vivek colloquium mtm
TRANSCRIPT
Just how personal can you get? When it comes to suits, there's customised, tailor-made, bespoke or made-to-measure. Simon Brooke sorts through the confusion: [SURVEYS EDITION]Brooke, Simon . Financial Times [London (UK)] 31 Mar 2007: 10.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlightingShow duplicate items from other databases
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Matthew Karcha needed a suit. "I wanted something that was fashionable but classically elegant.
Because I'm quite broad over the shoulders but I've got a 32-inch waist, I also needed something that
would fit properly," says Karcha, who works in the high-end property business. It was pretty clear that
off-the-peg was not an option. But should he go for made-to-measure or bespoke? And anyway, what
the hell is the difference?
Ask the average bloke in the street about the differences between personal tailoring, off-the-peg,
customised, tailor-made, made-to- measure or bespoke, and chances are he won't have a clue what to
answer. Indeed, these days there seem to be more variations and price points in suiting then there are
ties in most men's closets.
Karcha ended up ordering a brown cashmere single breasted suit with a red lining through Gieves &
Hawkes' "personal tailoring" service. Translation: the suit is created on the standard company "block"
or model but made in the customer's choice of fabric and altered to fit his measurements.
"Personal tailoring is a process. It's more than just made-to- measure because it's not just about
manufacturing, it's about developing a relationship with the customer and allowing them to have some
creative input," explains Andrew Goldberg, Gieves' head of tailoring.
At Kilgour, meanwhile, there's a service called entry level. "With bespoke, the garment is made by
hand in Savile Row by one person, whereas our entry-level suits are still hand-made but produced by a
team," says Hugh Holland, Kilgour's managing director. "It's like a watch - there are various levels of
intricacy."
Then there's Austin Reed's Signature range, which "fits above our ready-made and our made-to-
measure lines but is not quite true bespoke - there are more than a hundred different linings and a
choice of buttons, for instance," says chief executive Nick Hollingworth.
So is it all just the slick semantics of the marketeer keen to take advantage of an already nonplussed
would-be suit purchaser, or actually a positive new development in men's wear? For his part,
Hollingworth defends any additional complication: "Different people might be prepared to pay for
three-, four- or five-star hotels but, these days, what more and more of us want is something
individual, plus a higher level of personal service."
Similarly, Holland says, all the additional variation is driven by customer demand: "A bespoke suit is
Pounds 3,400 whereas entry- level suits are Pounds 1,880 for the first suit, when we measure you and
then Pounds 1,410 afterwards, so people very often trade up," he says. One barrister uses his entry-
level suit under his gown and his bespoke version to see clients, for instance.
Choice - financial and aesthetic - was also the impetus behind Baby Bespoke, shirtmaker New &
Lingwood's contribution to the many new options facing customers. "We found that people want to
customise their shirts without getting involved in the full bespoke process," says sales and marketing
director Justin Sumrie. "We've got a range of collar and cuff options available and a host of fabrics."
Corporate financier Hugh van Cutsem, for example, recently bought a Baby Bespoke shirt for his
wedding. "I'd never had a shirt made specially for me and I wasn't really sure how you went about it,"
he says. "I wanted something with a light blue stripe, which also had the old fashioned separate collar.
It's quite an unusual combination."
Unlike a fully bespoke shirt, Baby Bespoke comes in two fits: the Jermyn Street, which Sumrie
describes tactfully as "fairly full", and the tailored fit, which works for a leaner figure or a more casual
look.
Eton Shirts is taking the concept of micro-categorisation to the logical, technical, extreme: "You'll be
able to create your own shirt via the internet," says Jan Borghardt, head of design. "You'll be able to
design it on screen - sleeve length, collar style, colours - and then you'll get an SMS telling you when
it's on its way. Everyone can be their own designer." Out of confusion, comes simplicity.
(Copyright Financial Times Ltd. 2007. All rights reserved.)
Bespoke tailors hanging on by a thread in Savile Row SUITCUTTERS CLUSTER: Rising rents, smaller premises and an influx of plush stores and offices are forcing bespoke tailors out of one of London's most celebrated streets, writes Aditya Chakrabortty: [LONDON 1ST EDITION]CHAKRABORTTY, ADITYA. Financial Times [London (UK)] 13 Dec 2005: 14.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
John Hitchcock's new shop is hair-splittingly close to his old one. It has the same area postcode, sits in
the same grid of the London A-Z street map and is less than a minute's walk away. The crucial
difference is the street name. For 99 years, Anderson & Sheppard, Mr Hitchcock's bespoke-
tailoring firm, was on Savile Row. When its lease expired in March, one of the biggest names on the
street of suit-makers was forced to leave.
His old premises have been largely smashed up in preparation for redevelopment and, as Mr Hitchcock
looks over at the rubble and builders' trucks, some wistfulness is only too easy to detect. "We were all
very upset at having to move," he says. "And we may still go back one day." Although, as he admits,
that is a remote possibility: Pollen Estate, the landlord, has divided the site into units too small to
accommodate most bespoketailors. The remainder will be plush shops and smart offices.
Pollen owns over half the freeholds on Savile Row and tailors worry that it has similar plans for the
rest. Ask Mike Jones, consultant and spokesman for the estate, to name his ideal tenants and he
suggests high-fashion brands such as Stella Mc-Cartney and Paul Smith. What will the street look like
in 10 years' time? "It'll be an upmarket, quality retail-fashion area," he replies. While emphasising the
part tailors play in his plans, Mr Jones also makes a revealing comparison. "If Carnaby Street is at the
lower end of the retail scale, Savile Row will be at the upper end with more quality names," he says.
But Savile Row already has its own quality names - the tailors. Bespoke firms have been on the street
for over 200 years and are closely identified with it - the Japanese even use the word "sebiro" as a
synonym for suit.
Guy Gregory of chartered surveyors Lambert Smith Hampton says: "Every high street and shopping
mall needs an anchor - like a big department store - to draw customers in. Savile Row's anchor is the
street name and its reputation."
Change that too much and customers may no longer shop on the street, warns Mr Hitchcock: "If you go
to Savile Row and you find the same names as on Madison Avenue, you won't bother coming here."
Savile Row is a few shopping bags short of Madison Avenue at the moment. For many cutters, their
collective reputation removes the need for salesmanship.
Nearly all the shops are closed after 5.30pm and on Saturday afternoons. "Savile Row's not a fashion
street; it's not a browsing street," says Andrew Ramroop, who owns the bespoke tailor Maurice
Sedwell. "It'sa street you visit byappointment."
It is also an island of light industry in a sea of retail. Regent and Bond Streets are just minutes away
but Savile Row is a manufacturing area. Bespoke suits are handcrafted on the premises. While the
showrooms are often calm and quiet, the cutting rooms in the back or basement of the shops are very
busy, making and finishing outfits.
Big brands and glitzy shopping will almost certainly bring higher rents for the Pollen Estate. According
to Westminster City Council, the cutters on Savile Row typically pay Pounds 220 per square foot -
compared to the Pounds 440 a retailer would expect to pay on nearby Old Bond Street.
Rents for the tailors are already starting to move up. Mr Ramroop is a tenant of the Pollen Estate and
was this year confronted with a rise in his annual rent of more than 40 per cent, to Pounds 106,000. He
extracted some concessions but is still unsure about the future of his business, which has yearly sales
of about Pounds 500,000. He is considering partnering with another firm to cut costs. "It has become
so expensive that it's no longer economic for high-class tailors to remain on the Row," says Mr
Ramroop.
That is not because of a lack of custom - most tailors say they have full order books - but because of
rising overheads. An industry that specialises in making its products by hand and onsite cannot readily
cut costs or increase volume. Mr Ramroop and his team make only five suits a week, each taking about
130 man hours.
Not surprisingly, some tailors on the Row have gone into selling less labour-intensive readymade suits.
Kilgour, for instance, used to tailor for Cary Grant and Frank Sinatra but in the past few years has
increased ready-to-wear suits to about half its business. But for Malcolm Plews, master tailor at Welsh
& Jeffrey, readymades are a Savile Row no-no: "These people aren't tailors - they're outfitters."
Some of the newest arrivals barely bother with suits. Evisu, which opened for business on the Row in
September, specialises in selling jeans at about Pounds 200 a pair. This, says Mr Plews, is "sacrilege."
One wonders how he will feel next year when American casualwear chain Abercrombie and Fitch sets
up at the bottom of the street.
Mr Jones sees these two entrants as part of the street's revival, broadening its appeal without diluting
it. He cites approvingly a recent five-page spread on "the home of the bespoke suit" in FHM, the kind
of booze-and-babes magazine probably not widely read by Savile Row customers.
But for Mr Hitchcock, in his new shop around the corner on Old Burlington Street, the appeal of his old
home is already fading.
"To be honest, I'm quite glad to get away from Savile Row. With all these changes, it has not got the
same class any more," he says.
(Copyright Financial Times Ltd. 2005. All rights reserved.)
Word count: 936
Well-suited to match every woman's needs: Damian Foxe finds that the subtle advantages of men's bespoke tailoring are winning over an increasing number of female clients: [London edition]Foxe, Damian. Financial Times [London (UK)] 13 July 1996: 05.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
What do Ronnie Kray and Naomi Campbell have in common? Apart from the same tailor, very
little. Bespoketailors are one of men's few fashion secrets, and with growing lists of high-profile female
clients, including singers Kylie Minogue, Dolores O Riordan (The Cranberries) and Tori Amos, more and
more women are discovering the joy of having suits created specifically for them, at less than 5 per
cent of the cost of haute-couture.
Elizabeth Herring, 31, a massage therapist and part-time writer, still gets excited over having her
l950s-inspired, skirt-suit tailored by Mark Powell. "I went to a men's bespoke tailor because I wanted
something specifically created for me," says Herring. "Bespoke, unlike made-to-measure, involves the
creation of an individual pattern for each customer."
Having discussed the style and fabric for the suit, an initial fitting was arranged. "I was immediately
put at ease by Mark," she adds. "He was extremely professional, carefully noting each measurement
and particularly what was individual and different about my body. I was not at all embarrassed
because he was not being judgmental."
A toile (mock-up) of the suit is created, in either cheap calico fabric or loosely tacked together from the
chosen fabric. At the second fitting, the client tries on the toile and the tailor makes the final
adjustments before the suit is completed. The entire process takes between four and six weeks.
It is 200 years since Beau Brummel revolutionised the male aesthetic with his deceptively simple look.
A new batch of British tailors are applying this philosophy to women.
With Brummel's revolutionary ideology of dress central to their approach, they are not trying to
reinvent the man's suit but making it a new alternative for women.
Timothy Everest and Powell, two of the most high-profile among them, will be showing their first
women's ready-to-wear collections in London later this month, to complement their
existing bespoke services. Ozwald Boateng, the only British tailor to have shown a men's collection in
Paris in January, is now concentrating onbespoke for women.
Georgina Sinclair, 34, works in public relations for fashion designer Bruce Oldfield, who introduced her
to Everest. She now owns eight suits by him, an overcoat and a velvet pea-coat.
"It's addictive," says Sinclair. "I am 5ft 4in tall and find it impossible to buy suits off-the-peg. With
a bespokesuit, you choose the fabric, you know that it will fit perfectly and when you walk into a room,
nobody else will be wearing the same thing."
At £650 to £700, Sinclair is confident that Everest offers good value for money, adding: "You never
have to worry about what you are going to wear. You simply choose a suit and vary your shirt, a
concept men have been taking advantage of for years." Between 15 and 20 per cent of Everest's
business comes from women and this figure is growing.
Sabina Roth, 29, a freelance editor, had been waiting for the ideal opportunity to employ the skills of
Everest, who has been tailor to her barrister-fiance for four years. "I wanted a tailored structured
wedding dress with no flounces," says Roth, "and I loved the suits Timothy had made for my boyfriend.
Simplicity is very difficult to find in the shops. Timothy immediately grasped what I had in mind, and
could verbalise my ideas." Her dress, a sinewy column of pale, ivory, silk faille, is indeed a symphony
in simplicity.
"Unlike women's dressmakers, men's bespoke tailors think in small details," says Ronnie Cooke
Newhouse, 43, creative director. She is wearing a nutmeg, mohair trouser suit, her fourth from
Timothy Everest this year. "With Timothy, less is more," she says. "If you want a simple silhouette, the
quality and detail must be intrinsic, not merely added on. This is what a man's tailor understands."
Details such as buffalo bone buttons, hand-stitched lining and silk flower loops on the underside of the
collar are standard on Everest's suits. His garments are all hand-canvassed, meaning that the fabric is
separate from the backing, allowing them to move against the body. The buttons are stitched by hand
in silk thread coated with beeswax, which binds the thread and secures the button.
Mark Powell, who recently moved into new premises at 17 Newburgh Street, London W1, is more
a tailoringstylist than a tailor and is renowned for dressing Ronnie Kray, who wore one of his suits as
he was led away from the courtroom to Broadmoor Prison.
Powell wears his celebrity client list brazenly on his bespoke sleeve, citing many high-profile women
among his loyal followers, and most recently Naomi Campbell, who has ordered five suits.
"My husband bought me a Mark Powell, bespoke, three-piece trouser suit in charcoal grey pinstripe
wool, for my 30th birthday," says Chiara Menage, 30, a film producer. "It is beautiful both inside and
out. I love the details and annoy my friends by constantly pointing them out: covered buttons, moss
green silk lining for the body and contrasting lining for the sleeves, concealed waist adjusters and
inside jacket pockets which are normally only found in men's suits.
"I wanted a suit which would last, and although I would not normally spend £700, I felt that Mark was
offering me an investment over time, something which was both durable and timeless."
Powell is not a trained tailor but he does all the fittings, employing his skill as a stylist and aesthete.
Histailoring is undertaken on a commission basis, employing tailors who work predominantly in Savile
Row. "I am very difficult to please," admits Eva Ferran, 32, hand-bag designer, "because I know exactly
what I want. Mark immediately understood what I was looking for."
Ferran's suit combines a long-line, fitted, four-buttoned jacket with hipster, boot-leg trousers, crafted in
fake black pony-skin. It is the embodiment of classic styling with a modern edge.
"Mark has a great knowledge of different historical eras," she says. "He could immediately interpret
what I wanted, suggesting different options for cuffs, pockets, lapels and linings. We decided against
inside pockets, because the jacket is so fitted. The arms are gently fluted, and close with a single
covered button. I am so pleased. My suit is unique."
Sharply angling a pocket, scissoring a trouser leg to a seriously tapered point or gutting the sober
continuity of a pinstripe suit with a blood-red silk lining, are all signature details of Ozwald Boateng's
design. They proved an irresistible attraction for Miel De Botton, 28, a Swiss psychologist living in
Paris, who has just paid £1,000 for a shocking pink suit.
"I think Ozwald is extremely talented. His cut is so pure," says De Botton, "and his use of colour and
fabric is brilliant." Just eight weeks ago, Boateng moved into new premises in Vigo Street, just off
Savile Row. His ambition is to fuse the concepts of design and traditional tailoring, creating what he
calls "bespoke couture".
Kathleen Baird-Murray, deputy beauty editor for Elle magazine, insists that Boateng earns his elevated
price tag - upwards of £900. "You get something from Ozwald which you just cannot buy off the rails,"
says Baird-Murray, who owns three Boateng suits. "I am a size 10 on top and a size 12 on the bottom.
Ready-to-wear suits simply do not cater for such inconsistencies, while traditional dressmakers are
more about ripping a page out of a magazine and attempting to copy it. Ozwald is a hybrid of designer-
cum-tailor, and his advice and input are invaluable."
Her first suit, an adventurous Schiaparelli-pink, single-breasted, one-buttoned affair, seemed risky at
first. "I get much more wear out of it than I first expected," she says. "It is quite loud, but the simplicity
of its silhouette means that I can get away with it."
Boateng favours a body conscious look, stripped of all detail, to achieve a flattering and slender line.
Surfaces of perfect inviolate fabric are riven with strategic darts and seams, forming a long lean
silhouette. However, they only successfully cover you if you have a long and lean body. His philosophy
of tailoring is less about cleverly concealing one's physical shortcomings and more about highlighting
one's strengths. But you do need to have some impressive strengths to begin with.
Chris Eubank has just paid more than £4,000 for a mink-coloured cashmere overcoat designed by
Boateng, adding to a star client list which could out-sparkle the Brit Awards. Kylie Minogue, Tori Amos
and Mick Hucknall are just some of the many pop stars who sing his praises.
Gender reassignment is complete. Belle, formerly Beau, is ready for the boardroom, the bistro and
even the ball. Her principal feature remains understated simplicity, but her secret is definitely out.
* Timothy Everest, 32 Elder Street, Spitalfields, London El 6BT. Tel: 0171-377 5770. Mark Powell, 17
Newburgh Street, Soho, London W1. Tel: 0171-287 5498. Ozwald Boateng, 9 Vigo Street, London W1.
Tel: 0171-734 6868.Copyright Financial Times Limited 1996. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright F.T. Business Enterprises Limited (FTBE) Jul 13, 1996
Word count: 1483
Perfect Fit: to Some Outfits, Nothing Speaks Like 'Bespoke'; Term Once Used for Custom Tailoring Now Suits Many; Crackers, Boxes, BikesOvide, Shira. Wall Street Journal (Online) [New York, N.Y] 04 May 2012: n/a.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
Mark-Evan Blackman, an assistant professor of design at New York's Fashion Institute of Technology,
says thebespoke proliferation may be tied to young Hollywood types becoming enamored with custom
suits about a decade ago. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office lists 39 active applications and
registrations for "bespoke" entities or brand names; more than half have been filed in the past 18
months.\n
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
An SAT tutoring session fitted Tim Levin into the bespoke boom.
Studying vocabulary flashcards with a student, Mr. Levin came across "bespoke," a vaguely familiar
word. "I had heard about it previously in terms of suits and shirts, the English word," Mr. Levin recalled
of the 2005 session at his tutoring business.
He and the student looked it up. It "meant customized in general, made to order," he says. "I thought,
'This is perfect.' " And thus Tim Levin Tutoring was renamed Bespoke Education, joining what Mr. Levin
quickly found was a barrage of bespoke businesses.
Bespoke, once a term narrowly used for made-to-order suits from tailors such as those on London's
Savile Row, has gone into mass production.
In the New York City area, there are two dozen "bespoke" businesses, including Bespoke Barber
Shop,Bespoke Books, Bespoke Surgical and at least one shop simply called "Bespoke."
A company in the U.K. promises "bespoke" cardboard boxes, delivered in two working days. "Bespoke"
salads--ingredients of the diner's choice--are all the rage in London. U.S. executives sprinkle
conversation with talk of "bespoke deals."
Some language purists aren't happy with this co-opting. Neither are London's
original bespoke artisans.
"We don't like it when we have all sorts of so-called bespoke items that don't go anywhere near as far
as we do," says Philip Parker of Henry Poole & Co., a 206-year-old clothing business in London that will
custom sew a pair of pants and a suit jacket for about $5,000.
"As far as we're concerned, the word has gotten bastardized," Mr. Parker says.
Newly bespoke business people say they have sympathy for Savile Row purists--to a point. "I admire
what they do and love that there are people who really put their heart into their craft," says Scott
Summit, founder of San Francisco's Bespoke Innovations, which makes customized covers for artificial
limbs. "But the word is inevitably going to evolve."
When Mr. Summit was working on his first product, a $4,000 limb covering called Bespoke Fairings, the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office told him it considered bespoke a "merely descriptive" adjective--like
calling a strawberry "red"--for which the trademark bar is very high. Mr. Summit says it took many
months' work by lawyers for him to win the trademark.
Mr. Summit also had to fight other bespokers to find a Web address. Bespoke.com belongs
to BespokeSoftware, forcing him to settle for Bespoke Innovations. Another bespoke challenge: "No
Americans know how to pronounce it," Mr. Summit says.
