|
|
Post by Mme de Beaufort on Oct 15, 2007 18:09:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by cosmoblue on Oct 19, 2007 3:02:35 GMT -5
I found this Review here: www.gbacg.org/GreatPatternReview/Wingeo.htm
#211 - 1790-1820 Double Breasted WaistcoatDavid SalvinThere are errors in the pattern in terms of the sizing. The lines on the edge of the front facing don't line up (they cross over sizes) and secondly the lines for the 36-38 cross over into the 38-40. I've already called the pattern maker and she admitted the problems (claiming I was the first to find them). She says she will fix them. On the waistcoat the instructions (while they may have been period accurate) are a pain in terms of modern sewing and can easily be altered to make it much easier to complete the pattern (without any machine sewing showing).
#212 - 1790-1820 FrockcoatKevin Roche - RecommendedThe pattern goes together well but runs very small. There are two drawing errors in the cutting lines which are easy to correct. Plan on making multiple muslins for the best fit. Kevin is pictured at the right. David SalvinThere are errors on the pattern markings. The lines for the sleeve top are again mixed up between sizes. Size 36-38 is transposed with the 38-40 lines. |
|
|
|
Post by Goblin, esq. on Dec 14, 2007 13:01:32 GMT -5
I don't like the Wingeo 1790-1820 Frock Coat pattern.
From a distance it will pass as 1790-1800, not later, and a lot of the construction is not period accurate. For instance, the back is much too wide, and the cutaway-pocket-backpleat line is wrong (those three details should be roughly on the same horizontal line). I don't recall if the pattern includes pockets, or only pocket flaps, and the construction notes are far too modern. (I would use a heavy interfacing (canvas) for the collar rather than the short bits of boning, for instance.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Mme de Beaufort on Dec 14, 2007 13:03:34 GMT -5
Pocket flaps.
The boning worked I guess. I probably would have used canvas had I known that would have worked better than the heavy interfacing. Hubby is getting a new frock-coat soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Goblin, esq. on Dec 14, 2007 14:29:28 GMT -5
The boning works reasonably well, but it occasionally poked me in the jaw in a way that annoyed me. Plus, I have no evidence for it being period at all.
I have a thing for working pockets, so I tend to put them in every garment, whether called for or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mme de Beaufort on Dec 19, 2007 13:34:12 GMT -5
It's advisable, considering that we all need places to put our cameras and other non-period items. My ratings for the frock-coat pattern: 1-5 (five excellent)
Directions: 1 - horrible
Look: 2 - Marginal. Cut too high on the front, too square.
I would have liked more guidance than just the dense chickenscratch instructions written on the pattern paper. The pleats and vent were objects of great annoyance to me, and I'm still sure they're not right. I ilke the height of the collar, but I had to adjust the front cutaways and make them lower as they revealed far too much of the waistcoat, two inches should be revealed at most. The pocket flaps were just there, no idication where they should go; they're not even pictured on the cover image. The boning did not bother my husband, so I did not take issue with it.
It's a decent garment, despite the wonky pleats and vent. I didn't bother with the pockets or the cuffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by aylwen on Apr 16, 2008 19:08:13 GMT -5
I use the Rockinghorse Farm frockcoat pattern, and the Wingeo frockcoat sleeves. I have not tried the Wingeo frockcoat though, so have no comment on it at this stage.
Aylwen
|
|
|
|
Post by Mme de Beaufort on Feb 2, 2010 19:23:43 GMT -5
The Rocking Horse pattern is not to be found on this planet, and it's been under revision by the new owner of Rocking horse for years.
|
|
Where so many hours have been spent in convincing myself that I am right, is there not some reason to fear I may be wrong? ~ Jane Austen 
