Pant Settings, the experiment

A recent discussion on a pattern-drafting chat list got me to thinking about pant setting choices in PMB. We have been told that we are to use the ROUND crotch shapes and a "level" waist when making the basic pants when we begin the pant fitting process.

I don't generally use the ROUND back crotch shape (although I do use the round front shape). I use the Flat bk shape, plus several other setting choices that differ from the basic, default shapes that they want you to use to fit your pants....like, the "Wild Cut".

The WILD CUT is Wild Ginger's name for the shape that basically adds a 'wedge' to the back pattern. Here is the difference between using the WC and not using it:

As you see, the back waist is higher at the center and is basically 'shifted' laterally, creating a more-angled center seam and a straighter side seam. This changes the relationship between the leg's centerline and the waist's center point.

Also, as I said, I use the FLAT back crotch shape, not the round one.
Here, you can see the difference in these two crotch shapes.


The RED pattern has a ROUND crotch shape in both front and back.
The BLUE/GREEN pattern has a FLAT crotch shape in both front and back.

You can see that the FLAT front adds a little width at hip level in the front, making the center seam a bit more angled. In BACK, the FLAT shape adds quite a bit of width to the pattern at hip level.

Now, if you use both the Wild Cut and the FLAT back crotch shape, there is a marked difference in the shape of the back pattern:

This pattern (using WC and Flat back shape) would provide more 'bum room'...both vertically and horizontally!

But for some reason, I decided to try making pants using the ROUND crotch shapes. I haven't sewn a new pattern for pants since version 3, although as far as I could tell, the pants drafted the same as before. But tech support had stated that the new ROUND crotch was more like the old flat one (my eyes couldn't see it)...so I decided I would give it a try.

There was an article on Fitting Pants by Karen Howland in the Dec/Jan 2002 issue of Threads magazine (issue 98, pages 24-26). This dealt with those \_/ wrinkles that occur in the back of pants when the pattern's waist tilt is not right for the body.

Her example is that of a towel...you hold a towel by two corners and let it hang. If both hands are held at the same height, the towel will hang smoothly. But if one hand is held higher than the other, both sides will still hang straight but you will see wrinkles in the towel. The top and bottom are now at an angle.

Apply this to pants--Even if the pants are cut with the center line perfectly aligned with the fabric's grainline, the pants will only hang wrinkle-free if the upper support (i.e. waistline) allows them to. The LENGTH of the pant at side and center must be appropriate for the body shape. When the back wrinkles look like \_/ , then the sides are not long enough...OR, the center is too long...for the body shape.

So theoretically, we could apply her instructions to PMB to determine our waist tilt, right? That is, if I measure from my body's back waist to floor, side waist to floor, and front waist to floor, then apply that to the pattern, the resulting pants SHOULD have the correct waist tilt, right?

Now, we all know that using the Wild Cut will add extra length to the CENTER of the back pattern. What about that? Do we need to use the waist drops to eliminate that back height or leave the extra height there, even though the pattern will now be LONGER than what we measure? I wanted to know!

I also measured my crotch LENGTH...between legs from front waist to back waist...while wearing pants that I liked the waist tilt of. I measured from the waist line of those pants to the floor when taking my vertical measurements, so the resulting pants should have a waist tilt that hit me just like the waist of these pants...that was my hope.

According to the article, you adjust the pattern's length first, getting the waist tilt correct. Then you look at the pattern's crotch length and lengthen the crotch extensions until the pattern's crotch matches your measuresments. Sounds easy enough, right?

Ok, so I have the numbers I need to evaluate my pattern.

I have:
• Waist to Floor measurements (front, back and sides…41.5”, 42.5”, 42.5” )
• Crotch length measurement (to desired waist tilt…26.5” )
• Inseam measurement (to floor…32” )
• Crotch depth (calculated from sideseam and inseam…10.5” )

But there are a couple of other extra numbers that need to be noted when measuring…these are HELPING measurements.
• When measuring the crotch length, determine the forward-backward placement of the crotch point, and note the front crotch length and the back crotch length separately. These should add up to equal the total crotch length, of course!
• Measure down the sideseam to the level of the hip depth--do this while still wearing the comfy pants and using THAT waistband to measure from. You want to know how far below THAT WAIST that your hip depth should be. I just looked in the mirror and found the level that my bum protruded the most (side view) and measured to that level.

