new size guideline for used / vintage clothing
I need some help with the new sizing policy. for a person like myself that sells vintage clothing ? thank you
1 comment
I need some help with the new sizing policy. for a person like myself that sells vintage clothing ? thank you
itapaquanitatuckahenry
·2 weeks agomeasure, measure, measure . . .
suggest that you do accurate tape measurements in metric and imperial:
back neck to hem,
back neck to waist.
back pit-to-pit.
front pit to pit (there can be a fair difference esp. if the item is old and made for a bustier woman).
across top of shoulders.
across waist (if applicable).
extended waist (if gathered/pleated skirt for example).
hip.
inside sleeve.
outside sleeve.
wrist, button hole to button.
any other measurement that could be relevant.
you may think that is a lot of measuring - it depends on the garment. accurate actual measurements are more important and useful than "S" or "size 12"(yes, but what year?). or size 15 1/2. do you know what that is? it's been obsolete for decades and refers to a "half size" which was for "stockier" women or those with a shorter torso.
there still are people who sew. if you look at their patterns' directions you'll see the measurements as well.
i've been around for a long time. i can guarantee that sizing was always a problem - manufacturers differed from the competition, domestic/foreign measurements, shoppers' proportions differed, and nothing was as aggravating as finding "the ideal size" to be completely out of sync.
two examples:
ballantyne has been a steady presence in the cashmere segment. it has also (except for special-outlet labels such as "ballantyne for berk of bond street") stated the size on its woven labels. so you'd think that a "size 38" would be consistent from one decade to the next.
not so.
even dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists like the scottish mills adjusted their sizing as time went on. so measure. it's always best. and i'd recomment a list format.
late in the 1970s there was a fashion for boiled-wool jackets but geiger and other european manufacturers were expensive. enter the chinese. competitive prices, sturdy construction . . . and sleeves that were, on average, three inches too long. this also ties in with someone's comment about asian sizes.
in any event, just measure and forget what size 8 meant in 1965 vs. 1980 etc.