Just how personal can you get? When it comes to suits, there's customised, tailor-made, bespoke or made-to-measure. Simon Brooke sorts through the confusion: [SURVEYS EDITION]Brooke, Simon . Financial Times [London (UK)] 31 Mar 2007: 10.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlightingShow duplicate items from other databases

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Matthew Karcha needed a suit. "I wanted something that was fashionable but classically elegant.

Because I'm quite broad over the shoulders but I've got a 32-inch waist, I also needed something that

would fit properly," says Karcha, who works in the high-end property business. It was pretty clear that

off-the-peg was not an option. But should he go for made-to-measure or bespoke? And anyway, what

the hell is the difference?

Ask the average bloke in the street about the differences between personal tailoring, off-the-peg,

customised, tailor-made, made-to- measure or bespoke, and chances are he won't have a clue what to

answer. Indeed, these days there seem to be more variations and price points in suiting then there are

ties in most men's closets.

Karcha ended up ordering a brown cashmere single breasted suit with a red lining through Gieves &

Hawkes' "personal tailoring" service. Translation: the suit is created on the standard company "block"

or model but made in the customer's choice of fabric and altered to fit his measurements.

"Personal tailoring is a process. It's more than just made-to- measure because it's not just about

manufacturing, it's about developing a relationship with the customer and allowing them to have some

creative input," explains Andrew Goldberg, Gieves' head of tailoring.

At Kilgour, meanwhile, there's a service called entry level. "With bespoke, the garment is made by

hand in Savile Row by one person, whereas our entry-level suits are still hand-made but produced by a

team," says Hugh Holland, Kilgour's managing director. "It's like a watch - there are various levels of

intricacy."

Then there's Austin Reed's Signature range, which "fits above our ready-made and our made-to-

measure lines but is not quite true bespoke - there are more than a hundred different linings and a

choice of buttons, for instance," says chief executive Nick Hollingworth.

So is it all just the slick semantics of the marketeer keen to take advantage of an already nonplussed

would-be suit purchaser, or actually a positive new development in men's wear? For his part,

Hollingworth defends any additional complication: "Different people might be prepared to pay for

three-, four- or five-star hotels but, these days, what more and more of us want is something

individual, plus a higher level of personal service."

Similarly, Holland says, all the additional variation is driven by customer demand: "A bespoke suit is

Pounds 3,400 whereas entry- level suits are Pounds 1,880 for the first suit, when we measure you and

then Pounds 1,410 afterwards, so people very often trade up," he says. One barrister uses his entry-

level suit under his gown and his bespoke version to see clients, for instance.

Choice - financial and aesthetic - was also the impetus behind Baby Bespoke, shirtmaker New &

Lingwood's contribution to the many new options facing customers. "We found that people want to

customise their shirts without getting involved in the full bespoke process," says sales and marketing

director Justin Sumrie. "We've got a range of collar and cuff options available and a host of fabrics."

Corporate financier Hugh van Cutsem, for example, recently bought a Baby Bespoke shirt for his

wedding. "I'd never had a shirt made specially for me and I wasn't really sure how you went about it,"

he says. "I wanted something with a light blue stripe, which also had the old fashioned separate collar.

It's quite an unusual combination."

Unlike a fully bespoke shirt, Baby Bespoke comes in two fits: the Jermyn Street, which Sumrie

describes tactfully as "fairly full", and the tailored fit, which works for a leaner figure or a more casual

look.

Eton Shirts is taking the concept of micro-categorisation to the logical, technical, extreme: "You'll be

able to create your own shirt via the internet," says Jan Borghardt, head of design. "You'll be able to

design it on screen - sleeve length, collar style, colours - and then you'll get an SMS telling you when

it's on its way. Everyone can be their own designer." Out of confusion, comes simplicity.

(Copyright Financial Times Ltd. 2007. All rights reserved.)

Bespoke tailors hanging on by a thread in Savile Row SUITCUTTERS CLUSTER: Rising rents, smaller premises and an influx of plush stores and offices are forcing bespoke tailors out of one of London's most celebrated streets, writes Aditya Chakrabortty: [LONDON 1ST EDITION]CHAKRABORTTY, ADITYA. Financial Times [London (UK)] 13 Dec 2005: 14.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

John Hitchcock's new shop is hair-splittingly close to his old one. It has the same area postcode, sits in

the same grid of the London A-Z street map and is less than a minute's walk away. The crucial

difference is the street name. For 99 years, Anderson & Sheppard, Mr Hitchcock's bespoke-

tailoring firm, was on Savile Row. When its lease expired in March, one of the biggest names on the

street of suit-makers was forced to leave.

His old premises have been largely smashed up in preparation for redevelopment and, as Mr Hitchcock

looks over at the rubble and builders' trucks, some wistfulness is only too easy to detect. "We were all

very upset at having to move," he says. "And we may still go back one day." Although, as he admits,

that is a remote possibility: Pollen Estate, the landlord, has divided the site into units too small to

accommodate most bespoketailors. The remainder will be plush shops and smart offices.

Pollen owns over half the freeholds on Savile Row and tailors worry that it has similar plans for the

rest. Ask Mike Jones, consultant and spokesman for the estate, to name his ideal tenants and he

suggests high-fashion brands such as Stella Mc-Cartney and Paul Smith. What will the street look like

in 10 years' time? "It'll be an upmarket, quality retail-fashion area," he replies. While emphasising the

part tailors play in his plans, Mr Jones also makes a revealing comparison. "If Carnaby Street is at the

lower end of the retail scale, Savile Row will be at the upper end with more quality names," he says.

But Savile Row already has its own quality names - the tailors. Bespoke firms have been on the street

for over 200 years and are closely identified with it - the Japanese even use the word "sebiro" as a

synonym for suit.

Guy Gregory of chartered surveyors Lambert Smith Hampton says: "Every high street and shopping

mall needs an anchor - like a big department store - to draw customers in. Savile Row's anchor is the

street name and its reputation."