Ok, so now in addition to the measurements above, I now have my helping measurements:
• Front crotch length--12”
• Back crotch length--14.5”
• Hip depth on pattern--8”

Here is what I did:

I created a new chart that used the DESIRED CROTCH LENGTH instead of the CL that was taken according to the WG instructions (measured to bodice waist). My DESIRED crotch length was 26.5” (instead of the 29” CL that reaches the bodice waist).

In theory, using zero waist drops and settings, this should draft a pant with an accurate crotch length for my body--that is, 26.5”.

In theory. Turns out, this is kinda variable! Even with all settings at zero…crotch extensions, crotch breaks, waist drops--the crotch length was 27.22”. Hmmmm.

So I looked at the HIP DEPTH. I compared hip depths from 8.5” to 7.5”. The crotch length varied from 27.22” to 26.6”. I return my HIP DEPTH to 8” because that is my desirable/helping measurement. At 8” hip depth, the crotch length measured 26.9”. This means my crotch length is about .5” too long (26.9, when I need 26.5).

Next, I look at CROTCH DEPTH of this pattern.
Draw a line perpendicular to the grainline across the BACK pattern from the top of the inseam to the sideseam. Measure the vertical distance between this line at the sideseam to the SIDE/WAIST point. That is the crotch depth of this pattern.

My pattern’s crotch depth was too long--11” when I need 10.5”.

In PMB, to change the pattern's crotch DEPTH,
• You can first look at what you have selected for the crotch EASE. Increase or decrease the crotch EASE to raise or lower the crotch level.
• If you are already at zero crotch ease and you need to shorten the crotch depth further, you can use the waist drops. Drop front, back and side waist EQUALLY to adjust the crotch depth.
• Or, you can reduce the CROTCH LENGTH measurement in the chart.

For now, I leave the crotch as is, and continue to compare other areas of the pattern.

I check the INSEAM length. The FRONT inseam was correct, but the back inseam was .25” too long.

I check the SIDESEAM. The length of the sideseam needs to match my SIDE/WAIST-TO-FLOOR measurement. My pattern’s SS is too long--I measure 42.5” but my pattern’s SS is 42.9”.

Note: I am NOT clicking on the side seam segments to measure--I am drawing a straight line from sidewaist to level of hem and measuring that straight line. This is because I measured straight down to floor--I did NOT follow the contours of my body when I measured this. FYI, The difference in the straight-line measurement and the actual seam length is about .25”.

So, this sideseam was about .5” too long--the same amount that the crotch depth was too low.

The TILT of the waist will be determined by the waist to floor measurements.
In my case, my side- and back-to-floor measurements are EQUAL but my front-to-floor is 1" shorter.

Now I look at the pattern--again, I draw a straight line from the CB/waist point to the hem level and from the CF/waist point to hem level to measure these distances.

I have chosen the WILDCUT, so I know the pattern’s center back waist will be higher than the side waist (and it is--by about 1”). My pattern measures 43.8” CB TO FLOOR (hem) but I need 42.5”. So, my pattern’s CB waist is about 1.3” too high--which is MORE than the amount that the side-waist and crotch depth need to be lowered.

The front waist on my pattern measured 42.9” from hem--I need 41.5”. That means I will need to lower the front waist by about 1.5”.

Now I have the numbers.
Using the waist drop tool, I need to lower-
• the SIDE-WAIST by .5”,
• the CB-WAIST by 1.25”,
• the CF-WAIST by 1.5.

Ok, so now I remeasure from these points to the hem, and now my pattern’s waist tilt matches my body’s WAIST TO FLOOR measurements.

The CROTCH DEPTH is now correct.

But what about the CROTCH LENGTH? It is now too short--24.5” when I need 26.5”.

Well, according to Karen Howland in the article I am referencing, the next step is to increase the crotch extensions.

I have recorded the separate front and back crotch lengths, so I can compare these separately.
My target FRONT crotch length is 12”--the pattern measures 11”. I need 1” more.
My target BACK crotch length is 14.5”--the pattern measures 13.5”. I need 1” more.

After increasing the crotch extensions by 1” each, the total crotch length measures 26.38”. That is pretty close to the 26.5” target.

Now, something else to think about. I took my BACK waist to floor measurement straight down from the hip--but I want my pants to cup under my bum a little. So, that CB-to-floor measurement COULD be increased to allow for extra fabric to contour under the bum. So, I raised that back waist up by .25”--in essence, increasing my CB-FL measurement to account for the contouring, which means I would only need to lower the pattern’s back waist by 1”, not 1.25” as I originally did. Doing this makes my CROTCH LENGTH measure 26.64”--better!