Last month, the Patent and Trademark Office rejected Rachelle Miller's request to
trademark bespoke to refer to her dip brand. But the Colorado resident got a preliminary green light to
trademark Bespoke Crackers. "It's totally frustrating," she says about the split ruling. She plans to
appeal the dip decision.
In a dip denial letter, a PTO attorney wrote that there were too many examples of bespoke used to
"refer to similar types of food products, such as sauces, broths and marinades." A PTO spokesman says
that the agency can't discuss individual trademarks or applications but that it weighs requests on a
case-by-case basis.
The Oxford English Dictionary traces bespoke's origins to the shoemaking trade around the mid-1800s.
Thetailoring industry says the term began to be used to describe the cloth customers picked out in
advance for their suits. The cloth then became "spoken for" or "bespoken."
In the past two centuries, London's elite menswear stores have sprouted along Savile Row, where
shops brag about ties to the royal family, Winston Churchill or other English greats.
It is unclear when and how bespoke broke out of the tailoring mold. Mark-Evan Blackman, an assistant
professor of design at New York's Fashion Institute of Technology, says the bespoke proliferation may
be tied to young Hollywood types becoming enamored with custom suits about a decade ago.
Mr. Blackman says the bespoke boom trailed behind the proliferation of a parallel term from high-end
women's clothing--couture. "Bespoke has slowly started seeping into our consciousness as a term for
our gold standard, as a male equivalent of couture," he says.
He isn't thrilled about how fashion terms have proliferated. "Everything is couture now, even
bedsheets," says Mr. Blackman.
Bespoke business people say that the term is apt for their particular line.
"Like a bespoke tailor, we measure [clients'] risk tolerance, needs and outlook in order to develop a
strategy that fits their unique needs," says Justin Walters, co-founder of Bespoke Investment Group
LLC. "Let's face it, a company name with 'custom' in it would be much more boring."
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office lists 39 active applications and registrations for "bespoke"
entities or brand names; more than half have been filed in the past 18 months.
But the term has also entered the corporate-speak lexicon, along with words like "right sizing" and
"leveraging"--so much so that some executives say they are sick of hearing the word tossed around in
boardrooms.
"Bespoke, the word to use when you want to communicate economic superiority," longtime Silicon
Valley investor Roger McNamee says in an email. He says that when the word started to sprout a few
years ago, he waged a campaign among investors, novelists and entrepreneurs "in the hope of
creating a bespoke-free zone." He says he has given up the crusade, after failing to arrest the
explosion of bespoke use.
Even users of the word look down their noses at some bespoke brethren. Stefan Paszke, one of the
owners ofBespoke Cycles in San Francisco, says some companies tweak an off-the-shelf bicycle frame
and unfairly call it custom. "That's not really a bespoke bike," he says. His shop takes dozens of
measurements of a rider and completes a questionnaire about what kind of riding a customer does to
create a handmade bike from $3,500 to the "sky is the limit," Mr. Paszke says.
Mr. Levin, the SAT tutor, says that "bespoke" legitimately describes what he does. When prospective
clients in New York City puzzled over the name, he showed the dictionary definition--"made to
individual order; custom-made; requested"--printed on his business card.
The trouble now, Mr. Levin says: "Bespoke" is becoming downright ordinary. "Fewer and fewer people
are asking what it means these days," he says.
David Enrich contributed to this article.
Write to Shira Ovide at
Credit: By Shira Ovide
(c) 2012 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Word count: 1048
Made-to-measure garments for ladies - catering for wide ranging stature and length measurements for standard and outsize ladiesJohn Patrick Turner and Terry Bond. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 11. 4 (1999): 216-225.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
Made-to-measure clothing pattern systems have the capability of receiving sets of an individual
person's (customer's) body measurements and from these producing patterns for a chosen garment
which will, whenmade up, fit the customer well. A fully commercial system will also produce pattern
lay-outs (markers) for a given cloth width by means of semi-automatic or automatic algorithms which
are efficient in the use of material, i.e. giving near to minimum wastage. Default formulae for obtaining
measurements should not be seen as an entirely satisfactory way of replacing the actual measured
values, but only as a best guess of the measurements where these have not been measured for the
individual customer. The formulae replace what would otherwise be a complex system of interpolation
and extrapolation of the size chart data within the computer system's database.
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
John Patrick Turner and Terry Bond: The Manchester Metropolitan University, Hollings Faculty,
Fallowfield, Manchester, UK
Introduction to computer systems for made-to-measure patterns
Made-to-measure clothing pattern systems have the capability of receiving sets of an individual
person's (customer's) body measurements and from these producing patterns for a chosen garment
which will, whenmade up, fit the customer well. A fully commercial system will also produce pattern
lay-outs (markers) for a given cloth width by means of semi-automatic or automatic algorithms which
are efficient in the use of material, i.e. giving near to minimum wastage.
The hardware is likely to be PC based (currently one of the Pentium Series) and utilise an A0 or A00
size digitiser for the input of original pattern shapes, and a plotter for the output of markers to paper
for eventual cutting.
The software is based on one of the following methods of MTM pattern production:
(1) The patterns are drafted directly according to the body measurements and a set of drafting rules,
either built into the software coding or entered into a rule database.
(2) The patterns are graded by standard numeric grading and the made-to-measure patterns
subsequently produced by applying further numeric alterations to the nearest graded size. The
alterations are built into an alterations table for each garment type and are applied to points round the
patterns as percentages of the difference between the measurements of the standard size as found in
the related size chart and the equivalent measurements of the customer.
(3) The base patterns (input by digitisation) are graded by algebraic formulae based on proportions of
the body dimensions which together with the standard size chart determine and apply the grading
increments. These algebraic grading formulae are utilised directly (without the need for any alterations
tables) to producemade-to-measure patterns.
The German GRAFIS system uses method (1) pattern drafting - Gerber Garment Technology (GGT),
Investronica, and Assyst commercial grading systems utilise method (2) numeric grading followed by
application of alterations. The MICROFIT system of Garment Micro Systems developed by the author
(Turner, 1994) for themade-to-measure trade uniquely uses method (3) where grading rules and
alterations are combined into algebraic formulae.
All the above methods have the common feature of reference to size charts for either standard size
grading or calculation of the alterations to be applied.
When personal body measurements are input and certain key measurements, required either in the
drafting rules or in the alterations, are missing, default values must be applied which are realistic and
based on other key measures. Ideally the computer system itself should determine these default
values. This paper concerns itself with the derivation of formulae for such computer application.
Default measurements
The obvious method of obtaining girth defaults by computer is to interpolate within the chosen size
chart, according to the control measurement - usually the bust girth in ladies' charts. Thus for a given
bust girth, the default neck girth, for example, could be obtained by looking down the correct vertical
columns between which the bust girth lies and interpolating between the values of neck girth in those
columns.
The method is, however, complicated by the fact that a large number of charts may exist, and the
correct one needs to be chosen. In the well developed and up-to-date German DOB (Ladies'
Outerwear) system, there are nine separate size charts for the normal bust girth range 76-104cm. An
extract from the regular chart for standard height and hips is shown in Table Ia. The nine charts arise
because there are three hip categories (slim, standard and broad) and three height categories (short,
medium and tall). A further nine charts for outsizes with bust girth range 110-146cm complete the
system. In effect, each individual chart requires two-dimensional interpolation but the whole system
requires four-dimensional interpolation in order to achieve the best possible defaults. This is of course
theoretically possible, but would entail entering all these charts onto the computer system database
and working out an interpolation algorithm. There is, however, an alternative. If equations relating
dimensions and measurements can be derived, these can be applied directly to calculate default
values.
It is logical first to separate the girth/width dimensions of a size chart from the length dimensions.
Thus, eight common girth and width dimensions are Bust Girth, Hip Girth, Waist Girth, Back Width,
Shoulder Length, Upper Arm Girth, Wrist Girth and Neck Girth, where the control dimensions are Bust
Girth and to a lesser extent Hip Girth minus Bust Girth difference (Hip Category).
The further seven common length measurements are Stature (Height), Nape to Waist, Front Length,
Arm Length to Cuff, Outside Leg, Inside Leg and Waist to Hips distance, where the primary control
dimension is Stature.
Length measurement defaults
The control dimension for the length measurements is Stature and, while this is not normally
a measurementdirectly utilised in clothing, it is necessary in order to calculate correctly the other
default lengthmeasurements according to the person's height.
The first examples of default formulae developed here for the purpose of this paper
relate to lengthmeasurements and are derived from the German DOB size charts.
Length measurements are not well catered for in these charts. Only three height groups are
categorised, namely 160cm stature (short), 168cm (medium height) and 176cm (tall). While the
majority fall within these three categories and default lengths can be interpolated, many ladies are
shorter than "short" and many taller than "tall" and default lengths must be extrapolated. Formulae
provide a means of covering all statures from extra short to extra tall.
The first stage of analysis of the DOB charts length measurements is to set down
the measurements for each height category at a fixed bust size and thus determine the increment for
each length between stature categories. This is presented in Table Ib. for Normal sizes. The Stature
and Nape to Waist relationship can be easily seen by inspection as L = S/4 (2/8 = /) for Bust 96cm.
However, by further inspection of the size charts it can be seen that the relationship also changes with
Bust girth, the Nape to Waist increasing by 0.2cm per 4cm Bust girth size (in the Bust Girth range from
84-104 cm of Normal sizes). This ratio is therefore 0.2/4 = 0.05 or 1/20.
The full relationship is therefore expressed by the formula L = S/4 + (B - 96)/20.
The exception to this formula is that Nape to Waist remains the same for the first three Bust sizes (76,
80, 86cm) and for these the formula may be expressed as L = S/4 - 0.6. These two formulae hold true
for all Statures and Hip categories within the nine DOB size charts.
In a similar way the increment ratio for Front Length (F) is 1.4/8 = 0.175 and F = S*0.175 + K where K
is a constant.
For S =160 and F = 44.1, 44.1 = 160*0.175 + K and K = 44.1 - 28 = 16.1, so that for 96cm Bust Girth,
F = S*0.175 + 16.1.
Again, the Front Length increases by 0.9cm per Bust Girth increment of 4cm, so that the increment
ratio is 0.9/4 = 0.225 and the full relationship is therefore:
F = S*0.175 + 16.1 + (B - 96)*0.225
Such formulae hold true for any interpolation and are probably reasonably accurate for extrapolated
statures well outside the groups 160, 168 and 176cm, thus catering for much shorter and much taller
women.
The full set of default formulae for Normal Size Bust Girths 76-104 (76-106.9 cm) are shown in Table
Ic..
Notice that the formulae for Outside Leg (O) and Waist to Hip (D) both include a function of the Hip
Girth minus Bust Girth difference (H - B), i.e. they depend on the relative hip size (Hip Categories: Slim,
Standard or Broad).
From the Size Charts:
- Standard Hip-Bust differences range from 5-10cm and no adjustment needs to be made to the
formulae for O and D.
- Slim Hip-Bust differences range from 1-4cm and 1cm is subtracted from Standard O and D.
- Large Hip-Bust differences range from 11-16cm and 1cm is added to Standard O and D.
This addition or subtraction of 1cm or leaving the increment as zero is performed in a formula by the
device of using the INT function whereby a number is rounded down to the nearest integer.
The function INT ((H - B + 1)/6) - 1 ensures that the correct amount 0, -1 or + 1 is included. INT is
found in most computer languages as an arithmetic function.
Outsize sizes
Table II. shows the equivalent formulae for Outsize Bust Sizes 110-146.
Notice that the Outside Leg (O) and Waist to Hips distance (D) have the same formulae as for Normal
Bust Sizes.
The small increments resulting from the Bust girth changes are based around Bust size 110cm
although any Bust size could have been chosen as the base. The recalculated increment ratios depend
on the outsize Bust increment of 6cm compared to the 4cm increment of the Normal Bust Size Charts.
In order to ensure continuity and to include the Bust sizes between the two Size Charts (Normal and
Outsize) of 104-110cm, the range of Bust sizes included in the Normal set of formulae would be
taken to be 76-106.9cm, whereas the Outsize set of formulae would apply to the range 107-146cm.
The eight head theory
This theory divides the body into eight sections along the vertical stature axis. Figure 1 shows
diagrammatically the relationship of the length measurements to stature, according to this theory. It is
interesting to note that these proportions are immediately apparent in the default formulae:
- Nape to Waist (L) is one quarter of Stature (S).
- Outside Leg (O) is five eighths of Stature (S).
- Waist to Hips (D) is one eighth of Stature (S).
The minor variations around these exact proportions are in those extra functions of the Bust size and
Hips-Bust difference.
Practical application of length default formulae on a computer system
Following input of the girth/width measurements, either direct or interpolated, the prompts for the
lengthmeasurements would appear on the computer screen, starting with Stature (Height) S. Normally
the Stature value would be entered in cm and this entry followed by Nape to Waist (L), Front Length (F)
etc. in normal size chart sequence. Where a dimension is not known (not measured) the "Enter" key
would be pressed, and immediately the value would be calculated from the relevant default formula
and entered by the computer system's program.
In an extreme case, the Stature only could be entered and all other vertical measures entered as
defaults in this way.
Supposing, however, the Stature is not known, but at least one of the other vertical measures is
known. By back calculation the stature could be established and all other defaulted values
recalculated. An example of such a back calculation for a Normal Bust (between 84 and 106.9cm)
would be if the Nape to Waist was known, but the Stature not known, the Nape to Waist formula L =
S/4 + (B - 96)/20 could be transposed to S = (L - (B - 96)/20*4 and the Stature calculated. The
remaining defaults would then be available using this value of Stature.
A practical way of implementing these back calculation formulae on a computer system is suggested
as follows: Where the Stature is unknown and all following defaulted dimensions are given a blank
value (by pressing the "Enter" key only) then, after one measurement (i.e. with a numeric value) has
been input and a back calculation for this has been carried out to obtain the Stature, all other
defaulted (unknown) measurementsprevious to that known measurement are calculated using the
default formulae.
The transposed back calculation formulae for Normal Bust Girths (76-106.9cm) are shown in Table III.
The back calculation formulae for the Outsize sizes may be obtained by transposition in the same way.
Girth default measurements
Where the control girth measurements of Bust and Hip are known (i.e. have been input for the
individual) it is possible to derive the other girth and width default formulae in a similar way to those
for lengthmeasurements.
This has been done for the DOB charts and the results shown in Table IVa. for.for Normal bust sizes
and Table V. for Outsize sizes.
It can be seen that for the common measurements shown in the Tables only the waist girth and upper
arm girth measurements differ for slim and broad hips by comparison with standard hips. The other
four girths are exactly the same irrespective of the Bust-Hip category. Back calculation formulae are
not necessary for the girthmeasurements as it would be a requirement that at least the
control measurements of Bust and Hip would be taken on the customer to obtain a reasonable fit.
Conclusion
Default formulae for obtaining measurements should not be seen as an entirely satisfactory way of
replacing the actual measured values, but only as a best guess of the measurements where these
have not been measured for the individual customer. The formulae replace what would otherwise be a
complex system of interpolation and extrapolation of the size chart data within the computer system's
database.
The formulae are derived for a given set of size charts and are only applicable to that set. The DOB
German System of charts has been chosen as the example here because it is the most comprehensive
national system and is also the basis for European Standards. For any other logical system of size
charts, it should be possibleto derive the equivalent default formulae using the same method of
analysis.
Default formulae and the back calculation formulae in conjunction with the DOB size charts have been
implemented satisfactorily as subroutines on the MICROFIT made-to-measure system from Garment
Micro Systems. The default formulae are further utilised on the MICROFIT system to determine the
range of validity of measurements entered for a female individual customer, whereby any value
entered outside this range is rejected.
References
1. DOB-Grossentabellen Deutschland (1994), DOB-Verband, Koln.
2. Turner, J.P. (1994), "Development of a commercial made-to-measure garment pattern system",
International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 28-33
Illustration
Caption: Table Ia.; Extract from German DOB size chart - regular sizes, standard height and hips; Table
Ib.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), length defaults for regular sizes, comparison
of measurements for the different statures, for bust size 96; Table Ic.; DOB size charts (Germany,
1994), default formulae to obtain length measurements for given stature, S cm bust girth range 76-
106.9cm; Table II.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), default formulae to obtain
length measurements for given stature, S cm. Bust girth range (outsize) 107-146cm; Figure 1.; Eight
head theory; Table III.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), back calculation formulae for bust range 76-
106.9cm to obtain stature, S cm from other body measurements; Table IVa.; DOB size charts
(Germany 1994), girth and width defaults for regular sizes. Comparison of measurements for the
different hip categories. For bust size 96cm; Table IVb.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), girth and
width default formulae. Regular sizes, bust girth 76-106.9cm; Table Va.; DOB size charts (Germany
1994), girth and width defaults for outsizes. Comparison of measurements for the different hip
categories. For bust size 110cm; Table Vb.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), girth and width default
formulae. Outsize sizes, bust girth 107-146cm
Tailor-made with the right image: FT GUIDE TO VIRTUAL CLOTHING: Clive Cookson explains how body scanners should soon have the ability to take the pain out of clothes buying: [USA edition]Cookson, Clive. Financial Times [London (UK)] 10 Dec 1998: 25.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Isn't clothes shopping a nightmare? When I try on things that are supposed to be the right size for me,
they usually turn out to be either embarrassingly tight or too baggy. And buying clothes by mail order
is just as bad.
Don't worry - new technology will soon make life easier. Body scanners are becoming cheap, fast and
reliable enough for the retail and clothing industries to consider installing them to measure customers
electronically.
Once your 3D image has been recorded, you'll be able to use it in various ways. You could match
it to the shop's range of ready-made clothes before trying anything on. You could use it on your home
computer to buy clothes on the internet. Or you could order an outfit to be made specially to fit your
3D image - a high-tech version of custom tailoring. It sounds wonderful. Can you book me in for a
scan?
Not yet. Consumer scanning systems are still mainly experimental. So far most work has been done on
"electronic tailoring" of custom clothing. For example, the French navy has used a system produced by
Telmat of France to scan 70,000 sailors and produce uniforms. Hamamatsu Photonics of Japan has
installed about 40 scanners in Asia for modelling and designing up-market women's underwear.
The UK is taking a more comprehensive approach. A university-industry consortium with 20 members,
including retailers, electronics and clothing companies, has launched a £3.4m research project in 3D
Electronic Shopping, under the government's Foresight Link programme. It plans to use body scanners
for virtual shopping and custom-made clothing - and to carry out a national sizing survey. A sizing
survey? Surely the main clothingmanufacturers and retailers already know the range of their
customers' sizes and shapes?
Not well enough. Although companies do occasionally measure up a supposedly representative sample
of customers, there has not been a comprehensive national survey since 1951. Anecdotal evidence,
like your own shopping experience, suggests there is a mismatch between
customers' measurements and the range of clothes on sale.
The new survey will involve scanning a sample of 30,000 men, women and children.
Rosy Coveney, who represents Next on the project, says the results will help all ready-made
clothingmanufacturers. "We know we're different to fashion drawings but it's all a bit hit-and-miss
today," she says. "It will be great to have some accurate factual evidence." What does the scanning
itself involve?
It's quick and painless! You strip down to your underwear, step into the scanning booth and stand on
the designated footmarks. Then the machine scans you with low-power beams of infrared light
that measure100,000 points on your body.
After a few seconds you step out and put your clothes back on. Meanwhile, the computer is extracting
a high-resolution image, which can be fitted with "virtual clothes" and animated on screen, so that you
can see how the fabric changes shape as you move. Who is actually going to store the computer data
about my bodyshape? I'm sensitive about my bulges and I don't want anyone else looking at them.
Important details, such as networking standards, have not yet been worked out. But Roger Till of e-
centre UK, who will manage the virtual clothes shopping part of the Foresight Link project, says privacy
and confidentiality will be built into the system. As he points out, people vary enormously about how
sensitive they are. Some don't care who knows their dimensions; others, particularly women, are
almost paranoid.