Change that too much and customers may no longer shop on the street, warns Mr Hitchcock: "If you go

to Savile Row and you find the same names as on Madison Avenue, you won't bother coming here."

Savile Row is a few shopping bags short of Madison Avenue at the moment. For many cutters, their

collective reputation removes the need for salesmanship.

Nearly all the shops are closed after 5.30pm and on Saturday afternoons. "Savile Row's not a fashion

street; it's not a browsing street," says Andrew Ramroop, who owns the bespoke tailor Maurice

Sedwell. "It'sa street you visit byappointment."

It is also an island of light industry in a sea of retail. Regent and Bond Streets are just minutes away

but Savile Row is a manufacturing area. Bespoke suits are handcrafted on the premises. While the

showrooms are often calm and quiet, the cutting rooms in the back or basement of the shops are very

busy, making and finishing outfits.

Big brands and glitzy shopping will almost certainly bring higher rents for the Pollen Estate. According

to Westminster City Council, the cutters on Savile Row typically pay Pounds 220 per square foot -

compared to the Pounds 440 a retailer would expect to pay on nearby Old Bond Street.

Rents for the tailors are already starting to move up. Mr Ramroop is a tenant of the Pollen Estate and

was this year confronted with a rise in his annual rent of more than 40 per cent, to Pounds 106,000. He

extracted some concessions but is still unsure about the future of his business, which has yearly sales

of about Pounds 500,000. He is considering partnering with another firm to cut costs. "It has become

so expensive that it's no longer economic for high-class tailors to remain on the Row," says Mr

Ramroop.

That is not because of a lack of custom - most tailors say they have full order books - but because of

rising overheads. An industry that specialises in making its products by hand and onsite cannot readily

cut costs or increase volume. Mr Ramroop and his team make only five suits a week, each taking about

130 man hours.

Not surprisingly, some tailors on the Row have gone into selling less labour-intensive readymade suits.

Kilgour, for instance, used to tailor for Cary Grant and Frank Sinatra but in the past few years has

increased ready-to-wear suits to about half its business. But for Malcolm Plews, master tailor at Welsh

& Jeffrey, readymades are a Savile Row no-no: "These people aren't tailors - they're outfitters."

Some of the newest arrivals barely bother with suits. Evisu, which opened for business on the Row in

September, specialises in selling jeans at about Pounds 200 a pair. This, says Mr Plews, is "sacrilege."

One wonders how he will feel next year when American casualwear chain Abercrombie and Fitch sets

up at the bottom of the street.

Mr Jones sees these two entrants as part of the street's revival, broadening its appeal without diluting

it. He cites approvingly a recent five-page spread on "the home of the bespoke suit" in FHM, the kind

of booze-and-babes magazine probably not widely read by Savile Row customers.

But for Mr Hitchcock, in his new shop around the corner on Old Burlington Street, the appeal of his old

home is already fading.

"To be honest, I'm quite glad to get away from Savile Row. With all these changes, it has not got the

same class any more," he says.

(Copyright Financial Times Ltd. 2005. All rights reserved.)

Word count: 936

Well-suited to match every woman's needs: Damian Foxe finds that the subtle advantages of men's bespoke tailoring are winning over an increasing number of female clients: [London edition]Foxe, Damian. Financial Times [London (UK)] 13 July 1996: 05.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

What do Ronnie Kray and Naomi Campbell have in common? Apart from the same tailor, very

little. Bespoketailors are one of men's few fashion secrets, and with growing lists of high-profile female

clients, including singers Kylie Minogue, Dolores O Riordan (The Cranberries) and Tori Amos, more and

more women are discovering the joy of having suits created specifically for them, at less than 5 per

cent of the cost of haute-couture.

Elizabeth Herring, 31, a massage therapist and part-time writer, still gets excited over having her

l950s-inspired, skirt-suit tailored by Mark Powell. "I went to a men's bespoke tailor because I wanted

something specifically created for me," says Herring. "Bespoke, unlike made-to-measure, involves the

creation of an individual pattern for each customer."

Having discussed the style and fabric for the suit, an initial fitting was arranged. "I was immediately

put at ease by Mark," she adds. "He was extremely professional, carefully noting each measurement

and particularly what was individual and different about my body. I was not at all embarrassed

because he was not being judgmental."

A toile (mock-up) of the suit is created, in either cheap calico fabric or loosely tacked together from the

chosen fabric. At the second fitting, the client tries on the toile and the tailor makes the final

adjustments before the suit is completed. The entire process takes between four and six weeks.

It is 200 years since Beau Brummel revolutionised the male aesthetic with his deceptively simple look.

A new batch of British tailors are applying this philosophy to women.

With Brummel's revolutionary ideology of dress central to their approach, they are not trying to

reinvent the man's suit but making it a new alternative for women.

Timothy Everest and Powell, two of the most high-profile among them, will be showing their first

women's ready-to-wear collections in London later this month, to complement their

existing bespoke services. Ozwald Boateng, the only British tailor to have shown a men's collection in

Paris in January, is now concentrating onbespoke for women.

Georgina Sinclair, 34, works in public relations for fashion designer Bruce Oldfield, who introduced her

to Everest. She now owns eight suits by him, an overcoat and a velvet pea-coat.

"It's addictive," says Sinclair. "I am 5ft 4in tall and find it impossible to buy suits off-the-peg. With

a bespokesuit, you choose the fabric, you know that it will fit perfectly and when you walk into a room,

nobody else will be wearing the same thing."

At £650 to £700, Sinclair is confident that Everest offers good value for money, adding: "You never

have to worry about what you are going to wear. You simply choose a suit and vary your shirt, a

concept men have been taking advantage of for years." Between 15 and 20 per cent of Everest's

business comes from women and this figure is growing.