So now the pattern reflects my measurements. The crotch depth is right; the crotch length is right; the side waist to floor, CB-FL, CF-FL are all right.

Now, I rechecked the INSEAM lengths. The FRONT inseam is now too long by 0.125”, but the back inseam is now .299” too long. I will change that manually, trimming the top of the inseams at the crotch points.

However, the legs are much wider on these pants now that the crotch extensions have been lengthened.
• My patterns measure 28” across the top of the thigh area (at crotch level).
• My own thighs measure 23” at the top.

I decide to give them a try, and print the pattern.

Here is the back pattern...you can see that the waistline at the side and center are about the same 'height'. Notice that back side-thigh area...see how I have redraw the sideseam and marked (in red) the amount I wish to remove? Remember, on the NAVY pants I just finished, remember how I said I kept wanting to grab a wad there and remove it? WEll, at this point I still had not had my 'lightbulb moment'...so I was just going to reshape that seam (and did).

Notice how wide that back body space looks! Also notice the note on the pattern...the back inseam is too long and must be shortened so it won't be longer than the front inseam.
I had a bad feeling about this pattern. Before commiting to fabric, I tried out the front pattern on my body. I aligned the center line down the center of my leg and compared the waist and center front seam. Oh my! This front seam is about 2" farther toward the side than the seam on the pants I am wearing! This tells me that this isn't going to work...this pattern's front crotch extension is way too long! Shortening the front cr.ext. will move the leg laterally as compared to the waist and hip.
I was also skeptical of that waist tilt in front. It was scooped way too low! So, I shortened the front crotch extension AND raised the front waist drop. This kept the length of that front crotch seam stable, but it DID change the waist to floor measurement. oh well.

I went to fabric and cut, using 1" seam allowances for the sides and inseams.

These pants didn't look awful when standing but sitting was painful and very difficult! Plus, there was still too much fabric in the front in my lap. The legs were pretty wide.

Overall, the waist tilt was pretty close to correct. The sides are a little higher than the back, though, which answered the question about the Wild cut! No, you should NOT lower the back waist to make it match the WAIST-TO-FLOOR measurement if you are using the Wild Cut!

So I went back to the computer and redrafted the pattern...this time, moving the sideseams forward (-.5) and reducing that front crotch extension from (+.5) to (-.25).

The front looked better, but now sitting was even more difficult....despite that fact that the back crotch extension was (+1).

Remember, I had decided to use the ROUND crotch shape for this exercise.
And I was feeling it!
These pants were tight across the bum at hip level.
Like a sports bra...you know how a sports bra will kinda push both boobs together, rather than lift and support each breast separately? Well, that is how these pants felt...like it was giving me a uni-butt! My cheeks did not have enough coverage, separately.

These pants were just too straight up and down! No bias...

I redrafted again and printed a new pattern to recut these pants once more. At this point, I was out of seam allowances...down to 3/8" s.a.s, which is what I usually use on pants that I KNOW will fit!

Although difficult to see, I had drawn the hip line on these pants (FRIXION erasable gel pen from Pilot...wonderful marker, it disappears with a touch of the iron!). As you can see, once you cut a FLAT crotch shape, which is slanted, the hip line meets the center line at more of an angle. This means this line will NOT be level when on the body...it WILL have a slight 'V' shape, just as it shows here.

Because the last iteration was SO tight across the seat and thigh when I sat (despite being fairly wide in the thigh area!), I decided to try using the Flat FRONT crotch shape. I had not used it previously...I always use the ROUND front shape. But someone else on the chat list mentioned that she needed to use the flat front shape, so I thought I would give it a try.


Well, stupidly, I put the fly zipper into that new pant front BEFORE testing the fit of the FLAT front crotch shape.

Uh oh!

It was awful. These pants were SO baggy across the front hip area! Look at those folds!

Pinching out the front crotch made them look better. Too bad I couldn't just resew that area smaller (like it would be if I had used the round crotch shape)...BECAUSE I HAD INSTALLED A STUPID FLY AND ZIPPER!!!!

Needless to say, I was pissed.

They were starting to look better in back, though. There was more room for each bum cheek now.

As luck would have it, I had just enough fabric to cut out another pair of fronts.