You'll be able to hold your own data on a home computer or even on a high-capacity smart
card to take shopping with you. Or the data could be stored centrally by a retailing or mail order
company.
Unless you change shape unusually quickly, each scan should last for at least a year. You've made me
even more enthusiastic. How long will I need to wait?
Philip Treleaven, the project leader at University College, London, hopes the project will make quick
progress, with demonstration scanners, shop kiosks, internet and interactive television services ready
within 18 months.
"This technology is going to be huge worldwide, and the UK companies could gain an international
advantage if they move quickly," he says.
But it remains to be seen how quickly the retailing and clothing industries, which are traditionally
secretive and reluctant to share information, will move.
Nick Rawlings of Freemans, the mail order group, says: "This could be huge in the future but until now
everything has been done behind the scenes. We don't want to talk about it until things are a bit more
worked out."
If it really takes off, body scanning could have an enormous impact on electronic commerce
beyond clothing.
For example, you could see virtual images of your own body sitting on sofas or walking around houses
for sale on the web. Copyright Financial Times Limited 1998. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright F.T. Business Enterprises Limited (FTBE) Dec 10, 1998
Made-to-measure pattern development based on 3D whole body scansHein Daanen ; Sung-Ae, Hong. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 20. 1 (2008): 15-25.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
New techniques are required to link 3D whole body scans to manufacturing techniques to allow for the
mass-customization of clothes. This study aims to compare two methods of producing skirts based on
3D whole body scans. Three females participated in the study. They were scanned with an accurate 3D
whole body scanner. A set of relevant 1D measures was automatically derived from the 3D scan.
The measures were incorporated in a skirt pattern and the skirt was made from jeans material. The
second method was based on triangulation of the scanned waist-to-hip part. The points in the 3D scan
were first converted to triangles and these triangles were thereafter merged with neighboring triangles
of similar orientation until about 40 triangles remained. These triangles were sewn together to form a
"patchwork"-skirt. All females performed fit tests afterwards. The fit of the 3D-generated patchwork
skirt was much better than the fit of the skirt generated by the 1D scan-derived measures. In the latter
case, two of the three skirts were too wide because the scan-derived hip circumference exceeded the
manually derived values. For the 3D generated skirt, it was necessary to enlarge the triangles with a
factor of 1.025 to achieve optimal fit. As far as is known, this is the first study that reports a direct
conversion of a 3D scan to clothing without interference of clothing patterns. The study shows that it is
possible to generate a fitting patchwork skirt based on 3D scans; the intermediate step of using
1Dmeasures derived from 3D scans is shown to be error-prone.
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Introduction
Generally, clothing is selected in retail shops, where the customer is challenged to find garments that
match his or her personal preference and at the same time fit to the body. The latter is not an easy job
when the large variation in body shape between subjects is taken into account. Therefore, an
increasing effort is put into manufacturing made-to-measure (MTM) clothing, where the individual is no
longer at the end of the clothingchain, but instead forms the start of it. Body dimensions and preferred
textiles and colors are matched in individual patterns, which are consecutively cut by single layer
cutters and sewn together. This technique was recently used successfully for a complicated stage
costume and men's suit ([4] Choi et al. , 2005; [5] Choi and Hong, 2005; [9] Hong and Daanen, 2004).
In the last decade, new tools became available to determine the body dimensions fast and reliably: 3D
whole body scanners ([6] Daanen and van de Water, 1998). However, in most cases 1D measures like
chest and waist circumference are derived from the 3D scans and the 3D information is not used. In
this pilot study, we describe a method to make a more direct link between 3D body shape
and clothing form for a female skirt. We compare the results to the method using 1D dimensions
derived from 3D scans. The purpose of this research was to provide the best fit of a MTM skirt for each
different shape of individual consumer from 3D scanned data. The hip part was selected of a 3D scan,
since it is the most important part for designing pants and skirts. For the evaluation, we use virtual
fitting (mapping the skirt over the 3D scan) and real fitting (the subjects tries the skirt) and
combinations between the two.
Methods
Subjects
Three female subjects participated in the study. They were 40, 26 and 27 years old and weighed 61,
72 and 63 kg, respectively. Two skilled anthropometrists performed the
anthropometric measurements.
3D scanner and processing software
The Vitronic Viro 3D Pro 3D whole body scanner was used to scan the subjects. The system has 16
depth cameras and four color cameras. The images of the 16 depth cameras were aligned and merged
using Polyworks (www.innovmetric.com). The resulting scan was stored in the binary pol format.
Protocol
The subjects came to the anthropometric research lab twice.
In the first session, the body dimensions were measured and they were scanned seminude. They were
dressed in their underwear with a top and bicycle short over it. These garments were made in such a
way that they followed the shape of the body as natural as possible without compressing the skin
due to elastic bands. The subjects indicated their preferred skirt length and were informed about the
procedures. They were not paid and did not have to pay for the skirts.
After the first session two skirts were made for each subject. The first skirt was made based on the 3D
scan (3D skirt), the second skirt was based on 1D scan derived body dimensions (1D skirt).
In the second session, the subjects were scanned three times to evaluate the fit: seminude, seminude
with 3D skirt and seminude with 1D skirt.
Alignment and visualization of the scans was performed using Integrate ([1] Burnsides et al. , 1996).
3D skirt
The 3D skirt was based on the human body shape at hip level. The parts of the 3D scan above the
waist and below the hip were removed. The points in this "band" over the body were triangulated.
Using the imcompress module of Polyworks (www.innovmetric.com), the number of triangles was
reduced stepwise. It appeared that the reduction factor of 5 percent resulted in the minimum amount
of triangles in which the shape of the hip was still clearly visible (Figure 1 [Figure omitted. See Article
Image.]). This reduction corresponded to about 40 triangles. The method essentially combines
neighboring triangles when their surface normal vectors are pointing in the same direction (as set by a
certain tolerance). This results in a few large triangles for relatively flat surfaces and many small
triangles for curvy surfaces.
The triangles were projected on a flat plane perpendicular to the surface normal. One corner was
moved tothe (0,0) coordinate and the triangle was rotated around (0,0) so that the second coordinate
was on the x -axis (x 1,0). The third coordinate was (x 2, y 2). All coordinates were multiplied by a
factor 1.025 in order to be sure that the skirt would fit over the body.
The triangles were printed on paper, transferred to the textile material and then sewn together without
overlap. The band was cut at the back and a zipper was inserted to enable donning of the skirt. The
zipper was inserted in such a way that the textile on the left and the right side of the zipper would
have touched if the zipper was absent.
1D skirt
The 3D scan was processed using the TC2 body measurement system (www.tc2.com). The 1D
dimensions hip circumference and waist circumference were derived from the 3D scan and these were
used as input for the pattern design. The length of the skirt was determined by the preference of the
subjects.
Textile and patterns
The skirt was made of jeans textile. The physical properties of the textile are provided in Table I
[Figure omitted. See Article Image.].
The patterns for the skirts were custom made by using Investronica CAD system and converted to DXF
format. The skirt consisted of a front and back part with four darts for each part at the upper side of
the skirt. NARCIS (D&M Technology Co., Ltd) was used for 3D virtual sewing and try-on to test the fit of
variable skirts by investigating strain, ease amount, and relative pressure.
Results
Figure 2 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows a frontal view of 3D scans seminude, with the 1D
skirt and 3D skirt. White paint was attached over the skirts to make them visible for the lasers of the
3D scanner.
3D skirt
The 3D skirts generated by the triangulation process all had a similar shape for the subjects. A total of
37 triangles were generated for Subject 1, 41 for Subject 2 and 38 for Subject 3. The protruding point
of the buttocks was the connection point of several triangles, thus enabling the accommodation of the
buttocks (Figure 3 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]).
The subjects indicated that the skirts fitted tight to their bodies. The enlargement factor of 1.025 was
good with the zipper included (Figure 4 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). Figure 5 [Figure omitted.
See Article Image.] shows the enlargement.
The 3D scans were superimposed to investigate the fit of the skirts. Figure 6 [Figure omitted. See
Article Image.] shows the results. The 1D skirt has a much looser fit than the 3D skirt "band."
1D skirt
Skilled anthropometrists measured the subjects and their relevant body dimensions were derived
using the TC2 body measurement system. Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows the
relevant measures.
The waist circumference was considerably larger (75 mm) using the TC2 system as
compared to manualmeasures, in particular for Subjects 2 and 3. This is probably related to the
observation that the location of the waist circumference measurement was considerably lower (75
mm) for the TC2 system. Hip circumference as derived from the scan was used in the skirt design.
Subjects 2 and 3 considered the 1D skirts too loose. These two subjects had an underestimation of the
hip circumference using the TC2 software.
Comparison of 3D-1D skirt
The surface area of the 1D skirt and 3D skirt were both about 0.2 m2 (Table III [Figure omitted. See
Article Image.]). Figure 7 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows the superimposed image of the 3D
and 1D skirt for a typical subject.
MTM skirt patterns and 3D virtual fit
Depending upon the design preference (skirt length, etc.) and variable shapes of each subject, MTM
skirt patterns were developed and shown in Figure 8 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]. These skirts
were virtually sewn together and tried on to test the fit. The distribution of strain, ease amount, and
relative pressure were shown in Figure 9 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] for the objective
evaluation of the fit.
Discussion
3D skirt
The basic idea of the 3D skirt was to convert 3D information of the body shape directly to a pattern of
a skirt over the hips. The shape of the computer-generated skirt perfectly fits the body, but a scale
factor has to be included in order for the skirt not to be too tight. The scale factor of 1.025
appeared to be correct in this case. The optimal scale factor is expected to be dependent on the
material that is used.
It is well recognized that the described technique in this study is limited to clothing that follows the
body shape. However, since clothing increasingly becomes the platform for sensors to the human
body, for instanceto monitor the vital capacity of soldiers, it can be foreseen that tight
fitting clothing becomes increasingly important for functional clothing. For other clothing, like shirts,
[13] Sul and Kang (2006) recently described a nice draping method to interface the clothing pattern
with a 3D scan to optimize fit.
Putting the triangles together manually is a tedious job. However, since the dimensions of the triangles
are known, computer sewing may be an option. Moreover, recent techniques became
available to reorganize the triangles in clothing patterns ([11] Kim and Kang, 2003).
1D skirt
Increasingly, 3D body scans are used to derive 1D dimensions from 3D scans ([2] Chan et al. , 2004).
In a comparison of two main software packages to perform this process, [8] Hin and Krul (2005) noted
that considerable differences existed between the data of skilled measurers and the software results.
Also, in the study described here, large deviations occurred between manual and scan
derived measures (Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). [7] Daanen (1998) observed that
circumferences could be derived accurately when humans directly interact with a 3D scan. [10] ISO
20685 (2005) is a standard in preparation that defines the acceptation limits for scan derived body
dimensions as compared to manual measures by skilled anthropometrists. The difference between
scan derived and manual measures is dependent on the computer routine that is used. Also, the
absence of skin compression and the inability to palpate the body prior to measuring has an impact. In
the current experiment, the resulting errors caused the patterns to be far from optimal. Recently, [3]
Cho et al. (2005) proposed to convert a 3D whole body scan to an interactive body model suitable for
pattern making. Although, this method is not automated, it may be effective in reducing errors in
deriving 1D dimensions from 3D scans.
Conclusions
In conclusion, the 3D scan generated skirt showed a tight fit. The enlargement factor should be more
than 1.025. In line with previous observations, automatic 1D derived measures from 3D scans may
deviate considerably from measures of skilled anthropometrists and thus cause bad fit.
This research was financially supported by Hansung Universityin the year 2007. The authors
acknowledge: Koen Tan for processing the whole body scans; Mariëlle Weghorst for manufacturing the
skirts; Aard Daanen for the mathematics behind triangulation; and David Bruner for the information
supplied about the TC2 software.
References
1. Burnsides, D.B., Files, P.M. and Whitestone, J.J. (1996), "Integrate 1.25: a prototype for evaluating
three-dimensional visualization, analysis, and manipulation functionality", AL/CF-TR-1996-0095, Air
Force Material Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH.
2. Chan, A.P., Fan, J. and Yu, W.M. (2004), "Prediction of men's shirt pattern based on 3D
bodymeasurements", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 100-8.
3. Cho, Y., Okada, N., Park, H., Takatera, M., Inui, S. and Shimizu, Y. (2005), "An interactive body model
for individual pattern making", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 91-9.
4. Choi, J.H., Hong, S.A. and Kim, S.A. (2005), "3D sewing and virtual fit of stage costume", paper
presented at Seoul International Clothing and Textiles Conference, Seoul.
5. Choi, J.H. and Hong, S.A. (2005), "Pattern development of stage costume for dynamic movement",
paper presented at Seoul International Clothing and Textiles Conference, Seoul.
6. Daanen, H.A.M. and van de Water, G.J. (1998), "Whole body scanners", Displays, Vol. 19, pp. 111-20.
7. Daanen, H.A.M. (1998), "Circumference estimation using whole body scanners and shadow
scanners", Proceedings of the Workshop on 3D Anthropometry and Industrial Products Design, Paris,
June 25-26, pp. 5-1 - 5-6.
8. Hin, A.J.S. and Krul, A.J. (2005), "Performance of human solutions body dimensions software", Report
2005-A9. TNO Human Factors, Soesterberg.
9. Hong, S.A. and Daanen, H.A.M. (2004), "3D scan related research in TNO and its application for
apparel industry", Fashion Information and Technology, Vol. 1, pp. 72-80.
10. ISO 20685 (2005), 3-D Scanning Methodologies for Internationally Compatible Anthropometric
Databases, ISO, Geneva.
11. Kim, S.M. and Kang, T.J. (2003), "Garment pattern generation from body scan data", Computer-
Aided Design, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 611-8.
13. Sul, I.H. and Kang, T.J. (2006), "Interactive garment pattern design using virtual scissoring
method", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 31-42.
Further Reading
1. Robinette, K.M., Blackwell, S., Daanen, H.A.M., Fleming, S., Boehmer, M., Brill, T., Hoeferlin, D. and
Burnsides, D. (2002), "Civilian American and European surface anthropoometry resource (CAESAR)",
Final Report, Volume I: Summary, AFRL-HE-WP-TR-2002-0169, United States Air Force Research
Laboratory, Human Effectiveness Directorate, Crew System Interface Division, 2255 H Street, Wright-
Patterson AFB OH 45433-7022 and SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Dr, Warrendale, PA 15096.
Appendix
Corresponding author
Hein Daanen can be contacted at: [email protected]
AuthorAffiliation
Hein Daanen, TNO Defence, Security and Safety, Business Unit Human Factors, Department of Human
Performance, Soesterberg, The Netherlands Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit
Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Sung-Ae Hong, Apparel Fashion Business, Hansung University, Seoul, South Korea
Illustration
Figure 1: Gouraud shaded triangles resulting from the reduction process of the 3D scanned data
Figure 2: Frontal view of the scans of subject three seminude (left) and with the 1D skirt (middle) and
3D skirt (right)
Figure 3: Back view of the 3D skirt over the 3D scan of a typical subject (Subject 3)
Figure 4: Back view of the 3D skirt worn by Subject 3
Figure 5: Top view of the computer generated skirt of Subject 3 with (brown) and without (green)
enlargement
Figure 6: Transsections of the aligned scans of subject three seminude (brown), 1D skirt (blue) and 3D
skirt (green); (a) at the upper leg level; (b) just below the crotch; (c) at the hip level
Figure 7: Upper part: the triangulated skirt unfolded. Middle part: superimposed images of the
triangles (red dotted) and 1D skirt (blue lines) seen from the back (left) and front (right). Lower part:
separated hip block patterns of skirts
Figure 8: CAD patterns of MTM skirts for three different subjects seen from the back (left) and front
(right) in each set of patterns
Figure 9: Virtual try-on images of front and back indicating strain (top), ease amount in mm (middle)
and relative pressure of skirts (bottom)
Table I: Physical properties of textiles
Table II: Manual measures and 1D measures derived from the whole body scans
Table III: Surface area of the hip and skirts
Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2008
Development of a commercial made-to-measure garment pattern systemTurner, J P. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 6. 4 (1994): 28.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
A PC-based CAD system for producing made-to-measure garment patterns is described that has been
developed and implemented in the commercial environment of a bridalwear manufacturer. The
software simulates the hand drafting methods of the company while automating pattern production
with the following benefits: 1. very rapid production of made-to-measure patterns, 2. production of
patterns which require minimal alteration at first fitting, 3. a user-friendly interface with a very short
training period, 4. the de-skilling of the pattern cutting procedure so that problems of staff turnover
and training are minimal, and 5. the elimination of human error in pattern cutting. Initial software
development concentrated on bodice patterns. Further enhancements included sleeves and skirts and
the mixing and matching of these 3 components of a dress. Cutting layouts were produced using
automatic layout algorithms so that the whole procedure from order and measurements entry through
pattern drafting and lay-planning to the final full-scale plotting could be carried out automatically.
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Received 24 July 1993 Accepted 12 April 1994
INTRODUCTION
This paper describes the stages of development and implementation of a PC-based CAD system for
producingMade-to-Measure (MTM) garment patterns in the commercial environment of a bridalwear
manufacturer.
The system, which was aptly named MICROFIT, was based on standard PC technology and existing
pattern grading software whose source code was available with the following advantages:
(1) The hardware with its MS-DOS operating system was readily available and inexpensive, with the
prospect of becoming increasingly cheap and powerful into the foreseeable future.
(2) Some existing PC-based software routines used for pattern grading could be utilized.
(3) None of the programming restrictions imposed by a standard CAD package would impede
development.
(4) The majority of companies and colleges worldwide already have PCs installed and would be
able to utilize the software if they so wished.
The project of one year's duration was supported by a Royal Society/SERC Industrial Fellowship and the
host company was Creation Bridalwear of Wigan.
OBJECTIVES
The main objectives of the research project were:
(1) Development of a microcomputer-based system for automatic construction and plotting of "made-
to-measure" ladies' garment patterns.
(2) Implementation of the developed system, including comprehensive trials and utilization in the
commercial environment of the host company, in particular for bridalwear, the product of this
company.
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS
Within the environment of the host bridalwear company, namely Creation of Wigan, all aspects
ofmade-to-measure pattern design and construction, size charts used, and the methods
used to takemeasurements for order form entry and to cut patterns to fit a customer were observed
and noted. This was necessary in order to understand how to simulate the hand methods used and
implement them in a computerized system.
The methods used by the company, although tried and proven, showed shortcomings in the pattern
cutting area. In particular, patterns were cut on the large side on the principle that cut patterns can be
reduced (taken in) after the first fitting, but that it is not possible to add on material already cut off.
Erring on the small side entails wasteful and costly recutting of expensive cloth. Additionally, the
occasional human error occurred and this was more likely with new staff who had no(: completed their
training. The time taken to draft and cut a set of individual made-to measure patterns could take
up to two hours. The time and cost to train a new pattern cutter was considerable. A six-month period,
with the constant attention of the proprietor or another experienced cutter, was required for a new
employee.
Bearing in mind all the above points, the objectives of implementation of a computerized system were
therefore expanded as follows:
(1) to produce patterns which would need minimal or no alterations at first fitting of the customer;
(2) to produce patterns extremely rapidly, thus increasing the capacity of pattern cutting massively;
(3) to produce a user interface which was friendly and foolproof, with a very short training period (of
the order of days rather than weeks or months);
(4) to deskill the pattern cutting area completely so that problems of staff turnover became minimal;
(5) to eliminate human error in pattern production.
The benefits to the company of a computer system which fulfilled the above objectives would
immediately be obvious in terms of pattern accuracy, productive capacity, human resources and
training and direct costs of labour and material.
SYSTEM HARDWARE
The MICROFIT hardware used in the project comprised:
IBM compatible PC COMPAQ 386 16MHz processor with 40 Mbyte hard disc, dual 5.25" floppy drives
and EGA colour monitor. (This computer was available for use at the outset of the project and was
adequate for the development work.)