Sabina Roth, 29, a freelance editor, had been waiting for the ideal opportunity to employ the skills of

Everest, who has been tailor to her barrister-fiance for four years. "I wanted a tailored structured

wedding dress with no flounces," says Roth, "and I loved the suits Timothy had made for my boyfriend.

Simplicity is very difficult to find in the shops. Timothy immediately grasped what I had in mind, and

could verbalise my ideas." Her dress, a sinewy column of pale, ivory, silk faille, is indeed a symphony

in simplicity.

"Unlike women's dressmakers, men's bespoke tailors think in small details," says Ronnie Cooke

Newhouse, 43, creative director. She is wearing a nutmeg, mohair trouser suit, her fourth from

Timothy Everest this year. "With Timothy, less is more," she says. "If you want a simple silhouette, the

quality and detail must be intrinsic, not merely added on. This is what a man's tailor understands."

Details such as buffalo bone buttons, hand-stitched lining and silk flower loops on the underside of the

collar are standard on Everest's suits. His garments are all hand-canvassed, meaning that the fabric is

separate from the backing, allowing them to move against the body. The buttons are stitched by hand

in silk thread coated with beeswax, which binds the thread and secures the button.

Mark Powell, who recently moved into new premises at 17 Newburgh Street, London W1, is more

a tailoringstylist than a tailor and is renowned for dressing Ronnie Kray, who wore one of his suits as

he was led away from the courtroom to Broadmoor Prison.

Powell wears his celebrity client list brazenly on his bespoke sleeve, citing many high-profile women

among his loyal followers, and most recently Naomi Campbell, who has ordered five suits.

"My husband bought me a Mark Powell, bespoke, three-piece trouser suit in charcoal grey pinstripe

wool, for my 30th birthday," says Chiara Menage, 30, a film producer. "It is beautiful both inside and

out. I love the details and annoy my friends by constantly pointing them out: covered buttons, moss

green silk lining for the body and contrasting lining for the sleeves, concealed waist adjusters and

inside jacket pockets which are normally only found in men's suits.

"I wanted a suit which would last, and although I would not normally spend £700, I felt that Mark was

offering me an investment over time, something which was both durable and timeless."

Powell is not a trained tailor but he does all the fittings, employing his skill as a stylist and aesthete.

Histailoring is undertaken on a commission basis, employing tailors who work predominantly in Savile

Row. "I am very difficult to please," admits Eva Ferran, 32, hand-bag designer, "because I know exactly

what I want. Mark immediately understood what I was looking for."

Ferran's suit combines a long-line, fitted, four-buttoned jacket with hipster, boot-leg trousers, crafted in

fake black pony-skin. It is the embodiment of classic styling with a modern edge.

"Mark has a great knowledge of different historical eras," she says. "He could immediately interpret

what I wanted, suggesting different options for cuffs, pockets, lapels and linings. We decided against

inside pockets, because the jacket is so fitted. The arms are gently fluted, and close with a single

covered button. I am so pleased. My suit is unique."

Sharply angling a pocket, scissoring a trouser leg to a seriously tapered point or gutting the sober

continuity of a pinstripe suit with a blood-red silk lining, are all signature details of Ozwald Boateng's

design. They proved an irresistible attraction for Miel De Botton, 28, a Swiss psychologist living in

Paris, who has just paid £1,000 for a shocking pink suit.

"I think Ozwald is extremely talented. His cut is so pure," says De Botton, "and his use of colour and

fabric is brilliant." Just eight weeks ago, Boateng moved into new premises in Vigo Street, just off

Savile Row. His ambition is to fuse the concepts of design and traditional tailoring, creating what he

calls "bespoke couture".

Kathleen Baird-Murray, deputy beauty editor for Elle magazine, insists that Boateng earns his elevated

price tag - upwards of £900. "You get something from Ozwald which you just cannot buy off the rails,"

says Baird-Murray, who owns three Boateng suits. "I am a size 10 on top and a size 12 on the bottom.

Ready-to-wear suits simply do not cater for such inconsistencies, while traditional dressmakers are

more about ripping a page out of a magazine and attempting to copy it. Ozwald is a hybrid of designer-

cum-tailor, and his advice and input are invaluable."

Her first suit, an adventurous Schiaparelli-pink, single-breasted, one-buttoned affair, seemed risky at

first. "I get much more wear out of it than I first expected," she says. "It is quite loud, but the simplicity

of its silhouette means that I can get away with it."

Boateng favours a body conscious look, stripped of all detail, to achieve a flattering and slender line.

Surfaces of perfect inviolate fabric are riven with strategic darts and seams, forming a long lean

silhouette. However, they only successfully cover you if you have a long and lean body. His philosophy

of tailoring is less about cleverly concealing one's physical shortcomings and more about highlighting

one's strengths. But you do need to have some impressive strengths to begin with.

Chris Eubank has just paid more than £4,000 for a mink-coloured cashmere overcoat designed by

Boateng, adding to a star client list which could out-sparkle the Brit Awards. Kylie Minogue, Tori Amos

and Mick Hucknall are just some of the many pop stars who sing his praises.

Gender reassignment is complete. Belle, formerly Beau, is ready for the boardroom, the bistro and

even the ball. Her principal feature remains understated simplicity, but her secret is definitely out.

* Timothy Everest, 32 Elder Street, Spitalfields, London El 6BT. Tel: 0171-377 5770. Mark Powell, 17

Newburgh Street, Soho, London W1. Tel: 0171-287 5498. Ozwald Boateng, 9 Vigo Street, London W1.

Tel: 0171-734 6868.Copyright Financial Times Limited 1996. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright F.T. Business Enterprises Limited (FTBE) Jul 13, 1996

Word count: 1483

Perfect Fit: to Some Outfits, Nothing Speaks Like 'Bespoke'; Term Once Used for Custom Tailoring Now Suits Many; Crackers, Boxes, BikesOvide, Shira. Wall Street Journal (Online) [New York, N.Y] 04 May 2012: n/a.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

Mark-Evan Blackman, an assistant professor of design at New York's Fashion Institute of Technology,

says thebespoke proliferation may be tied to young Hollywood types becoming enamored with custom

suits about a decade ago. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office lists 39 active applications and

registrations for "bespoke" entities or brand names; more than half have been filed in the past 18

months.\n

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

An SAT tutoring session fitted Tim Levin into the bespoke boom.