But I HAD to make this existing back work, though...there wasn't enough fabric to start over with both pieces.

And it was obvious that I needed to extend that back crotch even MORE than it was extended on this pattern. Hmmmm..... how could I do that, as I was out of seam allowances?

I decided that if I moved the pattern's sideseam BACKWARDS in my settings, the new front would be wider and the back would be narrower. And I could fit this narrower back on the old back fabric to recut (if I didn't mind making the lower legs slightly narrower...which was fine!). The new wider front could be cut from the remaining extra fabric. The front would be wider than usual, to make up for the back being narrower. Seemed like it might work.

(Now, this is NOT what I usually do. Normally, I would move the sideseam FORWARD. But to be able to use the back pattern that was already cut, I had to do this)

So that's what I did.
The new front had a ROUND crotch shape with the crotch extension SHORTENED (-0.5").
The new back has a FLAT crotch shape with the crotch extension LENGTHENED (+0.75").

(BTW, I used the WILD CUT for ALL these various iterations.)

This new one seemed good. After all, I am practically back to using the same settings I had used in the past, in Version 3!

With the wild cut and flat back crotch, I could sit in these pants. The longer back crotch extension combined with the shorter front one put the inseam at the right (more-forward) location.

The upper side seam, though, was a bit more towards the back than I desired, but I didn't change the ss placement AT and BELOW the knee (so the lower leg section was still cut as if the SS position was a (-.5), which is my desired SS location...I just joined the two patterns together at the knee) so the overall look of the pants from the side view is fine. No one would notice the more-backward upper sideseam if I didn't point it out.

I thought this was gonna work.

However, it was just a bit too tight across the upper back area. Moving the sideseam backwards makes the back darts smaller. I need back darts that are bigger! THAT is a major reason for moving the sideseam forward! ...to make larger back darts. These smaller darts needed to be sewn larger...and once that was done, there was a gap in the side seam.

Below, you can see the difference between the pattern I started with (in RED) and what I ended up with. You can see that as fabric was removed from the center back to angle that seam, it needed to be added to the side back. Well, I only had 1" of seam allowance to work with.

So I made the painful decision to cut off the top of the back of these pants and replace it with a yoke! I figured I could cut the yoke WIDER to replace the missing fabric!

Here, you see the little vertical 'wedge' I added at the side seam (to the right). I cut this from fabric and crossed my fingers! I wondered how this shape would look on my behind. Would I suddenly look like SpongeBob Squarepants? Or SquareButt?

This was a last resort to save these pants.

Funny, because this fabric had already been relegated to the give-away bag. I had put it there, thinking I would not use it because it was 'scratchy'. Well, it isn't scratchy. And now I have become attached to the outcome of this experiment, determined to end up with wearable pants!

I took a deep breath and cut off the top of the pant back...

The Navy Pants

I was digging around in my stuff and pulled out this stack.
The entire pattern was there.
The pieces were cut out and even a zipper was included.
But there was NO EXTRA FABRIC to be found!

This was a pant pattern that was printed and cut out in April, 2006 (I had used PMB version 3 to draft the pattern).

I got distracted, the weather became too warm for long pants, the project was pushed aside.

Then I gained weight. Other pants made around that same time no longer fit me, so this one was put into a box.

Fast forward to 2012.

I have lost the weight and am once again able to wear other pants made at that time.

I decided to sew these up and see how they fit!

The sewing was fairly straight forward (and easy!) because the 'thinking' had been done when the pattern was created and cut out. All I had to do now was DO IT.

Or so I thought.

My pants are made jeans-style, and my front rise is not all that long. A 7" zipper is too long for me, so I always have to shorten them. No big deal...I just align the bottom stop at the appropriate place and then cut off the top of the zipper AFTER sewing on the waistband or facing.

HOWEVER, I like metal zippers in pants because I think they are stronger. It didn't occur to me until I was already sewing on the waistband that I was sewing across METAL ZIPPER TEETH! Fortunately, I didn't hit any when I began the sewing, and after I realized what I was doing I was very careful to hand-turn the fly wheel in the zipper area.

But now I have to eliminate those extra teeth! I have never shortened a metal zipper from the top before (with nylon, you can just cut across the zipper with scissors!). But a quick internet search told me to pry and pull...and it works!

See, above, I have already pulled the teeth off of the side at the top of the image.