* Hewlett Packard Thinkjet Inkjet printer for file listings.
* Hewlett Packard HP7475A A3 size plotter for miniature reference markers.
* Calcomp 1044 AO size plotter for full-scale patterns and markers.
* GTCO 60" x 40" digitizer for base pattern input.
A current MICROFIT System would utilize a 486 PC with 100 Mbyte hard disk, 3.5" microdisk drive and
SVGA monitor.
SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT
Bodice patterns chosen for initial experimentation were of a style which accounted for more than 50
per cent of the company's customer orders.
The computer program logic developed was one that closely mirrored the hand drafting and fitting
methods of the company's pattern cutters. It was, therefore, amenable to modification
according to advice from the staff as and when required. Briefly the method adopted is as follows.
A base size set of patterns is input through the digitizing board. This pattern set is graded
according to the company's size chart which has also been entered into the computer system. These
together form the base information for the pattern style.
Production of a set of patterns takes place following input through the keyboard of the individual
customer'smeasurements directly from an order form. Rules are built into the system so that either a
set of drafting rules are followed or drafting adjustments to the fitting are applied automatically to the
base graded patterns. The MTM patterns are displayed on the computer screen and subsequently
plotted out onto paper using a suitable layout. The COMPAQ computer was able to draft a set of made-
to-measure bodice patterns and form a layout in about 40 seconds. (A modern PC with 486 processor
would be able to reduce this to about ten seconds.) An order queuing logic allows many orders to be
processed in succession without operative interference. The whole process of measurement entry,
pattern processing and pattern plotting averages about six minutes per customer order giving the
system the capability of producing about 300 customermade-to-measure pattern sets in a 30-hour
week. Off-line customer order entry and plotting could, of course, increase this capacity many times.
THE PRINCIPAL OF MADE-TO-MEASURE DRAFTING UTILIZED
Computerized made-to-measure pattern drafting has been described by Turner[1]. who has outlined
the methods used by Burtons (The Centaur Clothes Group) at Goole and Hepworths (whose system
was subsequently moved to Complan Computer Bureau) for the production of men's suits. He also
developed computer programs for the drafting of ladies' tailored jackets and skirts and men's suits
using traditional tailor's code methods. Similar programs which follow the instructions defined by
Aldrich[2] for the generation of pattern blocks are described by Jo and Harlock[3,4] in their work on the
development of an educational garment design system.
Made-to-measure pattern production may be carried out by either of two methods, namely:
(1) Making alterations to standard graded sizes of the garment as in Gerber (used by Centaur Clothes)
or Camsco (used by Complan).
(2) Drafting a block or styled pattern to measure by programmed instructions.
The MICROFIT method chosen for the production of bridalwear patterns combines the strengths of both
of these methods by using drafting rules (instead of grade rules) which in combination with a size chart
can produce all the standard sizes automatically and can equally produce any one-off made-to-
measure garmentto a set of personal measurements.
The versatility of the alteration method is retained whereby the base shapes for a style may be
entered by digitization, while the drafting instructions laid down in drafting rule tables modify the base
shapes in girth and length according to the input measurements. The rules applied at each point on
the pattern pieces are functions of the measurements rather than the numerical values as used in
grading. Table I shows a bridalwear size chart which spans the sizes 8 to 20. (Table I omitted) Notice
that the measurements are all in imperial inches, indicated by an I entered under the column headed
"U" (units). An M in this column would indicate metric centimetres. Inch units are still commonly used
in the UK made-to measure business.
Notice also that under column "a", the abbreviated single letter names B, W, H, C etc. represent the
incremental values of BUST, WAIST, HIPS, CROSS CHEST etc. These abbreviated single letter names
are used in the drafting rule tables.
Tables II and III show two examples of an individual person's measurements as taken in the bridalwear
shop and entered on to an order form. (Tables II and III omitted) The base size 14 measurements are
also shown so that the incremental difference can be calculated and shown in the last column of each
table.
Table IV shows a drafting rule table. (Table IV omitted) Notice that all the rules, both for length x and
girth y, are functions of length or girth measurements, or alternatively zero (0) indicating no
movement.
The pattern in Figure 1 is an example from a bridal dress bodice and the rule number applied at each
cardinal point is one of the drafting rules in Table IV. (Figure 1 omitted) For example, Rule 2 is Deltax =
0, Deltay = C/2. This means that the point moves by half the incremental value of the cross
chest measurement in the girth direction (vertically), but does not move in the length direction.
For the personal measurement set of Table II, C = -0.5" and C/2 = -0.25", and the points redrafted by
rule 2 move one quarter of an inch vertically downwards due to the narrower cross chest.
Similarly, Rule 3 is Deltax = D, Deltay = B/8. From Table II, D = -0.5" and B = 1", B/8 = O.125".
Thus the bust depth is half an inch less than on the standard size and the point is moved 1/2" to the
left, while moving also 1/8" vertically upwards. Rules 4, 6 and 14 are interpreted using the same
method. The new draft through these points for this individual customer's measurements is seen
superimposed over the size 14 in Figure 2 where it can be seen that there is not a great difference
between the new pattern and the original 14. (Figure 2 omitted) These changes, however, make a
significant difference to the fit of the eventual garment on the customer.
In the case of the pattern produced from the personal measurements in Table III, Figure 3 shows very
great differences between the new pattern and the base size. (Figure 3 omitted) In particular, the girth
of bust and hips is large (between sizes 18 and 20 on the size chart), whereas the waist girth is
relatively very small (between sizes 10 and 12 on the size chart). The waist suppression on the side
panel is particularly severe. A good fit would be impossible from a standard size garment.
RESULTS OF INITIAL DEVELOPMENT PHASE
During this phase nearly 100 orders of the most common style were processed by the system. The
results showed that all the objectives of computerization were achievable: patterns fit the customer
more closely; the sewing machinists can allow smaller seam allowances; the pattern cutter's role of
pattern drafting has been almost eliminated and the skilled designer/pattern cutter employed by the
company can now concentrate on creative designing. The computer programs are menu driven and
extremely user friendly -- a new operative would easily learn to perform the task of order processing
within a two-hour training session.
SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS
The system was enhanced to cover the full range of bodice patterns and all the sleeves and skirts
produced by the company. The software allows bodices, sleeves and skirts to be mixed and matched
so that the pattern pieces of the chosen styles in each may be brought together and formed into a lay-
plan. Automatically formed lay-plans ready for cutting are produced on the system by programming
the order of pattern insertion and manipulation. This saves the time of an operative moving the
pattern pieces on screen interactively until an efficient layout is formed. It also allows uninterrupted
automatic processing of a queue of orders.
THE NEED FOR A DISCIPLINED APPROACH
The MICROFIT computer system, while having the capability of producing very accurate patterns which
fit well at first fitting, imposes responsibilities and disciplines on the company in order to achieve this.
The base size pattern set of each must reflect exactly the base size measurements in the size chart.
Themeasurements taken of individual customers must be carried out in a consistent way. This
necessarily means that if more than one employee has this responsibility, they should all be
trained to use exactly the same repeatable measuring method.
The size chart itself must have correct measurements throughout the whole size range. This is
important for the production of standard sizes, if these are required, because the software produces
these directly from the size chart measurements, rather than by grading. One of the strengths of such
a system is that it can produce standard sizes from any size chart, whether this be a company or
national chart, and in either inches or centimetres.
The setting-up of a completely new style on the computer does require a skilled pattern technician.
This, of course, only happens each season when new styles are introduced to the company's range. In
the case of bridalwear the pattern range is very traditional and stable.
SUMMARY
The PC-based system MICROFIT has been developed and implemented in a bridalwear company in
order toautomate the production of made-to-measure brides' and bridesmaids' dress patterns.
The system addresses well the needs of the company in that the patterns produced are accurate, the
day-to-day skills of pattern production are eliminated, the system itself is relatively easy to operate
and the potential production from even a slow PC is more than sufficient for the company's pattern
output requirements.
The company has now purchased its own hardware and is operating the system with all the benefits
envisaged in the original objectives.
CONCLUSION
While made-to-measure software is available on Gerber, Lectra and other commercial CAD/CAM
garment systems, these are more costly and more complex to operate than the PC-based MICROFIT
system developed during this Industrial Fellowship. The MICROFIT system combines customer order
entry and measurementvalidation, with pattern processing, lay-planning and plotting all on the same
PC, thus providing an inexpensive and compact solution for the small and medium-sized company. The
versatility of MICROFIT makes it a suitable basic system for other made-to-measure garments such as
ladies' jackets, skirts and trousers, men's suits and specialized wear such as wet and dry suits for
divers. For college use, MICROFIT can be added tostandard PC based grading systems in
order to familiarize staff and students with made-to-measuretechniques.
REFERENCES
1. Turner, J., A Computerised Technique for the Production of Clothing Patterns, PhD Thesis, UMIST,
1986.
2. Aldrich, W., Metric Pattern Cutting, Bell and Hyman Ltd, London, 1985.
3. Jo, J.S. and Harlock, S.C., "Developing an Educational CAD System for Garment Design",
International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 1, 1990, pp 16-20.
4. Jo, J.S. and Harlock, S.C., "Developing an Educational CAD System for Garment Design",
International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 2, 1990, pp 23-30.
Copyright MCB University Press Limited 1994
Word count: 2469
Fit evaluation within the made-to-measure processChin-Man, Chen. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 19. 2 (2007): 131-144.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
Purpose - The purpose of this study is to evaluate fit of the basic garments made for Taiwanese female
students with various figure characteristics. The basic garments are produced according to patterns
derived from the PDS 2000 and APDS-3D systems. Design/methodology/approach - This study
recruited ten Taiwanese female subjects who represented various figure characteristics. After scanning
each subject, the body measurements with additional functional ease were manually entered into the
APDS-3D system accompanied with the PDS 2000 system to generate the block patterns. These
patterns were used to make basic garments worn on the subjects for fit evaluations. T -test and one-
way ANOVA were employed to investigate if any statistically significant differences between figure
characteristics of subjects exist. Findings - After statistical analysis, results showed that the
percentage of tolerance allowed by the system in preventing incorrect measurements has to be
revised and more measurements have to be included into the APDS-3D system. Furthermore, female
students who exhibit multiple figure variations complicate fitting problems. For example, sloped-
shoulder subjects with narrow shoulders and forward stance generate the problem of extra fabric
gathering at the shoulder tips as well as looseness at the upper chest. Therefore, figure variations
have to be analyzed in a future study. Research limitations/implications - The convenient sample with
limited size does not allow generalization of figure variations associated with fit problems in all
colleges or universities located in Taiwan. Originality/value - Few researchers have analyzed fit
problems on garments made for females with figure variations, but none of them use 3D body
scanners in combination with computer-aided design systemsto test fit on basic garments for females
with various physical characteristics. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Introduction
Fit problems have plagued the women's apparel industry for a long time. Kurt Salmon Associates, a
consultant company, has found that more than 50 percent of consumers are unable to find well-fitting
garments. Also, research shows that fit problems are the primary factors causing customers to return
apparel products they purchase from catalog to web site retailers ([3] Anderson, 2004). The fit issue
has been so critical in influencing sales that some companies apply technological tools to improve
apparel fit. Manufacturers and retailers install 3D body scanners and computer-aided design (CAD)
systems to assist a made-to-measureprocess. The made-to-measure process is aided with a 3D body
scanner that extracts body measurementswithout physically touching human bodies. Then, the
extracted measurements are entered into alteration systems of CAD where existing patterns are
stored. Finally, existing patterns are selected and modified to be individual patterns ([13] Istook,
2002). Using a 3D scanning system accurately transfers body shape andmeasurements to CAD
systems and efficiently helps improve the quality of fit, according to the [2] ASTM (2005). Indeed,
using a 3D scanner is more effective in analyzing body shape and evaluating fit than the photographs
or videotapes that have been used to for decades ([4] Ashdown et al. , 2004).
Although research indicates that the 3D scanner is an efficient tool to help improve fit, apparel firms,
such as Levi-Strauss and Brooks Brothers, have conducted the customized process but not successfully
turned a profit. The high rate of customer returns could be a result of fit problems ([17] Lee et al. ,
2002). Most fit problems occur due to figure variations in body contour, posture, and proportion ([15]
Kwong, 2004). Few researchers have analyzed fit problems on garments made for females with figure
variations, but none of them use 3D body scanners in combination with CAD systems to test fit on
basic garments for females with various figure characteristics. This study applies a 3D body scanner
and a CAD system to produce block patterns for ten Taiwanese female students, as diverse apparel
technologies have been promoted in Taiwan. Specifically, these female students who are scanned
exhibit figure variations related to proportion between shoulder and hip, shoulder and chest shape,
curve of back, and posture. Block patterns altered to fit the females are cut and used to produce basic
garments. Fit evaluation on the basic garments is conducted, and results and suggestions are
provided.
Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is to evaluate fit of the basic garments made for Taiwanese female students
with various figure characteristics. The basic garments are produced according to patterns derived
from the PDS 2000 and APDS-3D systems.
Review of literature
Apparel fit
Apparel fit is defined as the relationship between the size and contour of the garment and those of the
human body. Fit problems arise as an incongruent relationship between the garment and the human
body occurs ([12] Huckabay, 1992). Whether the garment conforms to the body depends on five
criteria; they are ease, line, grain, balance, and set. Ease, including functional ease and styling ease, is
the dimensional difference between the garment and the individual wearing the garment. Functional
ease is considered as the amount of fabric allowed for body movement, and styling ease is defined as
the amount of fabric needed to demonstrate the design of the garment. The second criterion is line
associated with seams of garments. A well-fitting garment presents vertical seams
perpendicular to the floor and parallel to the body center when it is worn on the body. The third
criterion is grain focusing on the relationships among fabric, patterns, and wearers. Grain lines of
garments should be parallel or perpendicular to the floor as well. The fourth criterion is balance. A
balanced jacket evenly hangs on the body, so the distance from the right side of the body to the
center is the same as the distance from the left side to the center. The last criterion is set which
refers to the absence of wrinkles on garments ([9] Erwin and Kinchen, 1974).
Fit evaluation is a complicated process in which the relationship of the garment to the body is analyzed
based upon certain criteria. Fit evaluation determined by individuals wearing garments tends to be
subjective. Two individuals who have the same body measurements may perceive clothing fit
differently ([1] Alexander et al. , 2005). On the other hand, fit evaluation conducted by expert panels is
more objective. Trained judges follow criteria to analyze fit, and they discuss and negotiate rating
scales to reach consensus before final decisions are made. Therefore, the fit analysis by trained judges
is believed to provide reliable and valid data ([4] Ashdown et al. , 2004).
Self-reported body types and fit problems
Fit evaluation can be achieved by either general individuals or expert panels. Few researchers have
investigated fit problems perceived by individuals with various body types. [1] Alexander et al. (2005)
studied fit problems of females with four body shapes: pear, hourglass, rectangular, and inverted
triangular. Their study acquired 223 questionnaires from female ages 18 to 29 years. They found that
the participants who identified their body shapes as rectangular, pear and hourglass were more
likely to express fit problems at the bust area than those who perceived themselves as the inverted
triangular shape ([1] Alexander et al. , 2005).
In contrast to [1] Alexander et al. (2005) who studied females aged between 18 and 29, [16] Kind
(1995) focused on fit preference of college females on ready-to-wear garments. [16] Kind (1995) used
the heightmeasurements of 358 college females to classify their body types into petite, average, tall,
and large sizes. [16] Kind (1995) surveyed their fit perceptions and found that the college females,
with exception of the average group, were dissatisfied with pant length ([16] Kind, 1995).
Rather than focusing on fit perceptions of general college females, [10] Feather et al. (1997) collected
data from 503 female collegiate basketball players from two southeastern states. These researchers
investigated self-perception of body type and fit problems of uniforms and street wear. They reported
that almost 50 percent of the players identified their body types as ecto-mesomorph. More than 25
percent of the participants perceived themselves as ectomorphs. The players rated the sites of hips,
crotch of pants and buttocks on both uniforms and street wear the lowest satisfaction scores ([10]
Feather et al. , 1997).
Body-type classification and fit evaluation
The body-type classification of ecto-, meso- and endo-morphs is originated from the study of [20]
Sheldon (1954). [20] Sheldon (1954) and his colleagues excluded subjects with extreme figure
variations from their well-known study. Human subjects who had irregular development of bone and
muscle and imbalanced deposits of fat in their bodies were not recruited. By applying a somatotyping
technique, the body types of the male college students were categorized as meso-, ecto-, and endo-
morphs ([20] Sheldon, 1954). Although the body-type classification developed by Sheldon and his
colleagues has been applied by many researchers in various fields, [14] Johnson (1990) suggested that
two more categories, ecto- and endo-mesomorphs, neededto be added into the body classification,
because the two additional forms in a revised body classification system would more accurately reflect
the physical characteristics of current individuals ([14] Johnson, 1990).
Based on the somatotyping technique developed by Sheldon, [8] Douty (1968) established a method
of "somatometry" to analyze the body shape. She photographed 300 college females as they stood
silhouetted against a grided screen. The photographs were called somatographs which were
used to evaluate postures, body masses, proportions, and body shape. Three experienced judges
evaluated the somatographs, and the body shapes were classified into five categories of the body-
build and posture. [8] Douty (1968) concluded that the back shape, shoulder shape, buttocks shape,
posture, and body build were important elements that researchers needed to pay more
attention to while conducting a fitting test on female bodies. Directed by Douty, [6] Brinson (1977)
incorporated the somatometry method to alter patterns and to make basic garments of bodices and
skirts for ten female students. Among the ten subjects, six were in the experimental group and four
were in the control group. [6] Brinson (1977) measured the angles on the somatographs of the
experimental group, and she used angle measurements to determine how darts and side seams on
basic patterns could be altered. The traditional pattern alteration method used for her study applied
only length and circumferences to produce basic garments for the group members. Results showed
that there was no significant difference on the fit between the two groups of subjects. However, the
experimental method allowed a subject with figure variations to easily obtain a good fit without
numerous fittings and alterations ([6] Brinson, 1977).
Unlike [6] Brinson (1977) who tested the fit of bodice and skirt garments, [19] Pouliot (1980)
incorporated the somatometry method to develop pant patterns and test the fit of altered pants. She
used a computer program, designed to correct the distortion of measurements which resulted from the
somatometry method,to acquire body shapes, proportions, and angle measurements of 36 female
subjects between the ages of 12 and 55. Finally, she chose five models representing hip shapes of
round hips, pear-shaped hips, weight-in-front, weight-in-back, and average-figures for a fit evaluation.
Each subject wore basic pants altered by both the unit method and the experimental method. The unit
method referred to the application of length and circumference measurements to alter patterns, while
the experimental method combined length and circumference measurements with
angle measurements taken from somatographs. [19] Pouliot (1980) determined that using the
experimental method was better in creating pants that fit well on front waist position, front waist darts,
back crotch, and horizontal grain orientation. [18] Lesko (1982) further used the somatometry method
and same computer software to produce bodice garments. She photographed 30 subjects and selected
eight subjects who exhibited one or more of these figural variations: erect vs slumping posture, large
bust vs small bust, high bust vs low bust, square shoulders vs sloping shoulders, and overweight vs
underweight. Two garments were made according to patterns drafted using the unit and the
experimental methods for each subject. She concluded that there was no adequate evidence proving
that one method was better than the other ([18] Lesko, 1982).
Because the experimental alteration method that incorporated angle measurements did not
significantly improve the fit of garments, [11] Heisey et al. (1986) tried to improve the method. They
realized that the transformation of 2D patterns from the somatometry method could be derived from a
conical relationship between the 3D body form and the 2D patterns. Thus, they established a conical
theory to formulate equations and to apply equations to certain areas in patterns that can be modeled
as cones ([11] Heisey et al. , 1986). Their conical theory was not tested on the human body until 1993.
