In spite of the many comments to the contrary, the piece is varying in length from armpit to hem. Specifically, they’re shrinking as the sizes get larger. If the pieces were stacked on a horizontal plane at that armhole and side seam, you’d see increased length from arm pit to hem easily enough with the smaller sizes having the longer side seam. Picture that mentally, it’s kind of funny. This is why most of us in the US prefer the stack point of a nest to be on a horizontal plane at the armpit because the grade is easier to see. Somebody on the forum (from Israel) claims a leading designer there taught her to do it like this. The only way you can really tell if a pattern is graded properly for length is by comparing the CB neck and the CB hem. If these two points are static across all sizes, it’s a boo-boo.
The sketch was pulled from a Russian CAD program site called Comtense. This particular illustration came from here. By the way, don’t ask me if the software is any good because I don’t know. This plot isn’t a reflection of whether the software is good or bad, software only does what you tell it to do. I just found the site and added it to my collection. The English translation is very good so it’s a bit of a kill joy for Engrish devotees.
Many suggested the center back line was a problem (at right) but it’s not and that is actually the reason I picked this. Sure, you could say there’s a notch missing at CB but seriously folks, one missing notch is not a crime of sufficient gravitas to merit a pop quiz. And neither are poorly graded patterns. I can find examples of both all day long and never tire.
This is not a mirrored back. The tip off was a notch at back waist. I selected this piece because the upper most back should extend past the imaginary mirrored line that is so worshiped and adored in US drafting practice. Sure, it could have been shaped a little better with a curve rather than a straight line but it was the concept of what was right with this draft that I was trying to illustrate.