So, I'm currently somewhat obsessed with the idea of jumpers (in the American sense of the garment: a dress-like item worn over other clothes), and it appears that those are so incredibly unfashionable right now that search engines still want to show me knit sweaters (British sense of jumper) even when I search with terms like "jumper dress" (and I have leaned that the British term for what I'm looking for consists of variations of the phrase "pinafore dress")
But of course I'm looking for jumpers I can make, without doing...whatever it was I did with the vest pattern a few posts ago. I was surprised to see that there really aren't many jumper patterns in print right now. Simplicity has 4789, which...I've actually had for a few years already, and it's a super simple jumper pattern so should go together easily, but...you know me and super simple patterns. (I try not to be a snob about them, I really do, but it's something I have to actively try to do.)
In the 1990s, I had a jumper pattern that I used several times, and really liked everything I made. That was one of the patterns I eliminated when I got rid of patterns that were too small. Yeah. But! I was able to figure out what it was--McCall's 7812--and find it on eBay for a decent price.
When it was still in the mail, I went to a Walmart and spent time poking through the mill end pre-cut bins, and, when I happened to turn around, I spotted a jumper pattern on the cheap "It's Sew Simple" McCall's racks. I looked through all the other patterns on those racks and found a second pattern with a jumper view. I also recognized one of the other cheap McCall's patterns as a very distinctive color blocked Kwik Sew pattern, and, with that knowledge, I was able to identify the two "McCall's" jumper patterns as also originally being issued as Kwik Sew patterns...one of which is still in print as a Kwik Sew? The other had the decency to be an out of print Kwik Sew, at least.
(As an aside, I also recently noticed some patterns that I own as McCall's are now being printed as Butterick. It's obvious that McCall's, Butterick, Kwik Sew, and Vogue are all owned by the same parent company, now known as Something Delightful, and going up a level finds that the company that currently owns that--called Design Group--owns Simplicity/New Look, too, although they don't make that as obvious as the other four being under the same umbrella. So. While I am somewhat surprised to see patterns being reprinted under other patterns company names, the reaction is more "what are they up to?" than "how could this happen?")
It's Sew Simple McCall's 9578 is a reprint of the out of print Kwik Sew 3955
and that's where I started
While I was tracking down what name and number this pattern started as, I also looked at blogs of and reviews by people who have sewn it. The unanimous theme was "Wow this is big." So. I found the finished bust measurements printed on the pattern tissue and decided that the size small would be the best fit there. The pattern had no waist or hip measurements, and...well, you know my current issues in the waist area. I measured the pattern pieces and calculated the whole finished size and decided I would grade up to a large at the hip.
This would be a straightforward adjustment on a most patterns--while this pattern is not complicated, it does still have some weird things going on with the side pocket construction. I tried not to overthink things and it worked out. It may have helped that I only made the adjustment from small to large on the side seams, and cut the front and back princess seams at small the whole length. It was easy enough to cut from small to large on the upper pieces, then copy that onto the lower outer pocket pieces, and actually just as easy to follow those changes to adjust the single piece of the pocket facing, but, whoo...it felt wrong the whole time I was cutting the pocket facing. And I did end up making the pocket facing just a bit narrow, but it was still wide enough to reach the seams.
I did also angle the center front pattern piece a little when cutting it out
That may have been overkill? But, since this pattern was never intended to make a fitted jumper, it didn't result in anything looking off.
The way the pocket covers the side seams means the side seams are where you have to start with the construction of this jumper, then sew the facing to the lower side opening, followed by sewing the bottom of the pocket facing to the bottom of the upper side assembly then sewing the sides to the center front and back. Being me, I edge stitched and top stitched everywhere
Yes, of course this project is covered in cat hair. It's wool! Or at least wool-heavy--the fabric was thrifted (in late 2016, I took a photo) and I have never done a burn test. It didn't show any signs of melting under a maximum heat iron, so that makes it lean likely toward all-wool.
I had also approached the project with hubris, thinking I could get away with not laundering the fabric--it's wool!--but as soon as the iron hit it to start pressing before cutting, the ancient cigarette smell was unleashed. I decided to throw it in the washing machine. If the washing process ruined it, it would be no loss, because there was no way I was going to work with that cigarettey stench. Obviously, it worked fine, even washing away a sizing that had made the fabric feel extra synthetic...and making me wonder how the original owner's project--the cuts of which were still visible on one end of the yardage--had held up to being made before being laundered. Glad...uh...glad I didn't have to find that out.
Speaking of yardage, I had significantly less than the pattern envelope called for, even with the odd bit sticking out on the old cut end. I had gotten the idea from the pattern reviews I read that I could use a contrast fabric for the pocket facing, as well as the neckline and arm opening facings, and thus save yardage that way. I cut each piece separately, folding the cloth just enough as needed, and ended up with the right amount of length to cut the pocket facing, too. I probably could have cut the neckline and arm opening facings from what was left as well, but I didn't like the idea of cutting those skinny facing pieces from this happy-to-unravel wool. Some of the reviews said they'd used bias tape for the small facings, and that sounded like a good idea to me.
I didn't want to use bias strips that had already been ironed into proper bias tape, so I shuffled through my smaller fabric stash and found a cotton...that had a print with strong 2" diagonal lines.
Which meant I could make continuous bias without the "draw lines all over the back of the fabric" step
It had been a while since I had made continuous bias, and it took some time to realize that the "make the weird tube" step was achieved by aligning/offsetting the lines on the long sides. Once I got that, things went well and I had bias
I folded it in half, right sides together, sewed it to the right sides of the respective openings with 5/8" seams, trimmed the seam allowances, under stitched (more for the security of getting another line of stitching on that truncated seam allowance), pressed to the inside, edge stitched, then top stitched, trying not to think about how I was indeed sewing every opening four times.
I mean, I had sewed every other structural seam three times, sooo...
I thought about sewing the hem with edge stitching, too, but decided to just press up 5/8", press half of that to the inside, and stitch once
I used the magnets on the throat plate to mark the depth for this seam, as well as for the depth of every other seam in this project. Right now, I can't imagine sewing a (human-size) seam again without using the magnets as a guide (doll-size seams still use the presser foot width for seam depth.) It's so much easier to see the magnets than trying to keep track of the engraved lines on the throat plate, and more convenient than using the seam edge guide that bolts onto the machine bed.
Oh, and, I sewed that hem after cutting 3" off of the length of the unfinished garment
The pattern rather unhelpfully gives the finished length of the shorter view in size small as 22" from the waist...which...please, give me the finished length of the garment from the base of the neck. Waists aren't all in the same place. I also figure I'm several inches shorter than the model in the photo (found on the Kwik Sew site, since this pattern envelope only offers a drawing of the shorter view), so I wasn't surprised when I tried on the unfinished jumper and saw how long it was on my stubby little legs. If I had wanted my knees covered, I would have sewn the longer view (which would probably have ended up nearly ankle length on me...)
I don't usually take pictures of the inside of projects, because I'm only concerned with finishing seams in terms of preventing fraying and not making things Pretty™
But.
I wanted to convey how wonderfully enormous the pockets are
That line of white serger thread is on the bottom of the pocket bags. But, if that doesn't help convey the pocket depth, I took this picture, too
A vintage Barbie is a standard depth measurement, right?
And now the back of the jumper, which is enough different from the front, in terms of neck depth, that there won't be any problems telling front from back (some of the tunic dresses I've made in the last few years don't get that description)
And we'll end with a photo of the project supervisor
No comments:
Post a Comment