[22] Shen and Huck (1993) tested the conical theory by producing basic garments to be worn on the
human body. They used somatographs in combination with four body measurements to develop bodice
patterns for 12 female subjects with a variety of upper torso configurations. Bodice patterns for each
subject were drafted using both the experimental method incorporating angles with four body
surface measurements and the traditional method requiring 27 body surface measurements. They
particularly treated the bust area as a conical shape in the experimental group, and the cone was
transformed to a 2D wedge form as the basis to adjust darts in patterns. Garments made using the
experimental method were judged to have significantly better fit on most areas ([22] Shen and Huck,
1993).
In summary, previous research relied on photographs to extract body angles, and the
angle measurementsare incorporated with length and circumference in an attempt to create well-
fitting garments. The attempt toimprove apparel fit for female customers with a variety of body shape
has been a challenge. As new technologies such as body scanners and CAD systems have been
updated, the tests of fit on garments madeby applying these technologies are practical and profound.
However, none of research has used these technologies to create garments and test fit on females
with various figure characteristics. This study extracts body measurements from a body scanner,
deprives patterns from a CAD system, produces basic garments for fit evaluation, and analyzes female
body shapes associated with fit problems.
Methodology
In the apparel industry, pattern construction is a necessary step to produce garments. Most apparel
firms construct block patterns to develop patterns for new styles or design. The shape and size of
block patterns should accurately represent the human body ([7] Burns and Bryant, 1997). The block
patterns used in this study were derived from the APDS-3D system. Asahi Chemical Industry Co. Ltd
introduced the APDS-3D systemto the market in 1995. The APDS-3D system starts with the dress form
which contains 88 measurementpoints. The standard dress form can be viewed from different angles
on the screen, and the dress form can be modified using measurements that are extracted from 3D
body scanner ([23] Tait, 1995). The system incorporates with the Gerber Pattern Design Systems (PDS)
2000 into a complete CAD system enabling the function of design, pattern making, and production.
In addition to the CAD system, the VITUS 3D body scanner developed by Vitronic, a Germen company
is also used in this study. The VITUS body scanner is accompanied by a software system equipped with
VITUS View, RAMSIS Individual, and VITUS Measure to extract anthropometric measurements (Figures
1 and 2 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). After taking the six body measurements on each subject
(Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]), the scanning measurements with additional functional
ease were manually entered into a size-9 dress form measurement table of the APDS-3D system. The
size-9 dress form was selected because it represents the average figure of Taiwanese women. The six
scanning measurements were added toadditional ease measurements of 8 cm for bust circumferences
and 4 cm for waist circumferences. The values were entered into the measurement table, shown on
Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]. When entering the values of measurements, the APDS-3D
system only accepts values that are within a specific range. If measurement input is outside the
tolerance of a selected form's measurements, a white frame is marked around the measurement and
the form modification screen becomes non-functional. Therefore, themeasurements of waist
circumference 81.3 cm for subject 4 and 82.5 cm for subject 8 were rejected, and they were
limited to 79.3 cm and 78.5 cm instead. Once the measurements were accepted by the system, they
were transformed into 3D visualization. The 3D visualization was then converted into 2D patterns of
bodice front and bodice back. Both block patterns of bodice front and back with shoulder darts and
waist darts were imported to the PDS 2000 which allows users to make changes on the 2D patterns.
The completed block patterns were cut out and used to make basic garments for the ten subjects who
had different figure characteristics (Table III [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]).
The body forms of the ten subjects were categorized by a panel of three professional judges who were
faculty teaching clothing construction and apparel fit. The ten female subjects, who enrolled in the
advanced fashion design class, were voluntary for this study. The judges followed the illustrations
taken from the book Pattern Making for Fashion Design written by [5] Armstrong (1987) to classify the
subjects' body characteristics (Figures 3-8 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). The physical
characteristics of the subjects were categorized as "body type," "shoulder type A," "shoulder type B,"
"chest type," "back type," and "posture." Eventually, the judges evaluated the basic garments worn by
the subjects whose ages between 20 and 25. These subjects wore the basic garments over
undergarments for the fit evaluation. The judges received copies of the rating scale created by [21]
Shen (1991) to evaluate fit based on the appearance of the basic garments. They marked a score
ranging from -4 to +4 on the 25 items of the rating scale. The closer the score was to zero, the better
fitting the basic garments were. T -test was employed to test differences on the means of 25 items
between the physical characteristics of the shoulder type B category. One-way ANOVA was
run to investigate the potential presence of significant differences on the means of 25 items between
characteristics of each category: body type, shoulder type A, chest type, back type, and posture. When
the ANOVA tests showed significant difference, the Tukey multiple comparison test was
used to examine differences between possible pairs.
Results and discussion
The mean scores show that the basic garments have adequate ease and proper seam placement.
However, a particular concern is the mean of 1.73 on the back armhole shape. This score indicates
that most of the basic garments have the armhole shape much outside the natural body curves.
Because the size-9 dress form has a wider across back measurement than that of the subjects' bodies,
the form used in the Taiwanese apparel industry has to be remolded. Otherwise,
the measurement across the back must be included in the basemeasurement table of the APDS-3D
system. The same problem occurs in the front armhole shape as well. Although the mean of the front
armhole shape, 1.30, is not as high as that for the back armhole shape, the basic garments for
subjects two, four, and five have front armhole shapes much outside the curves of their bodies.
Along with inaccurate measurements of the dress form, the APDS-3D system's tolerance limits and
figure variations also cause fit problems. The APDS-3D system limits the measurement input of the
waist circumferences if the values exceed the selected dress form's waist circumference ±25 percent;
waist circumferences outside this range are rejected by the system. Since, the
waistline measurement inputs for subjects 4 and 8 went beyond the system's tolerance, their
waistline measurements were limited to the allowance and the tight waistline on the basic garments
generated fit problems. Indeed, software designers need to consider eliminating the waist darts on the
block patterns or develop a formula to adjust the waist darts. The waist darts can be eliminated
because the block patterns with shoulder darts still portray the 3D shape of female bodies.
Furthermore, software designers might create a formula to calculate the differences between the block
pattern's waistline circumference and the person's waistline circumference containing basic ease. The
intake of waist darts is the difference resulted from the block pattern's waistline circumference minus
the person's waistline circumference.
Either using patterns with only shoulder darts or adjusting the intake of the waist darts would solve the
problem of an exceedingly tight waistline. In fact, the software designers should revise the tolerance
limits of the APDS-3D system in terms of waistline circumferences as well as neck circumferences.
Particularly, the tolerance of ±25 percent is too big to prevent incorrect input when used for
neck measurements. The unusual neck measurements, 30.1 and 30.6 cm for subjects 7 and 10,
respectively, were resulted from an inaccuratemeasure during the scanning process. However,
these measurements were accepted by the APDS-3D system, so the basic garments appeared poor fit
on the necklines. The necklines of the basic garments were so small that they became stuck before
they reached the bottom of the neck; the necklines did not fit and could not be smoothly positioned on
the subjects' necks. Therefore, the percentage of tolerance allowed for the neckmeasurement should
decrease to assure proper fit.
The fit problems occur due to the APDS-3D system as well as figure variations. After a series of ANOVA
tests, significant differences exist between the physical characteristics within the categories of body
types, shoulder type A, chest type, back type, and posture. First, the findings indicate that the subjects
with the hourglass characteristic are significantly different from other groups on the items of bustline
circumference and strain/looseness at the bust level; p -values for bustline circumference and
strain/looseness at the bust level were 0.023 and 0.0001 (<0.05), respectively. The hourglass type
exhibit the fit problem - tightness around the bust area. The subjects with the hourglass characteristic
appear to have more prominent bust than those who are not the hourglass type. This finding
seems to be consistent with the study of [1] Alexander et al. (2005) who report that the hourglass type
expresses fit problems at the bust area.
Findings also show that those with narrow shoulders and large hips are significantly different from the
groups of straight and broad shoulders and small hips on the item called "strain/excess at shoulder tip"
(0.009 < 0.05). The subjects with narrow shoulders and large hips accompanied with sloped shoulders
have excess fabric around the shoulder tips compared with the groups of straight and broad shoulders
and small hips. Moreover, the shoulder seams of the narrow shoulders and large hips group move
much toward the front bodice. A possible reason for the occurrence of improper shoulder seam
position could be the subjects' narrow lengthmeasurement across the chests. In combination with
narrow lengths across chests, the subjects who exhibit narrow shoulders and large hips stand in a
relaxed posture. Their arms drop down and the shoulder seams are pulled toward the front bodice.
Within the category of shoulder type A, there are significant differences on the items of gapping/strain
at back armhole, strain/excess ease at shoulder tip, and shoulder seam position. The p -values for
gapping/strain at back armhole, strain/excess ease at shoulder tip, and shoulder seam position were
0.014, 0.046, and 0.001 (<0.05), respectively. The group of subjects with the physical characteristics
of square shoulders is significantly different from the others on these three items. The square-shoulder
subjects have more strains at the back armhole of the basic garments compared with those whose
shoulders are ideal. The subjects with square shoulders tend to have flat backs that lead diagonal
strains toward the shoulder tips. Furthermore, the group with square shoulders is significantly different
from the group with sloped shoulders on strain/excess ease at the shoulder tip. Square-shoulder
subjects showed much more strains at the shoulder tips compared with the subjects of sloped
shoulders. Moreover, the square-shoulder group of subjects significantly differs from the ideal- and
sloped- shoulder groups on the shoulder seam position; the shoulder seams of basic garments worn on
the square-shoulder subjects move more toward the back bodice. The possible reason could be that
the subjects' shoulder points tend to be closer to front bodices, so their shoulder points do not match
the shoulder points of the basic garments.
Within the category of the chest type, significant differences exist for the items of gapping/strain at
back armhole and side seam position. The p -values for gapping/strain at back armhole and side seam
position were 0.001 and 0.046, respectively, among the three characteristics (ideal-, hollow-, and
pigeon-chests). Subjects with hollow chest have more gapping at the back armhole compared with the
group of ideal chest because subjects with hollow chest also have round back generating gapping at
the back armhole. Meanwhile, the protruding back creates another fit problem on the side seams in
which the hollow-chest subjects' side seams move toward the back bodice. Owing to prominent back
and smaller bust, the side seams move more toward the back than the side seams of the ideal-chest
group.
The group of round back is significantly different from the group of flat back on the items of
gapping/strain at back armhole, strain/looseness at bust level, and bustline circumference; p -values
were 0.009, 0.037, and 0.037, respectively. It is a common occurrence for the group of round
back to have more gapping at the back armhole, more strains at the bustline circumference, and more
strains at the bust level. The round back produces gapping at the back armhole, and the subjects with
round back accompanied with big bust causing tighter bustline circumference and strains at the bust
level.
There are significant differences within the category of posture on the mean of gapping/strain at back
armhole, bustline circumference, and strain/looseness at bust level; p -values were 0.049, 0.039, and
0.021, respectively. Subjects with the characteristic of forward stance have more gapping at the back
armhole, strains at the bustline circumference, and strains at the bust level than the subjects with
upright stance. The possible cause is that subjects with the forward stance could also have round back.
Limitation and conclusion
This study recruited subjects who enrolled in the Department of Fashion Design at Shih Chien
University in Taiwan that represent various physical characteristics. The convenient sample does not
represent a generalization of figure variations in Taiwanese college women. However, the findings
provide some information valuable for software designers. This research suggests software designers
need to addmeasurements such as across back, across chest, and front center length that will enhance
well fitting. Also, the tolerance for neck circumference in the APDS-3D system has to be decreased in
order to ensure accuratemeasurements. Meanwhile, the intake of the waist darts has to be adjustable,
depending on the difference between the females' waist circumferences with additional ease and block
patterns' waist dimensions. Furthermore, this research reveals that fit problems become complicated
when one figure variation combines with another and when the physical characteristics are not all
ideal. Future research can focus on investigating commonly occurring figure variations among females
and combination of figure variations.
References
1. Alexander, M., Connell, L.J. and Presley, A.B. (2005), "Communications: clothing fit preferences of
young female adult consumers", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 52-64.
2. ASTM (2005), Global Notebook, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
available at: www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/SNEWS/NOVEMBER_2002/gn_nov02.html?
L±mystore±druk4676 (accessed December 2005).
3. Anderson, G. (2004), If The Clothes Fit, Buy 'Em, available at:
www.retailwire.com/Print/PrintDocument.cfm?DOC_ID = 10058 (2005, December).
4. Ashdown, S.P., Schoenfelder, L.K. and Lyman-Clarke, L. (2004), "Visual fit analysis from 3D scans",
Abstracts of the Fiber Society 2004 Annual Meeting and Technical Conference, p. 111.
5. Armstrong, H.J. (1987), Pattern Making for Fashion Design, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, NY.
6. Brinson, E.G. (1977), "Pattern alterations predicted and quantified using angle measurements",
unpublished master's thesis, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.
7. Burns, L.D. and Bryant, N. (1997), The Business of Fashion, Fairchild Publications, New York, NY.
8. Douty, H.I. (1968), "Visual somatometry in health related research", Journal of Alabama Academy of
Science, Vol. 39, pp. 21-34.
9. Erwin, M.D. and Kinchen, L.A. (1974), Clothing for Moderns, 5th ed., Macmillan, New York, NY.
10. Feather, B.L., Herr, D.G. and Ford, S. (1997), "Black and white female athletes' perceptions of their
bodies and garment fit", Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 125-8.
11. Heisey, F.L., Brown, P. and Johnson, R.F. (1986), "A mathematical analysis of the graphic
somatometry method of pattern alteration", Home Economics Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 115-
23.
12. Huckabay, D.A. (1992), "Perceived body cathexis and garment fit and style proportion problems of
petite women", unpublished master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, VA.
13. Istook, C.L. (2002), "Enabling mass customization: computer-driven alternation methods", Journal
ofClothing Science and Technology, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 61-76.
14. Johnson, K.K.P. (1990), "Impressions of personality based on body forms: an application of
Hillestad's Model of appearance", Clothing & Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 8 No. 4, p. 34.
15. Kwong, M.Y. (2004), "Garment design for individual fit", in Fan, J., Yu, W. and Hunter, L.
(Eds), ClothingAppearance and Fit: Science and Technology, Textile Institute; CRC, Cambridge, pp.
196-233.
16. Kind, K.R.O. (1995), "Specialty-size college-age females: satisfaction with apparel fit, body
cathexis, and retail attributes", unpublished master's thesis, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
17. Lee, S.E., Kunz, G.I., Fiore, A.M. and Campell, J.R. (2002), "Acceptance of mass customization of
apparel: merchandising issues associated with preference for product, process, and
place", Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 138-46.
18. Lesko, L.J. (1982), "Bodice fit compared: conventional alterations with and without graphic
somatometry", unpublished master's thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
19. Pouliot, C.J.T. (1980), "Pants alteration by graphic somatometry techniques", unpublished master's
thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
20. Sheldon, W.H. (1954), Atlas of Men, Harper, New York, NY.
21. Shen, L. (1991), "Bodice sloper development using somatometic and physical data: an exploratory
study", unpublished master's thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.
22. Shen, L. and Huck, J. (1993), "Bodice pattern development using somatographic and physical
data", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 6-16.
23. Tait, N. (1995), "The Asahi apparel CAD 3D-PDS system", Apparel International, Vol. 26 No. 11, pp.
35-7.
Appendix
Corresponding author
Chin-Man Chen can be contacted at: [email protected]
AuthorAffiliation
Chin-Man Chen, Department of Fashion Merchandising, Shih Chien University, Taiwan, Republic of
China
Illustration
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3: Body type
Figure 4: Shoulder type A
Figure 5: Shoulder type B
Figure 6: Chest type
A ready-made business: The birth of the clothing industry in AmericaZakim, Michael . Business History Review 73. 1 (Spring 1999): 61-90.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
The birth of the clothing industry in the US after 1815 is recounted. It is contended that, in
contrast to recent historical literature, the clothing business was at the center of the American
experience of industrialization. This was not because ready-made clothing was a novel commodity. Nor
was it because of new production technologies, social innovations, or legal structures adopted by the
industry. Rather, clothing entrepreneurs were significant because they integrated several important
markets - a trans-Atlantic trade in cloth, an urban trade in labor, and a market for manufactured goods
in the interior regions of the US. This helped to make the ready-made clothing business among the
country's largest industries by 1850.
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Headnote
This article recounts the birth of the clothing industry in the United States after 1815. It contends, in
contrastto recent historical literature, that the clothing business was at the center of the American
experience of industrialization. This was not because ready-made clothing was a novel commodity. Nor
was it because of new production technologies, social innovations, or legal structures adopted by the
industry. Rather, clothingentrepreneurs were significant because they integrated several important
markets-a trans-Atlantic trade in cloth, an urban trade in labor, and a market for manufactured goods
in the interior regions of the United States. This helped to make the ready-made clothing business
among the country's largest industries by 1850.
By the eve of the Civil War there were 430 clothing houses doing business in New York City. This stood
in marked contrast to the twelve "slop sellers," as dealers in cheap garments were known, listed in the
city's New Trade Directory just half a century earlier. The numbers added up to the birth of
a clothing industry. As Hunt's Merchant's Magazine enthusiastically reported in 1849, "It used to be
one job to seek for the cloth, and another to repair to the tailor, causing not unfrequently great loss of
time and much vexation. We now see everywhere, not only the economist, but the man of fashion,
saving his time and his money by procuring the very articles he requires all ready made to his hand."
Personal utility, though, was not all that qualified a ready-made suit as archetypically modern;
producing goods on speculation for sale to an anonymous public while standardizing consuming habits
and body sizes were also obvious criteria of industrial revolution, as was a rate of growth "even faster
than the great increase in commerce and population justify." And so, when the New York Chamber of
Commerce published its first Annual Report in 1858, it acknowledged the new industry's
contribution to the city's rise to continental pre-eminence. "The appetite grows by what it feeds upon,"
these Merchant Princes, long indifferent to such ordinary pursuits, noted of the clothing trade's
seemingly limitless elasticity, still a novelty in a world until recently prescribed by Ricardian
assumptions of implacable limits. "There is no telling the extent it may not reach."1
In 1747 an English survey of business opportunities observed that "the most general use of cloathing
makes the Experience of their commodiousness almost universal."2 What was a logical inference in
the eighteenth century, however, became an indisputable reality in the nineteenth. Clothing was
tied to the dumping of British cloth in America after 1815, the fitful rise of a domestic textile industry
during the same period, the concomitant decline of household manufacturing, the creation of a
transportation infrastructure connecting distant and disparate regions of the country, the consequent
growth of demand for finished manufactures in the hinterland, and the mass mobilization of cut-rate
labor in the country's major cities by means of a system of subcontracting which the New York
feuilletonist George Foster began to call "sweating" in 1849.3
By 1850, men's clothing constituted the largest manufacturing enterprise in New York, the country's
largest manufacturing city. In addition, clothiers were the leading employers, leading aggregate
investors, and leading producers of goods in Cincinnati, Philadelphia, and Boston.4 They did business
at the intersection of the two great trading triangles of the age, where southern cotton and western
produce met northern and European cloth and capital. The "ready-made" proved to be a practical
way to sell the cheap cloths and labor available in the city to the rest of the nation. Clothiers, thus,
staked out a heretofore nonexistent position in the country's developing networks of exchange and, in
so doing, helped to usher in the industrial market. They coordinated long and short credit cycles
between different parts of the commercial world. They overcame one of the central problems of doing
business in industrial conditions-bringing the new material abundance to market-by integrating two
traditionally distinct enterprises, dry goods jobbing and merchant tailoring. They balanced the
exigencies of a local retail and a distant wholesale market. And they connected the individual
consumer-in this case, only the male citizen, as the manufacture of ready-made women's garments
was still several decades away-to the ethos of mass production.5
Indeed, the commodity itself came to exemplify the social possibilities immanent in industrial
revolution. Alfred Munroe & Co., exhibitors of "ready-made wear" at New York's Crystal Palace
Exhibition of Industrial Arts in 1853, declared that the era had passed "when every man or boy in want
of a new coat or other garment, must resort to his tailor, and pay exorbitant prices in order to be
satisfactorily suited." The savings were presented as proof of the democratizing effects of the market.
