This is another submission from my Russian pattern making friend Rita. Unrelated, I’m surprised at how we’ve managed to keep in touch over the years. We first started chatting when we both still lived in Albuquerque so it’s weird that we’ve never actually met. I think she contacted me after she saw some of those hand outs I used to write up for my clients. You know, the precursor to the newsletter I used to publish which was the precursor to the book? Anyway, Rita says:
I keep these nests for interviewing new hires for technical design
positions. These graded nests are for Infant Boy Polo size range 6mo to 24mo (skipping 9mo).
Rita’s questions for those she interviews are:
- Do you know what you are looking at?
- Which nest would you prefer to work with?
Post your responses in comments. Tomorrow I’ll post the answer to why one nest is preferred over the other.
I have an advanced bonus question:
- Why might one of the nests have been made improperly? What might the pattern grader have been attempting to simplify?
In general, nests do not have grainlines (this one does not) and the notation is minimal. This is not considered to be an error. A nest is simply used to check the grade, a pre-flight check used by the pattern department. The nest is not intended or used for any other purpose.
The patterns in nest one and two are exactly the same. The only thing different is the stack point (the baseline of where they’re nested).
Presuming the CF placket will be inserted with automated equipment, I’m inclined to prefer nest #1. It’s easier to read for me because the grader chose the neckline CF as the point of origin. To my mind, I can see how the child gets taller and broader without much effort – a quick “read”, if you will.
The second nest is a little more difficult to read. It appears to be graded from the breastline measure (i.e. the base of the sceye). The length of the placket appears to be consistent across all sizes. I see no immediate benefit to choosing this point of origin from which to grade.
In an “ideal” world, I’d also like that placket to grade so it retains proportion with the total CF length. But, again, depending on the equipment being used, this may not be possible (e.g. long set up time, too much work interruption, etc.)
Nest #1 also has a few add’l notations (e.g. Cut 1 Single, Self) that I would prefer on a pattern. While the cutter’s must might address this information, it seems that redundancy in this place would be a good idea.
I am not sure if I should answer since I have graded similar styles. I am curious of what the horizontal line is across the pattern? If it is the grain line, then I could see problems during the placket application, but it all depends on the fabric. Since most polos are made of knits, the grainline should run the length of the shirt.
I prefer number one, although I do not like grades from front neck drops, I always grade from the high point of shoulder.
I almost never grade plackets on polos, unless they are big sizes.
I think the horizonal line across the chest could be a match line. Although it has no number or code beside it.
That also could be the grade point, which I do not care for.
I would choose nest 2 because I can see that, even though infants are small, an 18-mo.-old can’t wear a 6-mo.-old’s shirt (usually), and the necklines in nest 2 are proportionate to each size. In nest 1, all the necklines are the same, which would either be really small or really huge on the smallest size (since I can’t tell just from looking).
I’m looking at the front of a shirt. It’s marked for a button placket offset from CF. It has a horizontal stripe matching line perhaps. I would prefer to work with the second nest because I can make out the armholes and necklines distinctly.
The grader may have been trying to simpify the first set by using the placket and stripe matching line as the reference for the rest of the nest. Those are not fitting lines and the point of grading is to get different sizes that fit different bodies. In fact, you may want different lengths of plackets for the different sizes. At least he/she choose the longest length for all of them. Maybe they’re easier or cheaper to sew if all have the same placket length.
I’ve never made baby patterns or baby clothes, however I’ll take a shot at this one for fun. That is a simple polo shirt for a baby. I prefer nest two for baby wear, because it takes into account of the amount of growth experienced by babies in all parts of their bodies, not just width and length of torso. The second nest has far more difference in overall proportions, from the neckline to the armscye to the length of the torso. The first looks more like it was graded for toddler’s wear. The lack of difference in the neckline’s height and width for the different sizes is strange to my eyes. I think it would look awful large on a 6 month old and might be tight on a 24 month old. Was the pattern maker trying to simplify the neckline at the expense of the fit?
I’m going for nest #1. I don’t think the armholes on nest #2 will fit correctly
I already know the answer because I am in on this discussion late but if you work in an automated system you would should easily recognize it is nest #2. Your key grading points would have to allign up on the axis (either X or Y) that you establish to create the grading. This nested grade should also have those key meaurement lines in it including chest measurement, waist measurement, sleeve length etc., anything you would want on your spec. sheet. If you add the grading to the end of the lines it is very easy to use the measure grade command in your sytem and measure to make sure the pattern is grading correctly.
On a side note. I feel that waist shaping on women’s garments should grade up and down, not just in and out. Any thoughts about this? It drives me crazy that I can’t buy a tailored dress or jacket without the waistpoint being around my lower ribs. I can always tell when companies sample in a size 6 because the problem is so exacerbated as you grade up that it is a wonder to me how they fit anyone but the most petit women.