Here (above) you can see the teeth are still there on the lower side of the zipper, between those seam allowances. The grey stuff you are seeing is the interfacing on the back side of the waistband.

A quick trip to the garage provided the tools I needed. Needle-nose pliers were great for pulling those peshy teeth of the tape. I felt like a mad dentist!

I also used some wire cutters that have a thinner edge to do a little prying to get the top stop off...then I used the needle-nose pliers to squeeze it closed when I put it back on (under the seam!).

The waist of these pants was cut to the size I was in 2006...and my waist is a little bigger now. Normally, there would be an inch or so to cut off one end of the waistband...the end over the fly...because I cut it the same length as the side with the underlap, but in this case, I needed the whole length of waistband! So, even though this is a contoured waistband, i shifted it off-center to allow me to use the whole thing.

"But what about the top edge of the pants?" you might ask.

Well, this is a stretch woven (twill) so I could stretch the edge to fit. Yes, the end result makes a slight pull under the waistband when the pants are ON my body, but it made the difference between wearable or not.

When the pants were finished,, I put them on and looked for a place to photograph them.

I started in the hallway, where I had shot the knit top I talked about previously.

Oh my! These dark navy pants just disappear!

I picked a bright wall in the den, but no, they are still a black hole.

What if I face the windows? Would I have more light and be able to see the pants?

No, they are still a black hole, plus, now there is tons of 'stuff' cluttering up the shot!

So I went back to the hallway, and OPENED THE FRONT DOOR! Man, it was cold outside!

And the result was not really much better.

So, PHOTOSHOP to the rescue! I adjusted the light levels on these so you can see the details of the pants. The photos are now washed out, but you can see the wrinkles and folds and seams and stuff...at least, better than you could see them before!

For pants that were designed and cut out 6 years ago, I'd say they fit really well!

There was something about the back thigh that was bothering me, but I couldn't exactly put my finger on it. I kept wanting to pinch out some fabric along the outside thigh area, just behind the side seam and under the bum.
Here is the front view with my shirt pulled up, so you can see the contoured waistband...I am trying to hide skin!
Overall, the pants are great. Not perfect but really good.

But look at the back view. Can you see the semi-diagonal fold on each side of the back crotch area? It is not the imbalanced waist-tilt thing...because it doesn't extend to the side/waist area.

And really, I didn't diagnose this until AFTER I sewed the next pair (coming soon to a blog near you!). But here is the deal...I need MORE BACK CROTCH EXTENSION! DUH! That would move the back leg slightly more toward the center and add a tiny bit more fabric to the bum at center back. And that would TOTALLY jive with my inclination to pinch out the side/back thigh area! Fabric there would be decreased and fabric would be added to the inseam side of the thigh...just where the wrinkle is pointing!

Anyway, that is my current thinking. But before I try it and show you my results, I need to share another experiment I have recently done involving pants. sigh. Stay tuned!

The PMK Crossed Panel Top

As I mentioned before, back in September I drafted a pattern for a knit top using Wild Ginger's patternmaking program for knits (PMK). The style I chose was the CROSSED PANEL. This has front shoulder princess seams and overlapping center panels which create a V neck.
Since the final outcome is not one I would repeat, I won't go into my drafting choices, but here you can see my pattern:

I WILL tell you that I had the bust level too high, and the bust points too close to center.

Also, the upper back is too short...as is the upper front! sigh.
I chose a beige textured knit from my stash to use for this top. This is a fabric I really liked and had been saving until I was sure about my pattern's fit. Apparently, I didn't save it long enough!

I had limited yardage, so had to be creative about the layout. Both center panels are supposed to be full-sized, but I decided it was unnecessary to make the underpanel reach the hem. By cutting the left panel shorter, I was able to fit the pattern onto this fabric.

BTW, although that is a pattern for a short sleeve, I DID cut a longer sleeve...3/4 length was all I could fit, though!

The contruction order of this style took a few minutes to work out! I decided that the first step was to partially sew the front princess seams...just above the bust.

That way, I could sew the front shoulder seams, which needed to be done before the neck edge was finished.

This looked really odd...all these pieces going off in all directions!

I basted around the neck edge (using red thread!) so I would know how much to turn under for the coverstitch.

Then I used the coverstitch machine to finish the neck edge.

Once the neck edge was finished, THEN I could sew the remainder of the front princess seams. After that, the contruction order was pretty normal.

I was not thrilled when I first tried this on.