Foreign visitors invariably concurred. "A mob in the United States is a mob in broad-cloth," Lady
Emmeline Stuart Wortley characteristically observed in 1851. "If we may talk of a rabble in a republic,
it is a rabble in black silk waistcoats." Americans were the last to take issue. just a few years
beforehand the United States Magazine and Democratic Review had pointed to the "clothingrevolution"
as a true measure of republican progress: "Articles of clothing are now at the command of the lowest
members of society, which, but a century since, were scarcely within the reach of crowned heads."6
Clothing and the Industrial Revolution
Clothiers were pioneers of American industrialization. Nevertheless, their activities entailed no great
leaps of the imagination, technological wonders, or political privileges. Clothiers called for no special
tariffs. They utilized no incorporation laws and had no reason to secure eminent domain. What's more,
the capitalist production ofclothing was technically little changed from that which preceded it. Hunt's
might have considered the "perfect order and system" in evidence at the veteran Pine
Street clothing firm of Lewis and Hanford to be paradigmatic of the new age in 1849, but the cloth was
still being cut into suitable shapes there by a highly trained artisan and then sewn back together by
someone paid considerably less to do so. This was the same division of labor that characterized the
production process of colonial tailoring shops. The same modest collection of tools-shears, needles and
bodkins, a sleeve board, an iron-also remained in use. And the garment itself was constituted of the
same parts: a relatively expensive outer fabric, cheaper materials used for inner linings and less
exposed sections, buttons, and threads. Even when a much-anticipated sewing machine was
introduced in the 1850s, dramatically increasing productivity, no re-organization of the production
process ensued, a traditional measure of industrial change. Instead, mechanization was integrated into
the extant system of put-out labor. Nor did the mobilization of all those working hands-close to sixty
thousand persons were in the employ of New York City firms alone according to an 1857 estimate in
the Herald-entail the conscious social innovations characteristic of Lowell, or even Rockdale.7
The ready-made commodity itself wasn't even new. Inventories of presewn garments made up in
advance of their sale were already in evidence in the sixteenth century, when English tailors nervously
invoked traditional guild prerogatives in order to suppress the "trade of Salesmen." In 1700 a single
London merchant reportedly kept one thousand suits in stock. By the middle of the eighteenth century
the merchant tailor Jacob Reed was offering a choice assortment of "ready made cloths, both for Men
and Boys" in New York. And John Shephard, who counted some of New York City's most refined
personages among his 11 custom" in the mid-1780s, did a brisk business in ready-made clothing,
principally satin breeches and silk jackets, which were among the most expensive items in his ledger.8
The development of the clothing industry, then, does not conform to traditional visions of the industrial
revolution as a catalytic combination of entrepreneurial genius and sublime machines. At best,
clothiers could be said to have applied well-established arbitrage practices to the new domestic
market. But they still resembled an early modern "mercantile estate" insinuating itself between
purchase and sale. In the nineteenth century, however, this meant integrating the revolutions in textile
production (the plethora of cloths), labor (the mobilization of urban workers), and transportation
(canals and railways). Clothiers took control of both purchase and sale, and combined the traditionally
distinct roles of buyer of raw material, jobber, factor, wholesale manufacturer, and retailer in
integrating production and distribution. Change and continuity, in other words, were not mutually
exclusive terms in the industrialization of clothing. As a writer for the National Association of Wool
Manufactures cryptically explained in 1873, the ingredients of this giant new industry were "so simple
that the results to which they have led seem inconceivable."9 The apparent "contradiction" was really
evidence of the confusion and circumstance intrinsic to industrialization.
Contemporaries seemed unsure of how to account for this new industry. This was clear in the fact
thatclothing production was absent from all manufacturing statistics until mid-century, despite the
industry's dramatic growth after 1815. And when clothing was finally accorded an official presence, it
came as a result of the reconceptualization of industrialization itself.10
Early economic statistics had a singular design: to identify the sites of industrial change (whole
production sectors such as textiles or iron, for instance) and then gather as much information about
them as was bureaucratically possible. Such a taxonomy informed Alexander Hamilton's landmark
1791 Report on Manufacturers. It continued to guide all subsequent efforts as well. Even the ambitious
Sixth Census of 1840, which generated an unprecedented statistical representation of the nation's
economic life, adhered to the same epistemology: investigating commercial activities that were
chosen, a priori, for their presumed centralityto the political economy.11 "Manufacturing" itself
denoted that act which turned raw materials into "a form suitable for use." This was the creation of
something out of nothing, which was synonymous with the creation of value-a definition rooted in the
previous century's "producerism." In this order of things, making clothingwas an appropriation of the
value already manifest in the production of cloth. It was, at best, a commercial elaboration.12
Then, in 1850, clothing not only appeared in official statistics for the first time, it suddenly constituted
a giant industry. This was because Congress had instructed census marshals that year to record "the
name of each corporation, company, or individual producing articles to the annual value of $500." The
result was at once a more perfunctory and a far more exhaustive list of commodities than had ever
been compiled. It redefined manufacturing to mean no longer the physical transformation of nature, ex
nihilo, but the manufacture of surplus values.13 The ambitious New York City merchant tailor George
P. Fox, who sold ready-mades in his San Francisco store, thus revised the old political economy: "Until
the goods of the [cloth importer] have passed through the [tailor's] hands, their value is in a dormant
state, and they contribute nothing to the embellishment or the utility of life." In addition, no one was
going to "produce articles to the annual value of $500" without intending to keep some of it for
himself. The official record of industrialization now became a business document. That is, it reflected
an entrepreneurial logic rather than a productive one, an industrial revolution driven by the pecuniary
appetites of thousands of small firms and proprietary shops making up what they hoped would sell.14
Curiously, this version of industrial progress has been lost on modern scholarship. While in the latter
half of the nineteenth century most major accounts of industrial change included a chapter on "ready-
to-wear," recent histories ignore the subject altogether.15 Such important studies as Alfred Chandler's
The Visible Hand, Stuart Bruchey's Enterprise, and Walter Licht's Industrializing America confine their
accounts of the early industrial economy to "the large ... establishment, with its battery of machines,
foundries, or furnaces"; or to "the animating effects of cheap iron," McCormick's reaper,
interchangeable parts, and Crampton's mule; or to a neat bifurcation of the manufacturing project
between specialized "craftsmen-entrepreneurs" in the city and "large-scale" producers of mass
consumables in the countryside. Even Thomas Cochran, who, in moving the industrial revolution back
half a century, correctly noted that "it pleased early nineteenth-century Americans tohave the price of
cottons reduced, but the `new world' they lived in was more the product of faster and cheaper finance,
trade, and transportation than the result of steam engines, power saws, and other new machines,"
took no notice of the explosive growth of the clothing trade that grew precisely out of the interplay
between cheap cloths and cheap finance and transportation.16
Shoes and boots, on the other hand, are the industry of choice for illustrating how an ambitious
merchant agenda could transform smallscale, artisanal production into a giant business, which was the
underlying dynamic of the clothing trade as well. However, what actually recommends
shoes to historians of industrialization is the fact that their production underwent dramatic
mechanization and centralization. By the mid-nineteenth century the shoe and boot industry far more
resembled capital-intensive, factory-based production than it did its mercantilist-inspired origins in the
putting-out system, thus satisfying the view of industrialization as a singular process of escalating size
and sophistication. By 1860, in contrast, the clothingindustry had begun to move toward smaller
production units.
Industrial Beginnings
If the clothing industry had an actual birth, it was in the emporiums and warehouses that appeared in
New York and other American seaboard entrepots after the end of war and the reopening of European
trade in 1815. These businesses responded to the unprecedented amount and low cost of British cloths
in circulation. This allowed them to aggressively proffer the widest range of "fashionable apparel" for a
varied clientele of "gentlemen." James Burk opened a store on the still largely residential Wall Street in
1821 where he sold garments made up of the freshest imports: London cassimeres, fashionable
mixtures, William Hirst's superior blues and blacks, Sheppard's velvet cloths, real Tartain plaids,
elegant Valencia vestings, rich black Florentines, and silk camblets. Burk, a prolific copy-writer,
excitedly updated his inventory of fabrics in prolix and precise advertisements regularly placed in the
Evening Post, There he listed the latest brand names, colors, and cloths arriving from Liverpool, all of
which he promised to make up "in the first style." Burk appealed to the good taste of the self-
consciously fashionable while also offering them real savings of "33 1/3 per cent on the amount of
every six months clothing."18
Burk's store was certainly not a tailoring shop. Burk was no craftsman who sold his own skilled labor
and hoped that the resulting income, less trade expenses, would leave a sufficient margin to support
his household. A different ethos of accumulation informed his actions, one guided by anticipation of
what would sell tomorrow rather than what was available today. The commodity had become a means
of generating capital rather than vice versa, and surplus values were reinvested in the business rather
than devoted to personal maintenance. Clothing was simply a convenient means for Burk to do this. He
had formerly worked as an accountant and commission merchant before this latest career move, no
doubt prompted by the influx of cheap cloths to America at war's end.19 He began selling clothing in
his native Philadelphia in 1817. By the end of 1822 he had opened a third store, a mile or so up
Manhattan in the growing village of Greenwich. Moving goods between his three stores facilitated an
economy of scale which helped him realize his incessant exhortations to the public for "economy
in clothing." At the same time, Burk's enterprise did not at all resemble the low-end "slop" shop in
which merchants with no artisanal pretensions sold cheap clothing to a clientele of mechanics, sailors,
itinerants, and other urban rabble. The unabashed commercialism of these "salesmen," as slop dealers
were professionally known, was the traditional antipode of skilled tailoring.20
Burk's was not the only type of response to new business opportunities presented by British dumping.
Samuel Whitmarsh, who, unlike Burk, was a tailor, opened an establishment on Broadway where he
insistently promoted "genteel ... ready-mades," in contrast to Burk's decision to principally devote his
store to the "Measure Business." Whitmarsh kept the traditional appellation of draper and tailor but
called his business an "original." He promised visitors the standard rich assortment of cloths,
"constantly on hand." But instead of economy he offered an admixture of gentility and convenience.
Whitmarsh's store faced the City Hotel, a favorite meeting place for city residents and tourists located
at the half-way point along Broadway's fashionable promenade. There they could buy complete suits
available "at a moment's notice" and shop in spacious apartments expressly
fitted to appeal to fashionable sensibilities. By the end of the decade Whitmarsh also carried a wide
assortment of cravats, handkerchiefs, hosiery, suspenders, collars, undervests, and drawers-"a
splendid collection of Goods in his line," that line now being distinctly men's wear.21
A few blocks below Whitmarsh, also on Broadway, John Williams operated a Gentlemen's Fashionable
Wearing Apparel Warehouse that he opened in 1816. Thanks to the full page illustrated advertisement
he ran over several years in the city's annual directory, Williams allows us a glimpse inside the store.
His over-sized entrance fronted the avenue's broad walk, a backdrop to refined male strollers in no
hurry to get anywhere. Light floods inside and we can espy someone busy at work with his shears at
the front of the shop. Is it Williams? Perhaps. But he called himself a clothier, not a tailor, and so
underscored his role as a seller rather than maker of clothes. At the same time, the facade of this
Apparel Warehouse was dominated by a large window, not for display-finished garments advertising
the store to passersby hung outside on the door frame-but to provide the illumination essential for
sewing. Was Williams a tailor or clothier, a manufacturer or merchant? Or was such a distinction an
artisanal artifact, no longer relevant in the expanding, variegated market?22
Another clothier, Henry Brooks, opened a store at the corner of Catharine and Cherry Streets in 1818,
across from one of New York's busiest public markets and two blocks away from the bustling East River
wharves. This was the city's old slops district. "What a tide passed through that narrow street in those
days hurrying to the horseboats, hurrying to market, hurrying to the shops." It was an ideal retail site.
Indeed, Brooks had been selling groceries at the same address several years earlier. When the War of
1812 interrupted his provisioning trade he retired to an upstate farm in Rye. With peace, however,
Henry decided to return to business, though not to groceries. He joined a younger brother, David, in
the latter's clothing store on Cherry Street. In 1817 the two dissolved their partnership but both stayed
in the trade, with Henry moving a few blocks down Cherry, to the corner of Catharine Street, across
from Henry Robinson's well-known clothing store. A year later Henry bought the building for the not
inconsiderable sum of $15,250, and in 1825 he opened a second store two blocks away, near James
Slip, on the water. By then the business on Catharine Street was averaging sales of almost $50,000
per year. Unlike Burk and Whitmarsh, Brooks specialized in the pea coats, monkey jackets, duck
trousers, and smocks made from cheap cotton and mixed cloths that identified the city's less genteel
consumers. While "extraordinary cheap" coats in the vicinity of Broadway still cost between $22 and
$32 in 1819, for instance, most of the coats Henry Brooks sold in these years were for less than $15.
Nevertheless, he was taking advantage of the same new business opportunities as the more refined
retailers in other parts of town.23
Those opportunities were described at mid-century in an apocryphal story concerning A. T. Stewart, by
then New York's most famous retailer. Stewart had turned for help one day in the early twenties to a
veteran merchant. "A lady came into my store and asked me to show her some hose," he
explained to his senior. "I did not know what the goods were, and I told her I did not keep the article.
What did she want?"
Stewart, having arrived from Scotland a few years earlier, was just one of innumerable new men who
now saw their chance to profit by buying cheap and selling at small margins. It clearly mattered far
less to them what exactly they were selling.24
Many enriched themselves by acquiring goods at auction and passing the savings on to their
customers. Auction sales, in fact, became the primary means of marketing the flood of English cloth
after 1817, when New York State began to regulate the auction system in order to generate the
revenue necessary to build the Erie Canal. Once built, the Canal then brought provincial
merchants to the metropolis in search of bargains at the very auctions which had financed the
Canal to begin with.25 Auctions also became the focus of rabid controversy, opposed by an unlikely
alliance of veteran merchant houses nervous about losing their hold over importing, champions of
American industrialization who dreaded the effect of so many cheap imports on domestic
manufacturing, and mechanics who feared for their livelihood-all of whom somewhat disingenuously
expressed their opposition in the nostalgic terms of "the mutual confidence and courtesy that
subsisted in our better days." Now, they complained, business was characterized by fictitious bidding,
false news, rigged markets, evasion of duties, and dishonest sales reports. There was a growing sense
that too many taboos were being broken. Upstart merchants aggressively advertised in the "new
papers" and exhibited none of the old mercantile qualms regarding commercial limits, impelled
onward, as they were, "by the fear of losing something that another man as quickly bestirs
himself to acquire."26 Niles' Weekley Register was a leading voice of protest. It characteristically
reported, with the opening of the fall season in 1826, the recent arrival of English blue cloths,
"beautiful to the eye," which turned reddish brown after a few days exposure to the air. This was
representative of the state of things, complained Niles', a situation that victimized American tailors
who were then "compelled to take back the clothes made of these goods, or disoblige and lose their
customers."27
On the other hand, there were obvious advantages here for clothing entrepreneurs. Half the fabrics
reaching New York in these years sold at auction below wholesale rates. What's more, small lots were
regularly available. Many were cottons, or cotton mixed with more expensive wool, such as the
cassimere that was a staple of James Burk's business, a cheaper but respectable choice for one's coat
and vest which helped make Burk's "experiment" in lowering the price of fashionable clothing possible.
For that matter, the price of all-woolen cloth dropped throughout the decade, auctions remaining the
cheapest way to acquire them as well.28
These opportunities sundered the early commercial identity of master and merchant, integrated in the
eighteenth century by the merchant tailor who began to sell cloths in addition to his tailoring skills.
Now, as the market widened and the lower end beckoned, a striking journeyman tailor in 1819 accused
his employers of having only one object in mind, to "accumulate money." A similar complaint was
heard from the other side of the political and social spectrum. Charles Haswell later recalled that
tailors' search for profits in the 1820s had annulled the sartorial order between men who were
personally fitted and the less genteel who had traditionally dressed in slops.29
A new type of clothing entrepreneur appeared, equally active in a second market in addition to that of
cloths, the buying and selling of labor. Thus, even when the clothes were still personally measured for
a specific customer, such as at Burk's store, that customer effectively purchased them from a
middleman-whether he called himself a tailor or clothier-- who mediated not only between him and the
purchase of the cloth, but between him and the terms of (others') garment-making as well. The
product now became a set of abstracted inputs, to be properly-that is, profitably-manipulated.
Balancing the cloth and labor markets so they would yield the greatest return became the essence
of clothing production. The clothier bargained with all the pertinent agents necessary for executing
work. He contracted to give them a certain income and appropriated the difference between the sum
of these contracts and the outcome of production. This made him a "windfall absorber" of the
economic system. But he was also a new kind of capitalist-not a passive investor of funds but an active
coordinator of production. And so, the commercially ambitious removed themselves from the craft in
order to run their clothing businesses. By the early thirties the "draper and tailor" Samuel Whitmarsh
was a busy wholesaler. Meanwhile, non-tailors like James Burk could only dress the economic and
fashionable gentleman as long as he hired "as good cutters as any in America."30
A National Market
As Burk intimated, the emergence of the clothing industry was no local event. For all his self-professed
devotion to the "Measure Business," for instance, Burk courted "Southern merchants and dealers in
readymade clothing" with any wholesale quantity they required of dress coats, frock coats, pantaloons,
and vests.31 These were the same years that the trip upstream from New Orleans to St. Louis was
reduced from three months to ten days by the steamboat and the Mississippi and Ohio valleys filled up
with clothing stores selling eastern products. Kennedy Foster, for instance, opened a store opposite
Allen's Hotel in Louisville; John Torode operated a clothing business on Main Street in Pittsburgh; James
Waddell's "New, Cheap & Fashionable" clothing store advertised for customers in St. Louis; and R. Lusk
ran an Emporium of Fashion on the south side of Nashville's city square, across from Benson, Hunt, &
Co.'s clothing house on the north side.32 They were representative of hundreds of others, supplied
directly from the east or through New Orleans, where there were over a hundred stores
selling clothing by the early 1830s. New Orleans city boosters had declared in 1822 that the four
thousand miles of inland navigation separating them from New York were "evidently
intended to answer some wise purpose, as nature never exerts herself in vain." Clothiers now proved
themselves instrumental in furnishing such "nature" with a real, commercial expression.33
New York's emergence as the undisputed center of credit and the distribution of both domestic and
imported cloths in these years made centralized, large-scale production of clothing possible. Now,
before leaving portto the provinces, dry-goods would be turned into garments. The added costs of the
extra transaction were saved by manufacturers who marketed the clothing themselves, either to their
own far-flung stores or to the legions of country merchants who came to New York each
year to restock. This vertical integration bypassed established dry goods jobbers and accounts for the
early specialization of the men's clothing business-an innovation which satisfied traditional business
reliance on a few trusted partners while also facilitating the more modern desiderata of extended
control, scales of economy, and efficiency. In a specialized trade the provincial retailer could purchase
in larger quantities. With fewer types of goods to attend, he was better positioned to discover cheaper
sources of supply and to become an expert in his "line." And by buying and selling to greater
advantage he undercut the retailing standard of old, the general store.34
Augusta, Georgia provides a case in point. Augusta was located at the head of steam navigation on the
Savannah River and served as a trading junction for a wide swath of the Georgia-Carolina black belt. In
exchange for all the raw cotton it sent out of the region, eastern seaboard packets refilled the town's
warehouses with northern and European manufactures.35 A stroll down Broad Street in the mid-1830s
is illustrative. If one could not satisfy one's sartorial requirements at E.D. Cooke's new clothing store at
197 Broad, it was possible to continue up the street to Price and Mallery's Clothing Emporium at
number 258, located between the Globe and United States Hotels, or down the street to Francis
Cooke's clothing house, or past that to Samuel Lane's men's wear establishment. If that was still
insufficient, B.B. Kirtland & Co. offered an equally wide selection of garments next door to Price and
Mallery. One could also have once continued farther up the street to Joseph Moss's store, at no. 305,
though in 1834 Moss succumbed to the intense local competition, closed up shop before his lease ran
out, sold off his stock at reduced prices, and returned to his New York Fashionable Clothing Ware-
House in Charleston. However, Mr. D'Lyon Thorp's "old and long-known establishment" was still doing
business between Kirtland's and Moss's stores. Messrs. V. Durand & Co. were also to be found on
Broad, next to the post office. But the largest clothing inventory in town was not to be found on Broad
Street. Clarke & Holland regularly filled a whole column of advertising space in the Chronicle and
Sentinel, declaring it to be only a "partial list" of their goods available for sale. The most telling
evidence for the clothing business's importance in Augusta's economic life, however, was the fact that
both Francis Cooke and B. B. Kirtland were elected city Alderman in 1837.36
Volume and variety were the sine qua non of business success in "a fluctuating market such as
Augusta." As James Edney assured Francis Cooke in 1836, after being sent by the latter to New
York to oversee manufacturing for Cooke's clothing store, "I do not intend that you shall be behind any
other shop in your market." A decade earlier Augusta clothier William Hills was still announcing that his
"first quality clothing" was priced so cheaply because it had been made the previous summer. By the
thirties no such admissions were forthcoming and Augusta's retail competition had become keen.
