her method you can take ANY pattern size and make it fit you. I was having some light bulb moments as I was reading her book. However, I do think what challenges us is muslin frustration. I hate making them. But no matter what the pattern, it is inevitable. Yes, it is more work. And it sucks. But I have gotten some really nice garments from patterns I muslin first. Don’t count on the big 4 to change very much in the ensuing years. Even indie designers are only going to size up so far. My expectations are low. But for me personally, they are high. I see a pattern as a springing board for what I want. Designers be dammed.
Joi’s pattern fitting method is ACE! I took a class with her at last year’s American Sewing Expo, brought the book home, and immediately fitted a complicated Burda sheath dress perfectly–the first time! And I’ve used it on other patterns since with excellent results. It is by far the best fitting method that I have ever come across. It’s not the same old slash three lines that intersect and spread these angles, etc., that just don’t adequately address the real fitting issues.
And I do agree that no one, no matter the size, can sew a pattern right out of the envelope and expect it to fit without adjusting for personal figure variations. It’s just a fact. Pattern drafting standards exist so that there is a consistent basis for sizing, and so that everyone starts from the same place.
I don’t find McCall’s answers to be very adequate or thoughtful, which is surprising to me, because in the very recent past they have been very attentive to what their customers have been saying. Despite the difficulties and effort/extra manpower required to draft patterns from two masters, I think they should definitely be doing it far more than they currently are. Plus sizes are NOT a smaller market. Not when the average American woman is a RTW size 14 (which is a pattern 18-20). So saying “it’s not worth investing our time and resources into drafting for this market when it’s smaller than our target” is BS. We know it’s not true. And we won’t accept the answer “you’re not worth it” anymore. Wake up, McCall’s.
Even at the Jo-Ann’s $1.99 pattern sale pricing perhaps we should boycott McCalls et al I am thinking. Money talks bs walks.
I’m just sayin’.
Thanks for the input about Joi. I have all the skills to do the standard FBA, but remain fairly unsatisfied with it. Also, I have never gotten a wearable princess seamed garment with the traditional FBA method. I have been making some historical garments lately, and fitting them is vastly different than modern clothing. Reading Joi’s book made some light bulbs turn on. I think working on the historical garments has made me think outside the FBA (ginormous dart) box.
I hear that! The standard FBA leaves too much room for either overcorrecting or undercorrecting, and it tends to affect areas that have nothing to do with the bust, putting excess volume where it isn’t really needed. And because of that, princess-seam garments have been the bane of my existence. I also make historical garments, and yes, Joi’s methods would work for many of them a lot easier than the standard adjustment methods would work.
Who is this Joi? What’s the name of her book?
Joi Mahon (aka Designer Joi). her book is Create the Perfect Fit: Measuring and Pattern Fitting for Real Sewing Solutions (http://www.amazon.com/Create-Perfect-Fit-Measuring-Solutions/dp/1440239614/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1427228466&sr=1-1&keywords=joi+mahon). And her Craftsy class is Fast-Track Fitting.
Thanks!
The reason that the sales of the patterns with more ease is higher is because there are no other options and some sewers are able to tailor these, but it would be better if we didn’t have to.
I wonder, are WE typical as far as their target customers? Not regarding size, but regarding what we want to see as far as styles? For example, take a look at Kwik Sew. I don’t think they’ve produced a pattern in the last two years or so in that line that I would buy. Clearly, someone’s buying them, though. And the endless rounds of similar fit and flare dresses (sleeveless, LOL) in Vogue and McCalls. Clearly those patterns are selling to someone. Wouldn’t they be doing market research? Maybe we are the ones out-of-sync with the overall garment sewing consumer base,
I sometimes wonder if the mega-sales like 99 cent patterns lead many sewists
into grabbing whatever they might sew, possibly, maybe, kinda. This could make sales stats look like they mean more than they could. Example: I’ve bought some fug sack patterns that I’m not likely to make anytime soon. But they look like something my mother would like and wear, and could work as gifts to sew for some of my friends who are larger. Thing is I’ve never made these patterns. Because they are hiddy. But if they look at the numbers from sales, these patterns look better and more wanted than they maybe are.
Did that word salad make sense?