Studying vocabulary flashcards with a student, Mr. Levin came across "bespoke," a vaguely familiar

word. "I had heard about it previously in terms of suits and shirts, the English word," Mr. Levin recalled

of the 2005 session at his tutoring business.

He and the student looked it up. It "meant customized in general, made to order," he says. "I thought,

'This is perfect.' " And thus Tim Levin Tutoring was renamed Bespoke Education, joining what Mr. Levin

quickly found was a barrage of bespoke businesses.

Bespoke, once a term narrowly used for made-to-order suits from tailors such as those on London's

Savile Row, has gone into mass production.

In the New York City area, there are two dozen "bespoke" businesses, including Bespoke Barber

Shop,Bespoke Books, Bespoke Surgical and at least one shop simply called "Bespoke."

A company in the U.K. promises "bespoke" cardboard boxes, delivered in two working days. "Bespoke"

salads--ingredients of the diner's choice--are all the rage in London. U.S. executives sprinkle

conversation with talk of "bespoke deals."

Some language purists aren't happy with this co-opting. Neither are London's

original bespoke artisans.

"We don't like it when we have all sorts of so-called bespoke items that don't go anywhere near as far

as we do," says Philip Parker of Henry Poole & Co., a 206-year-old clothing business in London that will

custom sew a pair of pants and a suit jacket for about $5,000.

"As far as we're concerned, the word has gotten bastardized," Mr. Parker says.

Newly bespoke business people say they have sympathy for Savile Row purists--to a point. "I admire

what they do and love that there are people who really put their heart into their craft," says Scott

Summit, founder of San Francisco's Bespoke Innovations, which makes customized covers for artificial

limbs. "But the word is inevitably going to evolve."

When Mr. Summit was working on his first product, a $4,000 limb covering called Bespoke Fairings, the

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office told him it considered bespoke a "merely descriptive" adjective--like

calling a strawberry "red"--for which the trademark bar is very high. Mr. Summit says it took many

months' work by lawyers for him to win the trademark.

Mr. Summit also had to fight other bespokers to find a Web address. Bespoke.com belongs

to BespokeSoftware, forcing him to settle for Bespoke Innovations. Another bespoke challenge: "No

Americans know how to pronounce it," Mr. Summit says.

Last month, the Patent and Trademark Office rejected Rachelle Miller's request to

trademark bespoke to refer to her dip brand. But the Colorado resident got a preliminary green light to

trademark Bespoke Crackers. "It's totally frustrating," she says about the split ruling. She plans to

appeal the dip decision.

In a dip denial letter, a PTO attorney wrote that there were too many examples of bespoke used to

"refer to similar types of food products, such as sauces, broths and marinades." A PTO spokesman says

that the agency can't discuss individual trademarks or applications but that it weighs requests on a

case-by-case basis.

The Oxford English Dictionary traces bespoke's origins to the shoemaking trade around the mid-1800s.

Thetailoring industry says the term began to be used to describe the cloth customers picked out in

advance for their suits. The cloth then became "spoken for" or "bespoken."

In the past two centuries, London's elite menswear stores have sprouted along Savile Row, where

shops brag about ties to the royal family, Winston Churchill or other English greats.

It is unclear when and how bespoke broke out of the tailoring mold. Mark-Evan Blackman, an assistant

professor of design at New York's Fashion Institute of Technology, says the bespoke proliferation may

be tied to young Hollywood types becoming enamored with custom suits about a decade ago.

Mr. Blackman says the bespoke boom trailed behind the proliferation of a parallel term from high-end

women's clothing--couture. "Bespoke has slowly started seeping into our consciousness as a term for

our gold standard, as a male equivalent of couture," he says.

He isn't thrilled about how fashion terms have proliferated. "Everything is couture now, even

bedsheets," says Mr. Blackman.

Bespoke business people say that the term is apt for their particular line.

"Like a bespoke tailor, we measure [clients'] risk tolerance, needs and outlook in order to develop a

strategy that fits their unique needs," says Justin Walters, co-founder of Bespoke Investment Group

LLC. "Let's face it, a company name with 'custom' in it would be much more boring."

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office lists 39 active applications and registrations for "bespoke"

entities or brand names; more than half have been filed in the past 18 months.

But the term has also entered the corporate-speak lexicon, along with words like "right sizing" and

"leveraging"--so much so that some executives say they are sick of hearing the word tossed around in

boardrooms.

"Bespoke, the word to use when you want to communicate economic superiority," longtime Silicon

Valley investor Roger McNamee says in an email. He says that when the word started to sprout a few

years ago, he waged a campaign among investors, novelists and entrepreneurs "in the hope of

creating a bespoke-free zone." He says he has given up the crusade, after failing to arrest the

explosion of bespoke use.

Even users of the word look down their noses at some bespoke brethren. Stefan Paszke, one of the

owners ofBespoke Cycles in San Francisco, says some companies tweak an off-the-shelf bicycle frame

and unfairly call it custom. "That's not really a bespoke bike," he says. His shop takes dozens of

measurements of a rider and completes a questionnaire about what kind of riding a customer does to

create a handmade bike from $3,500 to the "sky is the limit," Mr. Paszke says.

Mr. Levin, the SAT tutor, says that "bespoke" legitimately describes what he does. When prospective

clients in New York City puzzled over the name, he showed the dictionary definition--"made to

individual order; custom-made; requested"--printed on his business card.

The trouble now, Mr. Levin says: "Bespoke" is becoming downright ordinary. "Fewer and fewer people

are asking what it means these days," he says.

