Posted 2010-02-10 9:13 PM (#61159) Subject: Foundation garments
BeverlyA. has mentioned this in the vintage blouse thread and I thought it would make a great topic.
I did some waist training before I had my daughter. I would like to start waist training again in anticipation of all the cute summer dresses I plan to make. I don't own any girdles but I do have a few corsets (both overbust and underbust) and some waist cinchers. I am thinking of using negative ease in the fitting of these dresses.
Do you wear foundation garments? Do you do your fitting with your foundation garments?
Here is a great article I found on BurdaStyle http://www.burdastyle.com/blog/sewing-vintage-retro-foundation-garm...
Has anyone made their own foundation garments from the curve program? Can the curve program make bullet bras!?
Posted 2010-02-10 11:20 PM (#61169 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
Marie-Anne, I'm enjoying your posts.
I've made bras from Curves. I prefer a seamless cup, however, and they take me over 5 hours to make so I'd rather just buy my favorite Vanity Fair. But I have some friends who LOVE their self-made bras. Curves doesn't have a bullet bra, but if you could figure out how to fit the pasties cup into the underwire bra, and stitch it with spiral "quilting", you'd probably have a reasonable facsimile...
I also made a girdle in a lingerie sewing class when I was a teen. I still have some of the yellow-gold powernet. (early 70s). I remember wearing girdles and garter belts with those clamps that held up hose. Panty hose was a GREAT invention and now we don't even wear them much.
As a side note, I'm attending a 50s themed fund raiser at the end of the month, and am musing over what to wear that looks 50s but won't cost me much time or money. I don't want to do a poodle skirt because that's so cliche, plus I feel and recently read they were only worn by young girls. Which I'm not! I'm thinking cardigan sweater, full skirt, pearls, hat and gloves. I have a good sweater and a stiff petticoat, but need to make a skirt and hat. I know, I can shop the vintage stores, but at my size in particular I bet it will be faster to sew these garments. I'm going to pass on the bullet bra. It has entered my head, but not only is that more effort than I'm willing to expend, I stick out quite enough in that department, thank you!
You should always measure and do your fitting garments wearing the foundations that you are going to wear the garment with. Strapless dresses in particular require a long-line bra, corset, or all in one, and those can all redistribute your body parts, particularly those of us with more flesh in our body parts. I would not use negative ease on a fabric with no stretch. You have to move... and breathe!
Posted 2010-02-11 8:39 AM (#61173 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
The negative would be to compensate for taking the waist in with a corset or cincher.
Posted 2010-02-12 8:26 PM (#61208 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
Re: the fifties look. Looking through my HS yearbook would not reveal everyone wearing full skirts. In fact, we also wore long (almost to the ankle) straight skirts, bobby socks and saddle shoes. Cardigan sweater sets or blouses with Peter Pan collars, single strands of pearls. Short hair. I was decidedly out of fashion because I wore my hair long but other than that..... One style of skirt we also wore was a gathered one made of as many widths of fabric we could gather onto the waistband and starched heavily with as many petticoats underneath as we owned. Whatever you decide on, have fun.
Edited by Beverly A. 2010-02-12 8:27 PM
Posted 2010-02-23 7:54 AM (#61377 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
I definitely do my fitting with the foundation garments I'll be wearing. I made a wiggle dress from a repro Butterick pattern (I looked on the site but couldn't find a link - I don't know where they've disappeared it to) and it fits beautifully with my all-in-one, albeit snugly. But with a regular bra and panties, I can't even get it over my hips.
A suggestion? If you have go-to foundation garments for your vintage styles, it might be worth it to set up a second measurements chart from them. It's not only your waist that changes, but, depending on the item, your hips, underbust and bust point as well. Negative ease won't take these all into account. A second chart will give you a more accurate starting point with less fussing.
And now that I've said it out loud, I guess I should do this too...
Oh! To answer the other part of your query. No, I've never made my own foundation garments. Yet. I have the Laughing Moon overbust corset pattern, which is on my list of things to do. The rest, I prefer to buy.
Posted 2010-02-23 8:53 PM (#61406 - in reply to #61377) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
Great ideas! Has anyone done two sets of measurements before? I also have the Laughing Moon overbust corset pattern. It's great and the instructions are really nice. Can you wear underbust corsets as foundation garments or would that be too bulky for, say, a wiggle dress?