Francis Cooke, for instance, had to quickly purchase an extra fifty or sixty coats in New York at the
height of the season in October, 1835, "even if wemade nothing on them," in order to satisfy local
demand.37
Advertisements boasted of receiving new goods from the North every day. This might not have been a
great exaggeration. Francis Cooke regularly wrote to James Edney in New York to apprise him of local
business developments and request he make up favorite styles and colors, often delineating price
ranges and specific sizes. Edney, his work force in place and under contract for the season uptown on
Grand Street, would then search the city for the desired fabric, always checking the auction houses for
bargains. The garments were ready by week's end, loaded in trunks and sent south by steam or sail on
packets that left New York every day for Charleston, and from there shipped the nine hours by
rail to Augusta, arriving in Cooke's store a few days after leaving Edney's shop. Thus, within
two to three weeks' time, Cooke could fill his shelves with clothing made up in New York specifically for
his Georgian clientele on his order.38
A "New York suit" offered a distinct cachet, a practical opportunity to buy into metropolitan culture.
Local fashions were informed by a bevy of promoters of modern male taste. The Spirit of the Times
and Life in New-York kept a subscription agent in Augusta. The New-York Mirror, The Knickerbocker,
The Salmagundi, and the Gentleman's Vade Mecum were also generally available, as were sundry
"Reports of Fashions" put in national circulation by big city tailors. As Price and Mallery promised, their
inventory could "not fail to suit the tastes of the most fashionable or fastidious," selected as it was "by
one of our firm now in New York." Francis Cooke, then, who upbraided Edney for sending him "old
fashioned pants" at the height of the spring season in 1835, proved to be an agent in the exchange of
cultural goods as well as simple raiment.39
In the winter of 1837 E. D. Cooke-no relation to Francis-advertised fine and common dress and frock
coats in over ten different colors in the Chronicle. He also had a selection of overcoats made from
mohair yams, or from a camblet weave of German goatshair, or a heavy, coarse Petersham woolen
identified with the pilot coats worn by seamen and used for hunting. His stock of vests likewise
constituted a seemingly endless permutation of colors, yams, weaves, and cuts, ranging from valentia
which imitated silk to "common" blue and black cloth vests. Clarke & Holland offered the same
cornucopia. True, they had no mohair goods in stock in January; Cooke apparently cornered the local
market in mohair that winter. But the business principle was the same: figured silks and satins,
superfine cassimeres, and merino woolens alongside negro cloth, kerseys, and cheap satinets.40 Up in
New York, Edney simultaneously devoted his manufacturing energies to making up and shipping in the
same week overcoats of expensive "drab" wool-to sell for "no less than $25"-and an assortment of
"negroe" pants and vests, though of a "finer" grade. Indeed, the low end of the provincial market
appears to have been as stylistically diverse as the upper reaches.41
Inventories were "manufactured ... expressly for the Augusta market," which included a broad social
and geographic range of provincial burghers and upcountry farmers buying clothing for work or for
their Sunday best. Augusta also lay on the Federal Road, a byway for families from the Georgia-
Carolina Piedmont migrating west.42 But the city's clothing merchants actively sought to extend their
market as widely as possible. Steamboats regularly plied the Savannah River and daily stages ran
southeast to Savannah, northwest toAthens, southwest to Milledgeville and Macon, and
northeast to Columbia, South Carolina, and, less frequently, to Greensboro and Fayetteville in North
Carolina and to Chattanooga, Tennessee. The rail connection to Charleston was, for a passing moment,
the longest railroad in the world and in 1833 the Georgia Railway Company received its charter and
began to build new roads connecting Augusta to the center of the state and from there to the
Tennessee River and Knoxville.43 E. D. Cooke collected debts in Greene County, one hundred
miles to the west, and Paulding County, which was all the way across the state on the Alabama border.
Augusta clothiers also sold wholesale to general stores further inland as the latter began to keep
several dozen men's garments on hand in addition to the more customary yards of uncut fabrics.44
The only ones not included in this expanding market were the bulk of the region's slaves, which comes
as a surprise since the two million or so chattel field hands in the southern states would seem a natural
mass market for cheap, standardized wear. Most stores carried "Negro Clothing." But larger
plantations often undertook their own cutting and sewing of the garments they issued
seasonally to their slaves, buying the cloth directly from the North through their factors. No one
produced their own cloth, of course, since that required a considerable investment which would divert
resources from staple production. Clothing, however, was easy to make and could be done by
pregnant and older slaves, under the supervision of the plantation mistress, producing unfitted
garments of the coarsest fabrics cut in two or three standard sizes, at best. This was what was
universally recognized as the dress "crop negroes usually wear."45 For that matter, the northern
textile mills themselves could put out their cloths to local householders to sew into coarse, unfitted
garments for a modest extra cost. This, for instance, was the practice of the Peace Dale Mill of the J.P.
and R.G. Hazard Company in Rhode Island. The price was, thus, kept to a minimum and no city-
based clothingmanufacturer could possibly compete. The same production process was occasionally
used by the Army too when it contracted for cloths for its enlisted men's uniforms. Both systems were
certainly designed to mass produce, though not in the same way that drove the commercial city
trade.46
Meanwhile, Edney did his best to deliver Francis Cooke the fashionable goods the latter demanded-
garmentsmade of a popular cloth called Honeycomb for the summer season, new vest patterns, extra
pocket flaps, alterations in the extant pantaloon styles, 11.62 vests" and 14 or $5 pants," or "plain buff
valencias." Edney: "I have been in intense anxiety to know what to buy for the spring trade, to know
what articles suited, what articles did not suit, what was most wanted, what remained most on hand,
sizes, quality, etc."47 Production, in other words, seemed market-driven, attuned to demonstrated
consumer preference and closely managed by the retailer in a position to best gauge popular tastes.
Indeed, all the retail minutiae-the incessant advertisements for hundreds of varieties of coats, jackets,
vests, pantaloons, and cloaks, not to mention shirts, drawers, collars, bosoms, hosiery, gloves,
umbrellas, suspenders, cravats, handkerchiefs, hats, and shoes-were an ode to abundance, a
provincial "culture of consumption" manifest in Augusta and in countless other southern and western
towns, large and small. They constituted the industrial transition to a world of plenty where goods
were not only desirable but were attainable. What most impressed the public in these early years of
industrialization was not novel production processes anyway, but the unprecedented quantities of
goods that resulted. This appeal to consuming sensibilities did not always make straightforward
business sense, however. Edney complained about the wide range of goods Cooke requested for the
store, specifically boys' clothing and women's cloaks (cloaks being the only women's garments
Edney made, and which Cooke sold). There was an ongoing tug of war between retailer and
manufacturer over such items. For Edney, they were an unwelcome diversion from the real business at
hand-men's wear. They forced him into the market for small amounts of extra fabrics and patterns,
costing him time, effort, and money. Certainly, for this reason, Cooke could not have made much of a
profit on them. But Cooke knew they had a merchandising value not tobe measured by any itemized
bottom line. A range of goods brought customers into the store. Certainly, all his competitors offered
the same for sale. And in the bustling southern retail market, in which Cooke's mark-ups ranged from
15 to 50 percent at best, a high turnover of goods was necessary to finance production, which, in turn,
was premised on a steady turnover. Cooke financed Edney's salary and the much higher one
paid toEdney's foreman/cutter, the tailors' wages, rent, coal for heating, and the occasional emergency
purchase of finished goods-sums that reached several hundreds of dollars a week during the
production season-from his weekly sales in Augusta.48
But the plethora of goods obscured the other side of the equation, namely, that production exigencies
sharply delimited the nature of the commodities reaching market. Despite appearances, the seemingly
limitless variety of fabrics was not necessarily a response to popular demand as much as it answered
the manufacturers' own production requirements. Mills would sometimes make a new fabric because it
offered the most profitable use for their machines that year. One wonders, anyway, if all those
verbose clothing advertisements were meantto be read literally, item for item, or whether their real
intent was to create a general aura of plenty, an aesthetic of "capitalist realism."49 Francis Cooke, for
instance, eventually received "fancy drilling" instead of the Honeycomb he asked for because the
latter could not be had in New York. Edney found no substitute at all for the plain buff valencia; Cooke
simply had to do without. In the fall of 1835 common grades of woolens became very expensive.
Because the cost could not be passed along to customers of modestly priced goods, Edney substituted
cheaper satinets for them. Presumably they found a market. But when satinets became scarce the
next year Edney simply made no clothes of this class at all, even though they were a retailing staple.
The situation, in fact, provoked a crisis in his relationship with Cooke. Cooke demanded that Edney use
cheaper labor in order to compensate for the higher cloth prices. Edney demurred. The result, he
insisted, would only be "miserable trash, ... a hard bargain at nothing." Edney held his own and Cooke
was forced to acquiesce, though he remained unconvinced. Edney, in fact, suspected that his
employment might soon be at an end.50
The differences between Cooke, the merchant, and Edney the manufacturer were based on the fact
that theclothing business was still largely dependent on its cloth supply. Labor savings, which had
been a key in the business's early rise, were pulled taut. A skilled work force was essential, and
perhaps increasingly so as the growth of the market for fine clothing increased the number of
fastidious customers. Cloth, on the other hand, was a highly fickle affair. It constituted not only the
single largest expense by far for clothing merchants, but also the least dependable one. The price of
such domestic staples as flannel and twilled cloth in the early 1830s, an important part of Edney's
purchases, fluctuated by as much as 40 percent.51 During the winter of 1837-8 Cooke made repeated
requests of Edney to send him clothing of mohair, camblet, blankets, and green, brown, and black
cloths, but Edney could not get hold of the fabrics. This was not because they were nowhere to be
gotten. By the thirties there was little that could not be had in the New York market. Edney's specific
problem arose from Cooke's insistence on dealing with a single cloth supplier, one with which he had a
personal relationship. Edney protested that widening their circle of suppliers was essential for
business: the only way to make up for the inelasticity of labor costs was to enhance their
ability to acquire the fabrics they wanted when they wanted them, and to do so on more competitive
terms, namely, a lower price or a longer credit arrangement. Cooke should have been the
first to accept his reasoning. Who better knew the importance to retail success of a varied selection of
goods? But Cooke was loath to complicate his exclusive relationship with Staples & Clarke, one of the
new breed of dry goods firms specializing in men's clothingmanufacturing. Staples & Clarke sold tens
of thousands of dollars worth of cloths each season to Cooke, which he paid for with his personal notes
on six months' time. The cloth supplier, in other words, was not just the source of the all-important raw
material, but of the no less indispensable long-term credit. Staples & Clarke consequently enjoyed
great leverage over Cooke's business and even over his day-to-day operations. Mr. Clarke would
travel to Augusta himself and observe business first hand, apprising Edney upon his return toNew York
of what and what not to make up, advice which Edney suspected was informed more by Clarke's than
Cooke's interests. But there was little he could do. "You have placed me in your employ and have put
both the employer and the employed in the grip and wholly at the will and entire disposal of Mr.
Clarke." In the end, both employer and employee, Cooke and Edney, stood their ground. Neither
cheaper labor nor cheaper fabrics were used to solve the conundrum, but the business prospered
anyway. And Edney eventually learned an important lesson. When the high-flying economy crashed in
1837 it was Cooke's reputation as a careful and loyal borrower which allowed him to survive the Panic
and subsequent depression by opening accounts with other cloth houses who knew they could trust
him with their money during such stringent times.52
Cooke and Edney were everymen. Their business was pursued in the same fashion all over the
country, not only in Augusta but in Milledgeville and Macon, Tuscaloosa and Vicksburg, Dubuque and
Peru. Upon reaching the frontier during his grand tour of America in 1842, Charles Dickens woke early
one morning to ride out of St. Louis through swamp and bush for a glimpse of the proverbial prairie,
the edge of western civilization. Along the way his riding party passed an abandoned wagon lodged in
a miasma of mud and muck. On its side was printed the motto "Merchant Tailor." Dickens thought it
highly ironic to meet with such modern commercial ambition in this forlorn landscape of wretched
cabins and isolated villages. It was an incongruity he best left unexplained, if it was explainable at all.
Little did he understand, apparently, that there was money to bemade here too.53
Those half of all Americans in 1850 who lived in lands settled only after 1800 never organized a
system of household production that had been an integral part of pioneering in earlier centuries. They
counted, rather, on the growing networks of continental exchange to make their new life out West a
better one. By the 1820s buckskin and homespun were replaced by eastern fashions. A decade later
Tocqueville noted the cultural meaning of these market achievements: "The man you left in New York
you find again in almost impenetrable solitudes: same clothes, same attitude, same language, same
habits, same pleasures."54
Hunt's Merchant's Magazine elaborated on this cohering national identity in 1840. America, it happily
declared, had become a "nation of shopkeepers." This meant that the farmer "was becoming quite as
dependent for clothes upon the manufacturer, as the manufacturer is dependent for food upon the
farmer." Hunt's was not oblivious to the revolutionary, and even anti-intuitive, nature of the new,
national division of labor: "Now, abundant harvests, barns bursting with grain, herds of fat cattle and
fatter hogs, will not make a farmer prosperous." The farmer required a healthy exchange economy in
order that his produce realize its value. Only the market, in other words, enabled him to turn his labor
into the "great number of articles which habit hasmade essential to his comfort." This was the moment
at which the market was "transformed from something acted upon to something acting," as the
historian Winifred Rothenberg has described the transition tocapitalism. In fact, not only did the
marketplace now become a market economy; it constituted a new civic ethos as well. Thus, Hunt's
concluded its paeon to the commercializing continent: "Now the interests of everyone are all
intertwined together ... unit[ing] men everywhere into one society, having common interests, which
can best be promoted by the joint prosperity of all." In that way, the reciprocity of life in the Republic
could be equated with the circular relations, and pseudo-symmetries, of commodity exchange.55
Metropolitan Production
All the pioneering was manifest in the frenzied dimensions of New York's clothing production. A single
issue of the New York Sun during the fall manufacturing season of 1835 carried thirteen separate
notices announcing work for over two thousand men's clothing makers (showing how the democratic
penny press played its own part in industrialization).56 The Herald and Transcript were likewise filled
with scores of advertisements each fall and spring promising "constant employment and good wages"
for city needleworkers. In June, Young & Van Eps sought four hundred sewers to make up clothing "in
the best manner." A month later they were ready toinvite clothing dealers from the South and
West to examine their "very large stock ... in the latest fashion" and discuss credit arrangements.
Hobby, Husted & Co. needed an extra three hundred tailors and five hundred tailoresses, in
addition to six cutters "accustomed to southern work," to fill their wholesale orders in the spring of
1836. The cutters were to report to the firm's new store on Liberty Street, in the heart of the business
district where they had recently moved from the old slop district, William Hobby for the first time
separating his residence from his business. The tailors and tailoresses were sent a mile and a half
uptown just above Grand Street, not far from where Edney was busy manufacturing for Francis Cooke.
There they received pre-cut bundles of fabric and trimmings (buttons and the such) in exchange for a
cash deposit, taking the goods home or to rented work spaces to sew, and thus saving employers the
prohibitive expense of providing a workplace in the city.
Two weeks before Hobby, Husted's call for eight hundred hands, twelve hundred "plain sewers" were
required at the corner of Chrystie and Stanton Streets, a few blocks away. Similar operations
were to be found on adjoining Canal Street, Grand Street, Division Street, and Madison Street. On
Stanton Street, in addition toeight hundred plain sewers, another firm required one hundred additional
"girls ... to do fancy work in the house." But the clothing business was not restricted to a specific
neighborhood. It was organized all over the city: in Greenwich Village, in the Cherry Street shops, on
Chatham Street and the Bowery, on Courtlandt Street just off Broadway. The Tailoresses' and
Seamstresses' Clothing Establishment, a benevolence project sponsored by middle class do-gooders,
solicited southern and western business at their location at Broadway and Leonard Street. Nor was
production confined to the city. In the mid-1830s, it was later recalled, every country village within one
hundred miles of New York "became as busy as a beehive" with men and women sewing for the
city's clothing houses.57
Sewing requirements were highly varied since businesses strove to offer inventories "adapted to the
means and wants of all classes of society." Better garments, for instance, were constructed with
finished edges, with pockets that matched, or with darts and tucks similar in length. Some seams were
double-stitched-which, of course, required far more labor time-or back stitched with fine linen thread.
The top of the back of a more costly pair of trousers might be faced with cotton twill sewn in place
before the center back seam was finished. Its hem could be secured with silk bias tape. Formal and
evening wear was often braided along the outside seams of pants. Sometimes pockets would be
added to the breast, or a button would be put on the watch pocket, or three buttons sewn onto the
cuff. All these variations belonged to the innumerable permutations of style and construction
adapted to a highly segmented market which required more or less time, expertise, and experience
from the sewer. How else could Lewis and Hanford, employing four thousand persons in an average
week in 1850, profitably issue a spring catalogue listing four distinct "qualities" each of hundreds of
separate styles of garments? Messrs. Lewis and Hanford had to be able to order up labor much like
they did their cloths.58
Putting-out answered the need for a fluid, flexible, giant work force which could be immediately
forthcoming when necessary, depending on seasonable fluctuations. Manufacturers saved money
since they then passed expenses and risks on to labor, including the costs of unemployment and of
unused capital in the form, not only of workspace, but of tools as well (threads, needles, and candles,
not to mention wood for heating one's room). What were inhibiting factors for other large industrial
enterprises-the lack of a power source, high rents, and, no less, social fluidity-were only incentives for
clothiers. Their production practices, in other words, were ideally suited to the exigencies of profit-
making in the city. The casual nature of putting-out was not just a function of commercial priorities
either. Married women, for instance, often entered and exited the labor market in accordance to their
family's material needs (not that those could ever be divorced from general economic conditions or
from the business cycle). They sold their sewing skills when income from other sources fell short of
needs: when a doctor's bill was due, new shoes were needed, or a husband was out of work. This was
possible because most women knew how to sew and because clothing manufacturers preferred
keeping a minimum number of permanent employees and improvising the rest, a business
strategy made possible, in turn, by the large numbers of occasional hands available in the city. In fact,
while complaints were often heard in other industries about the temporary nature of female labor, and
particularly about the unreliability of married women's employment, clothiers made few such noises.