David Enrich contributed to this article.

Write to Shira Ovide at

Credit: By Shira Ovide

(c) 2012 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further

reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.

Word count: 1048

Made-to-measure garments for ladies - catering for wide ranging stature and length measurements for standard and outsize ladiesJohn Patrick Turner and Terry Bond. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 11.   4  (1999): 216-225.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

Made-to-measure clothing pattern systems have the capability of receiving sets of an individual

person's (customer's) body measurements and from these producing patterns for a chosen garment

which will, whenmade up, fit the customer well. A fully commercial system will also produce pattern

lay-outs (markers) for a given cloth width by means of semi-automatic or automatic algorithms which

are efficient in the use of material, i.e. giving near to minimum wastage. Default formulae for obtaining

measurements should not be seen as an entirely satisfactory way of replacing the actual measured

values, but only as a best guess of the measurements where these have not been measured for the

individual customer. The formulae replace what would otherwise be a complex system of interpolation

and extrapolation of the size chart data within the computer system's database.

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

John Patrick Turner and Terry Bond: The Manchester Metropolitan University, Hollings Faculty,

Fallowfield, Manchester, UK

Introduction to computer systems for made-to-measure patterns

Made-to-measure clothing pattern systems have the capability of receiving sets of an individual

person's (customer's) body measurements and from these producing patterns for a chosen garment

which will, whenmade up, fit the customer well. A fully commercial system will also produce pattern

lay-outs (markers) for a given cloth width by means of semi-automatic or automatic algorithms which

are efficient in the use of material, i.e. giving near to minimum wastage.

The hardware is likely to be PC based (currently one of the Pentium Series) and utilise an A0 or A00

size digitiser for the input of original pattern shapes, and a plotter for the output of markers to paper

for eventual cutting.

The software is based on one of the following methods of MTM pattern production:

(1) The patterns are drafted directly according to the body measurements and a set of drafting rules,

either built into the software coding or entered into a rule database.

(2) The patterns are graded by standard numeric grading and the made-to-measure patterns

subsequently produced by applying further numeric alterations to the nearest graded size. The

alterations are built into an alterations table for each garment type and are applied to points round the

patterns as percentages of the difference between the measurements of the standard size as found in

the related size chart and the equivalent measurements of the customer.

(3) The base patterns (input by digitisation) are graded by algebraic formulae based on proportions of

the body dimensions which together with the standard size chart determine and apply the grading

increments. These algebraic grading formulae are utilised directly (without the need for any alterations

tables) to producemade-to-measure patterns.

The German GRAFIS system uses method (1) pattern drafting - Gerber Garment Technology (GGT),

Investronica, and Assyst commercial grading systems utilise method (2) numeric grading followed by

application of alterations. The MICROFIT system of Garment Micro Systems developed by the author

(Turner, 1994) for themade-to-measure trade uniquely uses method (3) where grading rules and

alterations are combined into algebraic formulae.

All the above methods have the common feature of reference to size charts for either standard size

grading or calculation of the alterations to be applied.

When personal body measurements are input and certain key measurements, required either in the

drafting rules or in the alterations, are missing, default values must be applied which are realistic and

based on other key measures. Ideally the computer system itself should determine these default

values. This paper concerns itself with the derivation of formulae for such computer application.

Default measurements

The obvious method of obtaining girth defaults by computer is to interpolate within the chosen size

chart, according to the control measurement - usually the bust girth in ladies' charts. Thus for a given

bust girth, the default neck girth, for example, could be obtained by looking down the correct vertical

columns between which the bust girth lies and interpolating between the values of neck girth in those

columns.

The method is, however, complicated by the fact that a large number of charts may exist, and the

correct one needs to be chosen. In the well developed and up-to-date German DOB (Ladies'

Outerwear) system, there are nine separate size charts for the normal bust girth range 76-104cm. An

extract from the regular chart for standard height and hips is shown in Table Ia. The nine charts arise

because there are three hip categories (slim, standard and broad) and three height categories (short,

medium and tall). A further nine charts for outsizes with bust girth range 110-146cm complete the

system. In effect, each individual chart requires two-dimensional interpolation but the whole system

requires four-dimensional interpolation in order to achieve the best possible defaults. This is of course

theoretically possible, but would entail entering all these charts onto the computer system database

and working out an interpolation algorithm. There is, however, an alternative. If equations relating

dimensions and measurements can be derived, these can be applied directly to calculate default

values.

It is logical first to separate the girth/width dimensions of a size chart from the length dimensions.

Thus, eight common girth and width dimensions are Bust Girth, Hip Girth, Waist Girth, Back Width,

Shoulder Length, Upper Arm Girth, Wrist Girth and Neck Girth, where the control dimensions are Bust

Girth and to a lesser extent Hip Girth minus Bust Girth difference (Hip Category).

The further seven common length measurements are Stature (Height), Nape to Waist, Front Length,

Arm Length to Cuff, Outside Leg, Inside Leg and Waist to Hips distance, where the primary control

dimension is Stature.

Length measurement defaults

The control dimension for the length measurements is Stature and, while this is not normally

a measurementdirectly utilised in clothing, it is necessary in order to calculate correctly the other

default lengthmeasurements according to the person's height.

The first examples of default formulae developed here for the purpose of this paper

relate to lengthmeasurements and are derived from the German DOB size charts.

Length measurements are not well catered for in these charts. Only three height groups are

categorised, namely 160cm stature (short), 168cm (medium height) and 176cm (tall). While the

majority fall within these three categories and default lengths can be interpolated, many ladies are

shorter than "short" and many taller than "tall" and default lengths must be extrapolated. Formulae

provide a means of covering all statures from extra short to extra tall.

The first stage of analysis of the DOB charts length measurements is to set down

the measurements for each height category at a fixed bust size and thus determine the increment for

each length between stature categories. This is presented in Table Ib. for Normal sizes. The Stature

and Nape to Waist relationship can be easily seen by inspection as L = S/4 (2/8 = /) for Bust 96cm.