Those sleeves were awfully twisty! barf. The lower edge is just folded under...there is no hem on the sleeves. I was just checking to see how it looked before finishing up. Needless to say, those sleeves came out!

But remember, i was short on fabric! I didn't have extra to cut more sleeves. I had to make these work.

I went back to the drafting board and created new patterns and compared. This is when I realized I had made a big mistake by choosing a C cup in my measurement chart! The front armhole is too long for me...I need more difference in the size of the front and back armholes and this is accomplished by using a bigger bust cup size.

Hmmmm.... I began to wonder if I could use the DART OVERRIDE to save this one.

The Dart Override tool makes the front armhole smaller and the bust dart larger (it will also do the opposite, depending on the setting choice).

So I redrafted using the DO and printed only the sleeve.

I just barely had enough room to recut the old sleeve using this new pattern. The cap mound of the new sleeve (paper pattern) is more 'forward' than the mound of the old sleeve. This is better for my body and will relieve the twisting.

To sew this sleeve into the existing armhole, which was NOT cut using the dart override, I had to ease the armhole to the sleeve in the lower front area. But this is a knit, remember? Knits are more forgiving of stuff like this!

The final shirt is just ok. I love the fabric. I like the neckline. The crossover pulls and causes folds because the dart position was not properly located for my body.

Also, the armholes are still not just right. I think instead of reducing the size of the front armhole, I needed to increase the size of the back one. But that would have called for a larger sleeve that could not have been cut from the first sleeve fabric. When I wear this top, I am aware of the armholes.

I am toying with the idea of just sewing the armhole deeper. I am torn, though...will it make it more difficult to raise my arms?
Overall, it isn't bad looking...despite that little bobble in the front hem that I created when coverstitching the hem and ran into a thicker area at the princess seam!
I really will have to fix that if I intend to wear this shirt out of the house!

PMK, darts vs no darts

Before, I mentioned that I generally choose the DARTED silhouette instead of using the NO DART choice, even when I plan to sew no darts. Here, I hope to show you why.

Below, I have superimposed two patterns...each using the identical measurements and settings EXCEPT, the RED one chose a SIDE DART and the blue/green one used NO DART.

With both pattern sets aligned at the shoulders, you can see that the front pattern is almost the same, with or without the dart.

But look at the back patterns. The no-dart pattern (in green) has a shorter back armhole depth than the darted one (in red).

But that isn't all...look at the overall length of the back patterns.

When I align the pattern sets, matching at the waist and hem, you can easily see that the back pattern of the NO DART set (green) is actually LONGER than the one that uses a dart (red), even though BOTH pattern sets were made using identical measurements!
PMK shortens the back length when a 'dart' is chosen.

I have adjusted my BACK length measurement to be longer than 'real' so that when it is shortened to use with the darted pattern, it will still be adequate.

Of course, this was NOT discovered before I sewed that last 'dud' I mentioned before...

I had assumed the overall back length of my newly-sewn top would be just the same length as the back of the previously sewn knit tops if I used the same measurement!

But no, that isn't the case when darts are chosen for one pattern but not the other.

But as I said, this is a recent discovery... sigh.

But to me, the real issue with the no-dart choice *is* the change to the upper back...that raised back armhole level. The upper back is now shorter from the underarm level up to neck.

My no-dart garments will pull to the back, trying to borrow fabric from the front. This happens because the back armhole height is too short...the distance from underarm level to the back neck on the pattern was reduced.

Also look at the sleeve. The shortened back armhole creates a sleeve with a smaller back half. This contributes to the "pulling-to-the-back" and a general feeling of tightness. When the back armhole is smaller, the back of the sleeve is smaller...there is less fabric there.

Also, this narrower sleeve's cap height would need to be made shorter to maintain the same bicep measurement across the sleeve as on the darted one...and that lowered cap height can introduce pulls that might not be there if the darted bodice were chosen. In the example above, I did NOT change the cap height on the sleeve...and you can see that the two sleeves are NOT the same width.

But here, below, you can see what happens when I change the cap height on the DARTLESS top...reducing the cap height by 0.25" so that the bicep width on the sleeve is nearly the same as before. The patterns are aligned at the front underarm point (because the front armhole on both patterns is nearly the same, I choose that as my point of alignment for comparison).

Anyway, THAT is why I choose to use the DARTED silhouette, even when I plan to sew NO darts! YMMV.