I’ll give an anecdote that I think approaches the issue. My grandmother who is 99 (and very rigid, unimaginative, etc) is notorious for giving every woman in the family the most hideous, boxy, frumpy clothes as gifts. One day I had the misfortune of being at the mall with her, and since I drove her she insisted that I allow her to buy me an outfit. We were in JC Penney and I headed over to the misses/juniors to get something (I typically fit in juniors plus sizes on bottom as I have giant booty but have a DD chest and large upper arms but small shoulders and waist, and Im only 4’10 so I’m very hard to fit) and she’s like, where are you going? Your sizes are over HERE. And she goes over to the “Women’s” dept. I don’t know about yalls dept stores up north but down here, the “Women’s” dept is all ugly ass stuff that I won’t be wearing even when i’m elderly. I said, nothing over there is going to look good on me, Grandma. And she says “Well you’re a grown woman, not a junior miss (I was about 35 at the time) so you don’t need to shop in those depts.” And that’s when I realized: She’s been shopping for all of us in the “women’s” departments the whole time. That’s also when I started paying attention at stores. There are 2 sides to the female clothing area at our walmart here- the side where *nearly* everything is cute but only goes up to about size 14 junior miss, and the other side, where *nearly* everything is like a frumpy tent- meant to cover you up, not to make you look nice. We have only 2 “trendy” clothing stores in the town proper- Stage, which looks like one side is for Kate Moss, but the other side is for Janet Reno, and nothing in between- and CATO’s- which I have to hand it to them: Most of the clothing on the junior miss side is replicated fairly well on the PLUS side of the store. They also have actual pretty plus size lingerie, just in case, you know, I’m over the age of 40 and would like to wear something besides a muu-muu. These manufacturers, both pattern and RTW, need to understand that if you’re over 25 or over size 12 that does not mean they need to throw a tent over you. Old, rigid thinking.
I agree about the average cup size not being a B anymore. You can be slim and still have a larger cup or you can be plus and have a smaller cup or a larger cup. I wish they would put more plus size models on the cover so you can see how it actually might look on a plus sized person. I have always been big busted and only in recent years been bigger through the waist and hips (working on that). Plus, they must think that everyone is 10 feet tall. I am barely 5’3″ and always have to shorten the waist and skirts or pants. That is why I sew because RTW stuff is usually too long! That is why I have been looking more to independent pattern companies (especially for dresses) for my sewing inspiration. Maybe someday these Big 4 companies will get a clue and make patterns for real sized people!
Maybe the reason the cute stuff doesn’t sell in the larger sizes is because many of us if we like a pattern enough will buy the LARGEST AVAILABLE and grade up from there. I.e. It doesn’t sell because they don’t offer it.
I haven’t bought any of the Khaliah Ali patterns, the Connie Crawfords are…meh (to me) and the Tilton Sisters are a MESS. No. I’ll buy the cute stuff, and then grade up – because really what choice do I have? In RTW, I’m a Large/XL 16/18 on top and a 22 on bottom (thanks to two kids and some booty!) For dresses, i can work an 18/20. Why is it, that I cannot fit into the largest size of most patterns without grading up? It’s made it necessary to learn how to do pattern alterations. Waist adjustments are almost always 6″ and hips are always 10″ – FBA, if needed, is usually 2″ – it depends on the pattern. I prefer fitted things. Who wants to look like she’s wearing a sack? There’s ease for certain styles, sure…but so much that it looks like you mugged a tentmaker? Sigh…
Here, here. I could not have said it better than Ms. R. Bowen. Forward HER comment to McCalls, please. Humph.
I agree with you Rhonda, I’m in the same boat. I always buy the smaller pattern and make the alterations to get the size needed. Who needs more floaty fabric around their booty
Glad to read I wasn’t the only one who thought this sounded like a bunch of lame excuses, but points for bothering to reply at all!
Most of the patterns listed only go up to a 24. The answers given are not really answers to the questions – they are explanations/excuses of why they DON’T do stuff, not what they will try to do better. But at east they answered the open letter, which is more than the others did. Very, very few people are ever going to fit any pattern out of the envelope, and knowing the adjustments we need to make for our unique combo of ins and outs is just life, but really, when a pattern goes up to a 24 and the models shown are thin as rakes, no larger size model shown as well so who can tell if the dress will look any good or how it sits or fits, it’s just more disregard, and I feel that in every way, from artwork to sizing to cut and fit and instruction, there is a LOT of room for improvement.
Well, I’m glad I’m not the only one with hackles at least slightly up. All of the exemplar patterns only go up to 24 which, to my mind, is hardly a plus size in rtw. I’m a pretty solid 22 in rtw — I really need a pattern which goes up to around 32 (thanks hips, love you).
It really becomes a kind of chicken-egg proposition: they put out some attractive and/or at least partly fitted “plus-sized” patterns which aren’t so plus-sized; the patterns that are actually plus-sized are often neither attractive nor remotely fitted which plus-sized people don’t buy, so they assume that there’s no market for additional patterns in plus sizes. It’s all rather disordered.
The only thing I *might* say, if I were feeling charitable, is that the larger our bodies become, the more difficult they can be to fit — and I say this in a matter-of-fact way without judgment. Where I carry my weight is not where you carry yours, or she carries hers, etc. The variance, compared to more lighter people is, imo, greater. I can see where pattern companies just kind of throw up their hands. I’m not saying they shouldn’t try harder — because they should, or at least do us the courtesy pretending that they actually care about us as a demographic.
Am I making any sense this morning?