However, by further inspection of the size charts it can be seen that the relationship also changes with

Bust girth, the Nape to Waist increasing by 0.2cm per 4cm Bust girth size (in the Bust Girth range from

84-104 cm of Normal sizes). This ratio is therefore 0.2/4 = 0.05 or 1/20.

The full relationship is therefore expressed by the formula L = S/4 + (B - 96)/20.

The exception to this formula is that Nape to Waist remains the same for the first three Bust sizes (76,

80, 86cm) and for these the formula may be expressed as L = S/4 - 0.6. These two formulae hold true

for all Statures and Hip categories within the nine DOB size charts.

In a similar way the increment ratio for Front Length (F) is 1.4/8 = 0.175 and F = S*0.175 + K where K

is a constant.

For S =160 and F = 44.1, 44.1 = 160*0.175 + K and K = 44.1 - 28 = 16.1, so that for 96cm Bust Girth,

F = S*0.175 + 16.1.

Again, the Front Length increases by 0.9cm per Bust Girth increment of 4cm, so that the increment

ratio is 0.9/4 = 0.225 and the full relationship is therefore:

F = S*0.175 + 16.1 + (B - 96)*0.225

Such formulae hold true for any interpolation and are probably reasonably accurate for extrapolated

statures well outside the groups 160, 168 and 176cm, thus catering for much shorter and much taller

women.

The full set of default formulae for Normal Size Bust Girths 76-104 (76-106.9 cm) are shown in Table

Ic..

Notice that the formulae for Outside Leg (O) and Waist to Hip (D) both include a function of the Hip

Girth minus Bust Girth difference (H - B), i.e. they depend on the relative hip size (Hip Categories: Slim,

Standard or Broad).

From the Size Charts:

- Standard Hip-Bust differences range from 5-10cm and no adjustment needs to be made to the

formulae for O and D.

- Slim Hip-Bust differences range from 1-4cm and 1cm is subtracted from Standard O and D.

- Large Hip-Bust differences range from 11-16cm and 1cm is added to Standard O and D.

This addition or subtraction of 1cm or leaving the increment as zero is performed in a formula by the

device of using the INT function whereby a number is rounded down to the nearest integer.

The function INT ((H - B + 1)/6) - 1 ensures that the correct amount 0, -1 or + 1 is included. INT is

found in most computer languages as an arithmetic function.

Outsize sizes

Table II. shows the equivalent formulae for Outsize Bust Sizes 110-146.

Notice that the Outside Leg (O) and Waist to Hips distance (D) have the same formulae as for Normal

Bust Sizes.

The small increments resulting from the Bust girth changes are based around Bust size 110cm

although any Bust size could have been chosen as the base. The recalculated increment ratios depend

on the outsize Bust increment of 6cm compared to the 4cm increment of the Normal Bust Size Charts.

In order to ensure continuity and to include the Bust sizes between the two Size Charts (Normal and

Outsize) of 104-110cm, the range of Bust sizes included in the Normal set of formulae would be

taken to be 76-106.9cm, whereas the Outsize set of formulae would apply to the range 107-146cm.

The eight head theory

This theory divides the body into eight sections along the vertical stature axis. Figure 1 shows

diagrammatically the relationship of the length measurements to stature, according to this theory. It is

interesting to note that these proportions are immediately apparent in the default formulae:

- Nape to Waist (L) is one quarter of Stature (S).

- Outside Leg (O) is five eighths of Stature (S).

- Waist to Hips (D) is one eighth of Stature (S).

The minor variations around these exact proportions are in those extra functions of the Bust size and

Hips-Bust difference.

Practical application of length default formulae on a computer system

Following input of the girth/width measurements, either direct or interpolated, the prompts for the

lengthmeasurements would appear on the computer screen, starting with Stature (Height) S. Normally

the Stature value would be entered in cm and this entry followed by Nape to Waist (L), Front Length (F)

etc. in normal size chart sequence. Where a dimension is not known (not measured) the "Enter" key

would be pressed, and immediately the value would be calculated from the relevant default formula

and entered by the computer system's program.

In an extreme case, the Stature only could be entered and all other vertical measures entered as

defaults in this way.

Supposing, however, the Stature is not known, but at least one of the other vertical measures is

known. By back calculation the stature could be established and all other defaulted values

recalculated. An example of such a back calculation for a Normal Bust (between 84 and 106.9cm)

would be if the Nape to Waist was known, but the Stature not known, the Nape to Waist formula L =

S/4 + (B - 96)/20 could be transposed to S = (L - (B - 96)/20*4 and the Stature calculated. The

remaining defaults would then be available using this value of Stature.

A practical way of implementing these back calculation formulae on a computer system is suggested

as follows: Where the Stature is unknown and all following defaulted dimensions are given a blank

value (by pressing the "Enter" key only) then, after one measurement (i.e. with a numeric value) has

been input and a back calculation for this has been carried out to obtain the Stature, all other

defaulted (unknown) measurementsprevious to that known measurement are calculated using the

default formulae.

The transposed back calculation formulae for Normal Bust Girths (76-106.9cm) are shown in Table III.

The back calculation formulae for the Outsize sizes may be obtained by transposition in the same way.

Girth default measurements

Where the control girth measurements of Bust and Hip are known (i.e. have been input for the

individual) it is possible to derive the other girth and width default formulae in a similar way to those

for lengthmeasurements.

This has been done for the DOB charts and the results shown in Table IVa. for.for Normal bust sizes

and Table V. for Outsize sizes.

It can be seen that for the common measurements shown in the Tables only the waist girth and upper

arm girth measurements differ for slim and broad hips by comparison with standard hips. The other

four girths are exactly the same irrespective of the Bust-Hip category. Back calculation formulae are

not necessary for the girthmeasurements as it would be a requirement that at least the

control measurements of Bust and Hip would be taken on the customer to obtain a reasonable fit.