PMK and shoulders

Edited near end for clarity, bold

I bought the knits program from Wild Ginger when it came out, but have not taken enough time to really use it as I'd like.

I told you previously about 3 of the knit tops I made, trying to work out what settings and measurements I should use. While those tops are wearable, they are not representative of the choices I'd make if I had the chance to do them over again!

I have since done yet another knit top that I am also less than thrilled with...it is not as wearable as these others!...but I have learned a lot from this one, too, and think I have finally nailed down MOST of the choices that I need to make.

Before I show you the latest 'dud', I'll show you what I have learned.

I have tried to explain this before on the chat list and forum, but as we all know, a picture makes things SO much easier to understand!

Here is the basic knit top as it drafts with my measurements...almost.

I did lower the armhole depth by .25" on this, and as you can see, I chose the DARTED version (because I am a D cup--More about that later).

You can see that the shoulders are very slanted, both in front and in back. This is critical to notice. When the program first came out, many people were surprised to see those sloped shoulders, but were assured they worked...just try them. Well, after trying them, many were still not satisfied with the fit, so the company added settings to enable adjusting the shoulders as desired. This company does listen to its customers and tries to please.

Here you can see the basic pattern with the front and back superimposed on each other, with neck points aligned.

Notice that the shoulder angles, front and back are the same.

The shoulder WIDTHS, front and back, are the same. The program uses the back shoulder width to draft...there is no measurement for the front shoulder width. So the upper chest area in front is the same width as the upper back area in back...you can see the upper armholes are superimposed. Right away, I know that is a problem, because my body is wider in the back at that level than in the front.

Here you see the same basic pattern with the front superimposed over the back, but this time, it is aligned at the waist and hem. You can see that the front pattern is LONGER than the back pattern, because I am using a D cup in my measurement chart. If I used a C or less, the front would be the same overall length as the back.
Now, I have made some changes to my shoulders using the settings that were added to the program.

• I used a SHOULDER HEIGHT setting of .75...this raises the shoulders up on BOTH patterns by .75".
• I also used a SHOULDER POINT setting of .5...this moves the shoulder point (at arm) forward by .5".

The net result of these settings is that the front shoulder is still pretty slanted, almost like it was with the original draft. But the back shoulder is much more 'square'.

Here you can see the new pattern IN RED superimposed on the original pattern (in green/blue).

At a glance the new pattern doesn't look all that different...nothing remarkable about it.
But look what happens if you flip and superimpose the new front onto the new back.

Immediately, you notice that the shoulder angles are NOT the same, but the back shoulder is higher.

But look at the shoulder WIDTHS. While the actual seam length of the front and back shoulder seams ARE the same, the width of the patterns across the upper chest and upper back are NOT the same! The back pattern is wider...you will see that the back armhole is farther out than the front armhole is...by about 3/8". Now, I don't know about you, but that looks more like how MY body is shaped!

Here you can see those same new front and back patterns (flipped and superimposed) aligned at the waist and hem. Again, you can see that the upper back pattern is wider than the upper chest area, and the front pattern is still longer (at the neck point) than the back pattern (because of the D cup).

The new back shoulder angle looks more like the shoulder slant on my regular (non-knit) pattern. Can't you just see those shoulders sewn together and curving forward on my shoulders which also just happen to curve forward (like the shoulders of many of us!)?
How does this affect the sleeves? Well, the original sleeve is below.
And here is the new, adjusted-shoulder sleeve.
It takes some careful observations to see the differences! But if I superimpose them, it will be easier.

Below, the RED SLEEVE is the NEW, adjusted shoulder sleeve...and the green one is the original. I have aligned them at the front underarm.

Because the front armhole on the NEW pattern is not very different from the front armhole on the OLD pattern, the front of the sleeve is not very different. the new armhole has a slightly more-square shoulder...not much difference, so not much difference in that area of the sleeve.

You can see that the new, RED sleeve is bigger in the back of the sleeve cap. Duh...the back armhole of the new bodice is longer than the back armhole of the original bodice, because the new back shoulder is taller! The RED back cap line is about 3/8" outside the original sleeve, which means it will provide about 3/8" more fabric in the critical 'forward-movement' (driving room!) area. (edits in bold)

I also mentioned that I use the DARTED basic silhouette, rather than the no-dart version. I don't plan to actually SEW this dart...it will be eased in the seam and will disappear...so I consider this my dartless block.

More about WHY I use the darted instead of the no-dart, later...