I wonder if a way to address the issue is to have certain designers direct some effort at a few niche markets– the uber-busty, the super petite (both in slimness and/or height– it can be hard to find adult clothes for women under 5’4″), sizes over 26 RTW, just a few examples that come to mind. I know its anecdata– blogs and other social media posts– but what I’ve seen says there is a decent sized market for all of these things. Whether some indie would take up the challenge or one of the Big 4. Some indies are obviously looking for niche, and the Big 4 doesn’t mind partnering with special designers for their aesthetic so why not partner with a designer or assign one on the staff to work specifically with special fitting needs issues?
That said, no pattern company can ever make a pattern that will address all concerns for everyone. If someone fixes for my long arms and broad shoulders, someone with shorter arms and narrow shoulders gets screwed over. I think we should just acknowledge that we’ll always be doing tweaks for individual bodies and preferences.
This would be a great solution!
Oh my goodness! Same old answers, I see. One question I still have is, how many women, of any size do you know that wear many sleeveless garments? While we all DO wear them, we usually wear something over or something under. PLEASE, Please, Please make cute items with real sleeves! Real sleeves, not those “cap” things that hit you right in the thickess part of your arm.
The other thing that gets to me – if I’m going to take the time to buy your patterns and make stuff, please take the time to listen to me and make patterns I really would like to make and wear. Unfortunately, I’m part of two groups of “forgotten” women. Plus size and older. Yikes! I should just wrap up in a bed sheet and hide!
I did find the reply more “excuse driven” than an explanation. Given the resources and current market-share, the indy style pattern companies wouldn’t be growing in success if the big 4 were already providing as they say they are. However even the smaller companies as has been noted before, often don’t provide much in the way of plus sizes either. They also have a much smaller selection to choose from.
I have found overall that the Big 4 pattern companies are just not producing as they used to. My local fabric store had a special on patterns recently so I decided to buy a few Connie Crawford ones as i’d seen them recommended. I’m going to review how I went with those. It wasn’t what I expected. I did notice in my pattern browsing that the same patterns have been repeating for years. That is across all of the size ranges. Apart from multiple cup sizes, there’s very little innovation or anything genuinely new out there. Where does McCalls explanation about master patterns fit into that? I used to see real changes across seasons and more fashion change than is evident in the pattern books.
Mass-produced clothing from China is so cheap and people so much more time-poor that people aren’t sewing as much period. Pattern companies are operating in a difficult economic climate as a result. I believe grading for plus sizes would be more difficult and it is a smaller market so it is probably not a great business decision to invest in it.
An area which could be improved substantially is sewing and fitting education. This would make what is out there far more usable. I believe change is coming, (ie fitting shells and cup sized patterns) just that it is very slow.
Another thing, where are all their women patterns? I can only find one that is above size 24, and that one is of course a sack style
Very true… They have a whole section of Plus pattern designs and other patterns that go up to ‘plus’ sizes, but only FOUR go past 24W. And they are sad sacks not even my grandmother would deign to wear.
They are not making enough profit to risk change. I predict that the independent designers and pattern makers will be making a dent In the Big Boys’ business in a few years. What if shoe companies stopped making larger size shoes as feet got bigger?
hmmm I don’t know about all the other stuff they were talking about, but I love the jumpsuit pattern. What I don’t understand is why they think the red tent they put out would look good on anyone.
I’m calling BULLSHIT on the B cup. I have worked for the past 9 years in the apparel industry – C is average. And that is in athletic apparel, and dresses.
The truth is they don’t make usable patterns for us because we’re not their demographic. I’m a 40DDD rtw size 16/18 down from a 24. I have a daughter who’s a 34DDD rtw size 6. Don’t get me started on my plus size 10 year old niece! At least Simplicity/New Look/Burda make an effort but M/B’s line of multi-cup and plus size clothing is a joke. The styles cater to small, B cup girls so basing their decisions on the sales of these patterns is a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is why I don’t bother looking at what they have to offer. Thankfully, there are a lot of independent designers who pay attention to how women of all shapes and sizes are built and take the time to accommodate all of us. I’d much rather have a few great patterns than 1 of theirs that I have to spend a ridiculous amount of time altering and redesigning.
McCall’s is right about cup sizes. I am a pear but have always been smaller in the bust which is so frustrating with ready wear. Camisoles by avon gape in the neck but a size down they are too tight around my waist which is ten inches smaller than my hips. That is one of the reasons I read your posts to find out what I need to do.
The same garbage answers they always give!
It’s like telling us, “You’re not worth it. We put out tents and you’ll buy them. What choice do you have? Too much ease? Quit complaining! Fix it. You should be ashamed of yourselves!”
You know what I’d like to hear? That they’re working on some awesome patterns that flatter and don’t require so much adjusting that the pattern isn’t recognizable.
My FBAs are TEN inches. TEN.
Plus a swayback, full butt adjustment, narrow shoulders, shorten the bodice and skirt. If I can do it, why can’t they?