Conclusion

Default formulae for obtaining measurements should not be seen as an entirely satisfactory way of

replacing the actual measured values, but only as a best guess of the measurements where these

have not been measured for the individual customer. The formulae replace what would otherwise be a

complex system of interpolation and extrapolation of the size chart data within the computer system's

database.

The formulae are derived for a given set of size charts and are only applicable to that set. The DOB

German System of charts has been chosen as the example here because it is the most comprehensive

national system and is also the basis for European Standards. For any other logical system of size

charts, it should be possibleto derive the equivalent default formulae using the same method of

analysis.

Default formulae and the back calculation formulae in conjunction with the DOB size charts have been

implemented satisfactorily as subroutines on the MICROFIT made-to-measure system from Garment

Micro Systems. The default formulae are further utilised on the MICROFIT system to determine the

range of validity of measurements entered for a female individual customer, whereby any value

entered outside this range is rejected.

References

1. DOB-Grossentabellen Deutschland (1994), DOB-Verband, Koln.

2. Turner, J.P. (1994), "Development of a commercial made-to-measure garment pattern system",

International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 28-33

Illustration

Caption: Table Ia.; Extract from German DOB size chart - regular sizes, standard height and hips; Table

Ib.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), length defaults for regular sizes, comparison

of measurements for the different statures, for bust size 96; Table Ic.; DOB size charts (Germany,

1994), default formulae to obtain length measurements for given stature, S cm bust girth range 76-

106.9cm; Table II.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), default formulae to obtain

length measurements for given stature, S cm. Bust girth range (outsize) 107-146cm; Figure 1.; Eight

head theory; Table III.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), back calculation formulae for bust range 76-

106.9cm to obtain stature, S cm from other body measurements; Table IVa.; DOB size charts

(Germany 1994), girth and width defaults for regular sizes. Comparison of measurements for the

different hip categories. For bust size 96cm; Table IVb.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), girth and

width default formulae. Regular sizes, bust girth 76-106.9cm; Table Va.; DOB size charts (Germany

1994), girth and width defaults for outsizes. Comparison of measurements for the different hip

categories. For bust size 110cm; Table Vb.; DOB size charts (Germany 1994), girth and width default

formulae. Outsize sizes, bust girth 107-146cm

Tailor-made with the right image: FT GUIDE TO VIRTUAL CLOTHING: Clive Cookson explains how body scanners should soon have the ability to take the pain out of clothes buying: [USA edition]Cookson, Clive. Financial Times [London (UK)] 10 Dec 1998: 25.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Isn't clothes shopping a nightmare? When I try on things that are supposed to be the right size for me,

they usually turn out to be either embarrassingly tight or too baggy. And buying clothes by mail order

is just as bad.

Don't worry - new technology will soon make life easier. Body scanners are becoming cheap, fast and

reliable enough for the retail and clothing industries to consider installing them to measure customers

electronically.

Once your 3D image has been recorded, you'll be able to use it in various ways. You could match

it to the shop's range of ready-made clothes before trying anything on. You could use it on your home

computer to buy clothes on the internet. Or you could order an outfit to be made specially to fit your

3D image - a high-tech version of custom tailoring. It sounds wonderful. Can you book me in for a

scan?

Not yet. Consumer scanning systems are still mainly experimental. So far most work has been done on

"electronic tailoring" of custom clothing. For example, the French navy has used a system produced by

Telmat of France to scan 70,000 sailors and produce uniforms. Hamamatsu Photonics of Japan has

installed about 40 scanners in Asia for modelling and designing up-market women's underwear.

The UK is taking a more comprehensive approach. A university-industry consortium with 20 members,

including retailers, electronics and clothing companies, has launched a £3.4m research project in 3D

Electronic Shopping, under the government's Foresight Link programme. It plans to use body scanners

for virtual shopping and custom-made clothing - and to carry out a national sizing survey. A sizing

survey? Surely the main clothingmanufacturers and retailers already know the range of their

customers' sizes and shapes?

Not well enough. Although companies do occasionally measure up a supposedly representative sample

of customers, there has not been a comprehensive national survey since 1951. Anecdotal evidence,

like your own shopping experience, suggests there is a mismatch between

customers' measurements and the range of clothes on sale.

The new survey will involve scanning a sample of 30,000 men, women and children.

Rosy Coveney, who represents Next on the project, says the results will help all ready-made

clothingmanufacturers. "We know we're different to fashion drawings but it's all a bit hit-and-miss

today," she says. "It will be great to have some accurate factual evidence." What does the scanning

itself involve?

It's quick and painless! You strip down to your underwear, step into the scanning booth and stand on

the designated footmarks. Then the machine scans you with low-power beams of infrared light

that measure100,000 points on your body.

After a few seconds you step out and put your clothes back on. Meanwhile, the computer is extracting

a high-resolution image, which can be fitted with "virtual clothes" and animated on screen, so that you

can see how the fabric changes shape as you move. Who is actually going to store the computer data

about my bodyshape? I'm sensitive about my bulges and I don't want anyone else looking at them.

Important details, such as networking standards, have not yet been worked out. But Roger Till of e-

centre UK, who will manage the virtual clothes shopping part of the Foresight Link project, says privacy

and confidentiality will be built into the system. As he points out, people vary enormously about how

sensitive they are. Some don't care who knows their dimensions; others, particularly women, are

almost paranoid.

You'll be able to hold your own data on a home computer or even on a high-capacity smart

card to take shopping with you. Or the data could be stored centrally by a retailing or mail order

company.

Unless you change shape unusually quickly, each scan should last for at least a year. You've made me

even more enthusiastic. How long will I need to wait?

Philip Treleaven, the project leader at University College, London, hopes the project will make quick

progress, with demonstration scanners, shop kiosks, internet and interactive television services ready

within 18 months.