Of course, this meant that those searching for full-time employment in the trade often had a
problem.59
The coordination of variable labor costs with the business's multifarious markets was, first and
foremost, a social process. Hierarchies of in-house trimmers, southern-work cutters, vest
embroiderers, journeymen sewing surtouts with side linings creased in half-inch blocks, and
subcontracted plain shirt-makers earning what contemporaries acknowledged to be starvation wages-
they were all expressions of how the material facts of production were applied to social reality and how
social reality was integrated into production. When there were no machines increasing productivity or
technologies redividing the labor, when the product itself underwent no physical
transformation to speak of but became a commodity in every respect, industrial production could only
be organized through a proper manipulation of the extant organization of society.
Such a system was not without its problems. The same low piece rates which sped up the work and
maintained an impressive degree of control by the absent boss were also the source of concerns that
temporary hands would disappear with the goods. Hard-pressed wage earners in the city, for instance,
not only pawned their own clothing to raise cash for rent or groceries. They also pawned the garments
they made for the firms, redeeming them with a new job when the previous one was due. They could,
thus, keep turning over their debts with a cycle of ostensibly free credit borrowed from their
employers. In fact, however, payment was exacted. Clothing houses required deposits of up to several
dollars-the value of the whole job-from those taking cloths home to sew. The money was returned
when the finished goods were delivered and approved, although that too might depend more on the
cash flow of the clothing house rather than on the fact that the work had been delivered. Stories
abounded of employers postponing payment, withholding wages until alterations were made, or even
keeping deposits under the pretext that substandard work had ruined the value of the cloth. If a
deposit was not required, then references were. Putout pieceworkers kept their own ledgers of past
jobs that constituted an employment history available for the perusal by each new boss. Records of all
incoming and outgoing work were also maintained, of course, by the firms. Such
documentationmade it practical to organize put-out production on a mass level and left little doubt but
that employers enjoyed a structural advantage in the system.60
The scale of business is best grasped by looking again at James Edney's relatively modest operations
in the mid-1830s. Having just arrived from Augusta in the late spring of 1835, new to both the city and
the trade, Edney bought $20,000 worth of fabrics and paid $4,600 more in wages and rent to make
them up. A year later, getting an earlier jump on production than he had in 1835, Edney purchased
$50,000 worth of cloths between August and January: his volume had grown 150 percent from one
year to the next. He employed nearly a hundred tailors to sew it all up into garments. These were the
not insignificant sums required tostock a single clothing store-just one of many-in Augusta, Georgia for
a single shopping season in 1836.61
The large wholesale businesses, of course, such as Frederick Conant's, who was a busy presence in
almost every southern state, manufactured for more than one store. They were engaged, in a way that
Edney was not, in industrial production for an anonymous market. They had to think about advertising
strategies, creative credit arrangements with buyers, and the risks inherent in any time gap between
the commitment to produce (the purchase of the cloth) and the product's arrival to market, particularly
in a market influenced by fashion. But while all these risks were compounded by the ambitious size of
operation, volume also helped toameliorate them.
Edney, for instance, could not compete with the wholesale prices of some middle-range goods made of
cloths bought long beforehand at auction and sewed with labor hired on the off-season when it was
cheaper and skilled hands were more available. This also allowed the large firms to more economically
provide the provincial market with the wide variety of clothing it demanded, from the coarsest
apparel to the most expensive fabrics and cuts. Hobby, Husted's advertising motto encapsulated the
business strategy: "Wearing apparel in great variety, adapted to all seasons and climates, and
suited to every taste and condition." Young and Van Eps gave the slogan practical expression, listing a
range of coats for sale from five to twenty-five dollars, pants from sixty-nine cents to eleven dollars,
and vests from forty cents to seven dolars and fifty cents. This madethem suppliers of last resort for
the whole trade, selling to other city clothiers who, for one reason or another-usually an
inability to acquire a certain fabric-couldn't manufacture the goods they needed. Edney, for instance,
went to F.J. Conant's in early October, 1836 looking for a mixed lot of long overcoats which Cooke was
anxious to have and which Edney would not have the time to manufacture himself. Other firms
competed for the business of country merchants who purchased their cloths from someone else.
Kershaw & Co, operators of a wholesale clothing warehouse on Pearl Street, promised to manufacture
goods from cloth bought elsewhere "at the shortest notice and for the lowest price." This would lower
profit margins, but also the risks, and it opened up opportunities for smaller firms with less credit.
There was no lack of points of entry into the fast-growing business of clothing American men.62
"Democratic Capitalism"
In fact, the clothing business was almost too easy. In 1831 the Working Man's Advocate complained of
the "hundreds" who knew nothing of the trade but had established themselves with their own money,
hired cutters to prepare the work, and exploited the labor of impoverished seamstresses to sew the
goods. A few years later, in the wake of the Panic, the Philadelphia Public Ledger condemned the
hordes of "speculators" who had entered the clothing business because of the lure of quick and easy
profits. These "mere mushrooms of bank credits" had been proliferating throughout the decade, to the
point where the wholesale clothingtrade was "running riot."63 Edney, who some might have
wanted to include in that category, nevertheless gave voice to the opprobrium. Men "who knew
nothing of the business," he wrote to Cooke, who were "entirely strangers to it in knowledge and
practice," made up huge quantities of clothing. They then sold the goods to "Tom, Dick and Harry,
here, there and everywhere," moving their giant stocks by extending credit for up to eighteen months
even though they themselves often owed on notes which came due in half a year. No matter, for in the
short run they showed a dramatic profit, which was enough to arrange another round of credit.
Meanwhile, "the fool countrymen" coming to New York to buy their goods "got in the `speculation'
while they were here and saw fortunes staring them in the face." They bought up all
the clothing offered at such easy credit. The cleverest converted that credit into western land holdings-
the ultimate object of the inflated economy-so that when the bubble burst in 1837 they could leave
their bankrupt stores behind for a farm, or reestablish themselves in business with their landed
collateral.64
Clothiers proved to be ideal men for the Age of Jackson; industrial success could become
available to those without any special claims to privilege or capital. Haiman Spitz's experience was
emblematic. Spitz left Posen for America in 1840. His brother was already established in the cap
business in New York and upon his arrival, Haiman bought some goods from him and traveled to New
Orleans to sell them. He peddled the caps, along with "Yankee notions," in the Natchez area. Within a
few months he had accumulated two thousand dollars. Returning to New York, Haiman now
bought clothing, both at auction and from several city firms. He traveled back to New Orleans in
September, selling at good profit. In the spring he returned north to replenish his stock, this time
manufacturing the clothing himself. He continued in this way for several years, coming to New
York to produce clothing in the summer for sale in New Orleans in the winter.
By the mid-forties Haiman was in business with his brother, who had since moved his cap
firm to Boston. Spitz & Brother became wholesalers and retailers of clothing. Peter oversaw the
manufactory in Boston. Haiman, who was now known as Philip, managed the branch store in New
Orleans.
After dissolving their partnership, Philip moved to Bangor, Maine, and again opened a clothing store.
When the 1857 Depression wiped out his wholesale trade in the region, he moved to Boston and sold
liquor and cigars; he then relocated to Baltimore after temperance legislation was passed in
Massachusetts.65
Conclusion
When searching for the historical meaning of the ready-made clothing industry, it is not
enough to note how the consumer was removed from the actual making of things, initially from the
sheep's fleece and the flax patch, and then from the uncut yards of cloth as well. This distance
between production and consumption was both physical and social, often peopled by men of modest
means who had found a niche in the widening sphere of market relations. Their search for profits was
no less central to the making of a ready-made world than was the production of things. Indeed, it gave
industrialization its revolutionary nature.
Footnote
1 Wilson's Business Directory of New York City (1860); New Trade Directory for New York (1800); Hunts
Merchant's Magazine (Jan. 1849): 116; Chamber of Commerce of New York, Annual Report, 1858, 38-
40; Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606-1865, vol. 2 (New York, 1946),
593-7; Maurice Dobb, Theories of Value and Distribution Since Adam Smith: Ideology and Economic
Theory (New York, 1973), 69-73.
TODAY, PREMIUM JEANS; NEXT, MADE-TO-MEASURE?GELLERS, STAN. DNR 36. 35 (Aug 28, 2006): 180.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
Now for the bottom line. [Alan Flusser] related that these first-timers usually order their second suit
when they pick up the first, and they couldn't be happier. "We haven't advertised; we've just used
word of mouth," he added. "In the last three months, we've introduced 20 new men to the product. Not
a lot of people, but each has three friends. Also, it's really a feeder program for our custom shop."
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Off the wall? Not if you talk to custom tailor Alan Flusser, the man who does the made-to-measure at
Brooks Bros., or the specialists on the manufacturing end. They're all gushing over the latest wave
of clothingcustomers who aren't exactly refugees from jeans stores selling True Religion, Diesel or 7
For all Mankind denims. These dudes-the 25-plus, post-boomers-are beginning to build their wardrobes
of posh suits that look like they belong on executive row at investment banks like Goldman Sachs or
Lehman Brothers. It's not a coincidence that these prestigious companies, among many, slammed the
door shut on casual-anytime a few years ago. The result? The brainy young guys just entering the
world of finance started dressing for the occasion.
Is a $1,250 or $1,500 made-to-measure suit too pricey for them? Or premium jeans with a $300 price
tag? Not really, if they drive a BMW 3 series and weekend in the Hamptons.
Why my sudden interest in the top end of the clothing market at a time when the business is stumbling
badly? (Check the latest NPD survey, on page 138, that shows the precipitous 17 percent drop in suit
sales for the first half of this year.) Made-to-measure suits are booming, according to people at IAG
(which owns Tom James, which is in the process of buying Hartz & Co.), Coppley Apparel with its one-
week turnaround, and Hart Schaffner Marx.
But what really stopped me in my tracks a few weeks ago was the mailer from Alan Flusser announcing
the custom tailor's new made-to-measure clothes. His reasoning: "There was a void in the marketplace
for young men who love to dress up and aspire to wear real, custom-made clothes, but can't afford the
$3,500 price tag."
For some background, he said, "One of our largest corporate clients for custom clothes are executives
from Goldman Sachs. The company has many young men, roughly five years out of college in their
mid-to-late twenties, who are now earning enough money to get beyond Brooks Bros. and Joseph A.
Banks. They're ready for a $1,500 Armani or Zegna off-the-rack suit."
Flusser went after the guys who wanted to look like their boss, explaining, "We told their bosses-our
regular clients-that the service was now available. You can imagine the impact telling the managing
directors of companies like Goldman Sachs that their high-flying money managers can get the look of
custom without breaking their budget."
Who are Flusser's first-time customers? His description: "The guy working in an investment house and
making over $125,000. He brings his friends here, and we tell them about the shirts and the suits on a
one-on-one level. They immediately relate to made-to-measure, and they can appreciate it with their
scholarly background."
Now for the bottom line. Flusser related that these first-timers usually order their second suit when
they pick up the first, and they couldn't be happier. "We haven't advertised; we've just used word of
mouth," he added. "In the last three months, we've introduced 20 new men to the product. Not a lot of
people, but each has three friends. Also, it's really a feeder program for our custom shop."
Reading the classics at Brooks Bros.
Martin Greenfield, the major domo of custom at Brooks Brothers, reported that the retailer "gets a lot
of younger customers in their thirties and younger. It could be as much as 25 percent. Sometimes we
make a bigger sale with a younger guy than with our regulars." He explained these are the young men
entering the business world-financial and other areas-and they come in to buy made-to-measure,
running from $1,250. "Very often, the fathers, my regulars, bring their sons."
Like Flusser, he also plays teacher with the newbies, and primes them on details like functional
buttonholes, hand-stitching-everything that looks custom. "Today, money isn't the object, because
they're making a lot of money," he announced.
Greenfield's made-to-measure 101 curriculum starts off with a navy or banker's gray pinstripe or solid
in a safe two-button, flapped pocket model with a center vent. How big is the first sale? Said
Greenfield, "They usually buy two suits, a navy blazer and a pair of charcoal pants. And the younger
guys buy no pleats because Brooks is known for this."
More retail feedback from Warwick Jones, Coppley Apparel, the Hartmarx division in Canada, who gets
his input from Harry Rosen, the retail chain based in Toronto. He told me, "We're finding that the
younger guy in his late twenties is accepting made-to-measure, because he's used to customizing
everything in his lifestyle, from his courses at school, his iPod, his car, etc., and it's the same with
suits. He can create something that's just for him, and he doesn't go to a rack in a store and see the
same 10 suits."
Coppley gives them the works when it comes to fashion, with slim-bodied silhouettes to double-
breasteds topeak-lapel, one-button models. Retails run from $795 to $1,295, and Jones' ace in the hole
is "Saturday-to-Saturday delivery." His made-to-measure business is up 26 percent this year.
Modern suit, modern lifestyle
Likewise, Eric Jones at Hart Schaffner Marx reported that his company has a new model and
fabricmade-to-measure package, broken down by the rejuvenated labels. He noted, "The ones showing
real growth are Travelor and Monogram. Travelor is all about sexier piece goods, and the model is
younger, cooler, hipper. What we like to see is the 27-year-old guy in good shape-the first-time, made-
to-measure customer-buying this one.
"It's the right model for him, a two-button trimmer coat with side vents and a slightly narrower, point-
to-point shoulder. In other words, a modern suit for modern lifestyle." He said Travelor made-to-
measure retails for $825 and Monogram, at $1,295 and up, depending on the better piece goods." This
is the first season the various HSM labels have been separated, and Jones is projecting double-digit
growth.
The big surprise about this end of the business came from Mimmo Spano, the clothing designer/stylist
at the flagship Saks Fifth Avenue, who said about 20 percent of his regular custom-suit business was
with men from 23-years-old. And what do they order? Vintage styles and 1930s vintage stripes.
He continued that first-timers often come in with their girlfriends, and noted, "They find my suit
silhouette sexy and love the way their guy looks." First-time customers, he explained, go for the
advanced styles, and he sold a slew of his own three-button peak or double-breasted models.
The typical young Saks custom-clothing customer will spring for one suit, a sport coat and a pair of
trousers." Not bad, considering the suit goes for $3,200 a pop. And the same young man can pick up a
pair of pricey jeans just one floor up at Saks.
Comments? Write to [email protected]
Copyright © 2006 Fairchild Publishing Inc.
Barneys' Made-To-Measure SuitePalmieri, Jean E. DNR 38. 37 (Sep 15, 2008): n/a.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
Addition of 1,100-square foot department expected to increase sales 10-15 percent in the short term
Barneys' Made-to-Measure Suite
Addition of 1,100-square foot department expected to increase sales 10-15 percent in the short term
NEW YORK
--Barneys New York is creating a made-to-measure mecca at its Madison Avenue flagship.
In a move that "reflects the changes in the business," the luxury specialty store will today unveil a
1,100-square-foot suite on its seventh floor comprised of four rooms that are designed to capitalize on
the explosive growth of this tailored clothing category.
In the short term, sales are expected to increase 10 to 15 percent, and 5 to 10 percent a year after
that, projected Tom Kalenderian, executive vice-president and GMM of men's. "But that doesn't factor
in the extra business," he noted. "The physical boutique will attract more attention."
Kalenderian said the floor hadn't been renovated since the store opened in September of 1993. "We're
redeploying the space to fit the needs of the business as it has matured. We're dedicating a significant
amount of square footage to customized clothing."
Noting that this is "an area where no ready-to-wear will hang," Kalenderian said this is "very new" for
Barneys. "In the past, we would do made-to-measure at a desk within rtw," he said. "But now there will
be four independent spaces that are connected but not designed as one room."
The first "and most important," he said, is the "library," where customers can sit at a desk and sift
through fabric choices "in a quiet, contained setting. It's not behind closed doors; there's a glass wall,
so it's private but you can still see in."
Next up is a lounge where friends and family can relax while the shopper is making his choices. This is
followed by the dressing chambers, which are "more private and discreet; near the lounge but away
from the traffic on the floor."
Last up is the home of the master tailor and head fitter. "He's right on the other side of the wall,"
Kalenderian said.
"Everything works in concert to create the best shopping experience for the customer," he said. "It's
really about customer service. It was a big decision to take square footage away from ready-to-wear.
But this new step will enhance the customized clothing business."
Kalenderian believes the new suite will appeal to the existing made-to-measure customer and attract a
new one as well. "The men who already shop there will spend more time because they'll be less
distracted and can concentrate. And other customers who walk by the suite will be intrigued and
want to come in."
Kalenderian said that when the store opened, there were three floors of tailored clothing. The fourth
centered on contemporary lines, while the sixth focused on traditional vendors and the seventh offered
luxury clothing.
But in 2002 the store revamped the offering, compressing clothing onto two floors--with contemporary
and classic lines on six and luxury brands on seven. The fourth floor was converted to contemporary
sportswear.
"We needed more square footage for contemporary sportswear, so we consolidated
tailored clothing into fewer brands," he said. "But the editing of the business and resources actually
allowed it to grow, so it was a positive process."
The made-to-measure suite will offer fabric books from Battistoni, Brioni, Canali, Zegna, Incotex, Isaia,
Kiton and Lanvin 15 Faubourg.
"This is just what the business needs," Kalenderian said. "It's important to be doing something different
in an area that is viewed as classic. That doesn't mean that it also can't be modern."
He pointed out that in addition to the made-to-measure suite, the entire seventh floor is being
renovated. That revamp of the part of the floor that includes Amani Collezioni, Battistoni, Canali, Dolce
& Gabbana, Giorgio Armani, Zegna, Isaia and Paul Smith is expected to be completed by the end of
this week.
Kalenderian pointed out that by capturing some unused space on the floor, the 5,500 square feet
devoted tortw has been retained. "It's all part of the continued evolution of the building."
Credit: BY JEAN E. PALMIERI
Illustration
Caption: A rendering of the new department
COPYRIGHT (c)2008 FAIRCHILD FASHION GROUP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Word count: 685
Custom clothing co. a high-tech fit for Newbury St.Goodison, Donna. McClatchy - Tribune Business News [Washington] 19 June 2012.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting
Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract
Alton Lane uses a 3-D, white-light body scanner to capture about 70 percent of its customers'
measurements and a traditional tape measure for a dozen others to ensure a proper fit for its
"bespoke," or custom-made,clothing.
Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation
June 19--A custom men's clothing company that marries old-school tailoring techniques with new
technology is headed to Boston.
Alton Lane uses a 3-D, white-light body scanner to capture about 70 percent of its
customers' measurementsand a traditional tape measure for a dozen others to ensure a proper fit for
its "bespoke," or custom-made,clothing.
The company will open a showroom at 91 Newbury St. in the fall or early winter, selling custom suits,
shirts, blazers, trousers, overcoats and tuxedos by private appointment.
"If you go to England and Savile Row, you're guaranteed to have four or five fittings," co-founder
Peyton Jenkins said, referring to the London street famous for its traditional men's bespoke tailoring.
"Our goal is toget it fit perfectly out of the box, and technology can help us to achieve this."
The company uses its iPad app to take orders from customers who sit at a showroom bar to choose
their fabrics, cuts and detailing, including lapel type and width, and lining color.
"Our role is not to be the designer, but to put the design in the customers' hands so they really get
what they're looking for," Jenkins said.
Once Alton Lane has a customer's measurements, it sends a 3-D image to its factories in Asia.
Customers also can shop online using the company's 3-D "virtual design lab."
Alton Lane launched in New York three years ago and expanded to Washington, D.C. Jenkins co-
founded the company with best friend and fellow University of Virginia grad Colin Hunter, both 30.
"We had different bodies, but similar problems -- nothing fit us off the rack," Jenkins said. "We
wanted to do custom (clothing), but it was just inaccessibly priced for the most part. We felt that there
had to be a better way."
The company's pricing is one of its best attributes, according to Jenkins. Suits start at $500 and shirts
at $89.
Credit: Boston Herald