I really want to have a nice vintage repro wardrobe for this summer, complete with pencil skirts and wiggle dresses. But to pull off a vintage silhouette I either need a smaller waist or bigger hips. Maybe I should try those padded underwear. I'm just worried the lumps and pads would be visible in a tight skirt. Haha, it would look like those cheap superhero Halloween costumes with the foam muscles.
I feel like foundation garments have a strange place in soceity. I always feel strange buying them. Like people will judge me, or say I'm 'cheating'. Perhaps their popularity has decreased because women began to see them as 'fixers' when they felt that nothing was wrong with their bodies. I like to think of them as 'enhancers'. They take a beautiful thing, and make it sweeter. They do all the work and a tailored outfit shows it off. Anyone agree, disagree? I understand this might be a loaded topic, and some people might feel strongly about this. We're all ladies here, let's be civil.
Posted 2010-02-24 8:31 AM (#61414 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
"Has anyone done two sets of measurements before?"
In a couple of weeks, I'll be able to say "yes". When I'm done, I'll check in here. The system is set up to do multiple charts...the only thing I would make sure to do is a) a dress sloper of the new chart to double check fit and b) create separate folders in the PMB files I use (My Pictures, Patterns and StyleSheets) so that the pattern info doesn't get all mixed up.
Re: corsets - I worry that, even with a good fitting underbust corset, the line over the hip will show through something fitted like a wiggle dress or pencil skirt. But a waist cincher might be ok, and there's always corsolette or all-in-one. For something that fills you out a bit, might I suggest something like this?:
It'll give you a smooth line, takes extra pads if you want them, has garter clips and isn't insanely pricey. Also, I've bought from that company and their product and service is really good.
Posted 2010-02-24 8:46 AM (#61417 - in reply to #61406) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
marieannepynn - 2010-02-23 6:53 PMGreat ideas! Has anyone done two sets of measurements before?
sure, all the time, when i was costuming operas full time i had several different sets of measurements for the singers that appeared often in our shows, i measured them in whatever foundation was to be worn for the period we were doing.
I also have the Laughing Moon overbust corset pattern. It's great and the instructions are really nice. Can you wear underbust corsets as foundation garments or would that be too bulky for, say, a wiggle dress? I really want to have a nice vintage repro wardrobe for this summer, complete with pencil skirts and wiggle dresses.
1--in general, women were bigger in years past. so when they squished their bodies to make smaller waists, the excess flesh had to go somewhere and that was usually up into the bust and/or down into the hips.
2--if you want to look authentic to the period, you have to wear what they wore, including the foundations.
for the wiggle dress period they didn't wear corsets, they wore girdles.
Posted 2010-02-25 2:06 PM (#61452 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
Thanks for the great link Jeannine. That doesn't look lumpy at all! I also like their shapewear and posture supports. The waist cincher looks like it would be perfect. I might just use the corset to train when I'm staying home.
Rowena, that sounds like so much work but I'm sure it paid off. I have looked at a few girdles, mostly at GirdleBound. I'm worried that a girdle like this one http://www.underworks.com/rago/5359.html will be unflattering and give me a childish figure. Perhaps something like this would be more appropriate and still be period correct. http://www.underworks.com/rago/5221.html. I would like the control to be at the waist.
Posted 2010-02-28 2:02 PM (#61476 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
Oooo TaDa! http://www.kissmedeadly.co.uk/collections/vargas-girdle This looks perfect and I love how it doesn't come down to far over the bum and thighs. Probably makes going to the washroom easier too. What do you think? I may need to save up for a bit but it's definitely going on the wishlist.
Posted 2010-03-02 2:55 PM (#61520 - in reply to #61159) Subject: RE: Foundation garments
The first thing I saw was the garters. Although my very first pair of panty hose came only to my knees, quality control must've been asleep that day, I was grateful for them. I am 5 feet tall and when I wore garters I had to roll the stockings down which made them vulnerable to holes in the tops and ultimately runs.
On the other hand I have to smile that old adage pops it's head "what goes around, comes around." It appears girdles and the ilk are going to make another entrance, but then after bustier's and corsets what do I expect. I remember my great grandmother's corset and the powerful odor it took on. There was not an affordable way to have a different corset for each day. The more it changes the more it stays the same.