"This technology is going to be huge worldwide, and the UK companies could gain an international

advantage if they move quickly," he says.

But it remains to be seen how quickly the retailing and clothing industries, which are traditionally

secretive and reluctant to share information, will move.

Nick Rawlings of Freemans, the mail order group, says: "This could be huge in the future but until now

everything has been done behind the scenes. We don't want to talk about it until things are a bit more

worked out."

If it really takes off, body scanning could have an enormous impact on electronic commerce

beyond clothing.

For example, you could see virtual images of your own body sitting on sofas or walking around houses

for sale on the web. Copyright Financial Times Limited 1998. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright F.T. Business Enterprises Limited (FTBE) Dec 10, 1998

Made-to-measure pattern development based on 3D whole body scansHein Daanen ; Sung-Ae, Hong. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 20.   1 (2008): 15-25.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

New techniques are required to link 3D whole body scans to manufacturing techniques to allow for the

mass-customization of clothes. This study aims to compare two methods of producing skirts based on

3D whole body scans. Three females participated in the study. They were scanned with an accurate 3D

whole body scanner. A set of relevant 1D measures was automatically derived from the 3D scan.

The measures were incorporated in a skirt pattern and the skirt was made from jeans material. The

second method was based on triangulation of the scanned waist-to-hip part. The points in the 3D scan

were first converted to triangles and these triangles were thereafter merged with neighboring triangles

of similar orientation until about 40 triangles remained. These triangles were sewn together to form a

"patchwork"-skirt. All females performed fit tests afterwards. The fit of the 3D-generated patchwork

skirt was much better than the fit of the skirt generated by the 1D scan-derived measures. In the latter

case, two of the three skirts were too wide because the scan-derived hip circumference exceeded the

manually derived values. For the 3D generated skirt, it was necessary to enlarge the triangles with a

factor of 1.025 to achieve optimal fit. As far as is known, this is the first study that reports a direct

conversion of a 3D scan to clothing without interference of clothing patterns. The study shows that it is

possible to generate a fitting patchwork skirt based on 3D scans; the intermediate step of using

1Dmeasures derived from 3D scans is shown to be error-prone.

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Introduction

Generally, clothing is selected in retail shops, where the customer is challenged to find garments that

match his or her personal preference and at the same time fit to the body. The latter is not an easy job

when the large variation in body shape between subjects is taken into account. Therefore, an

increasing effort is put into manufacturing made-to-measure (MTM) clothing, where the individual is no

longer at the end of the clothingchain, but instead forms the start of it. Body dimensions and preferred

textiles and colors are matched in individual patterns, which are consecutively cut by single layer

cutters and sewn together. This technique was recently used successfully for a complicated stage

costume and men's suit ([4] Choi et al. , 2005; [5] Choi and Hong, 2005; [9] Hong and Daanen, 2004).

In the last decade, new tools became available to determine the body dimensions fast and reliably: 3D

whole body scanners ([6] Daanen and van de Water, 1998). However, in most cases 1D measures like

chest and waist circumference are derived from the 3D scans and the 3D information is not used. In

this pilot study, we describe a method to make a more direct link between 3D body shape

and clothing form for a female skirt. We compare the results to the method using 1D dimensions

derived from 3D scans. The purpose of this research was to provide the best fit of a MTM skirt for each

different shape of individual consumer from 3D scanned data. The hip part was selected of a 3D scan,

since it is the most important part for designing pants and skirts. For the evaluation, we use virtual

fitting (mapping the skirt over the 3D scan) and real fitting (the subjects tries the skirt) and

combinations between the two.

Methods

Subjects

Three female subjects participated in the study. They were 40, 26 and 27 years old and weighed 61,

72 and 63 kg, respectively. Two skilled anthropometrists performed the

anthropometric measurements.

3D scanner and processing software

The Vitronic Viro 3D Pro 3D whole body scanner was used to scan the subjects. The system has 16

depth cameras and four color cameras. The images of the 16 depth cameras were aligned and merged

using Polyworks (www.innovmetric.com). The resulting scan was stored in the binary pol format.

Protocol

The subjects came to the anthropometric research lab twice.

In the first session, the body dimensions were measured and they were scanned seminude. They were

dressed in their underwear with a top and bicycle short over it. These garments were made in such a

way that they followed the shape of the body as natural as possible without compressing the skin

due to elastic bands. The subjects indicated their preferred skirt length and were informed about the

procedures. They were not paid and did not have to pay for the skirts.

After the first session two skirts were made for each subject. The first skirt was made based on the 3D

scan (3D skirt), the second skirt was based on 1D scan derived body dimensions (1D skirt).

In the second session, the subjects were scanned three times to evaluate the fit: seminude, seminude

with 3D skirt and seminude with 1D skirt.

Alignment and visualization of the scans was performed using Integrate ([1] Burnsides et al. , 1996).

3D skirt

The 3D skirt was based on the human body shape at hip level. The parts of the 3D scan above the

waist and below the hip were removed. The points in this "band" over the body were triangulated.

Using the imcompress module of Polyworks (www.innovmetric.com), the number of triangles was

reduced stepwise. It appeared that the reduction factor of 5 percent resulted in the minimum amount

of triangles in which the shape of the hip was still clearly visible (Figure 1 [Figure omitted. See Article

Image.]). This reduction corresponded to about 40 triangles. The method essentially combines

neighboring triangles when their surface normal vectors are pointing in the same direction (as set by a

certain tolerance). This results in a few large triangles for relatively flat surfaces and many small

triangles for curvy surfaces.

The triangles were projected on a flat plane perpendicular to the surface normal. One corner was

moved tothe (0,0) coordinate and the triangle was rotated around (0,0) so that the second coordinate

was on the x -axis (x 1,0). The third coordinate was (x 2, y 2). All coordinates were multiplied by a

factor 1.025 in order to be sure that the skirt would fit over the body.

The triangles were printed on paper, transferred to the textile material and then sewn together without

overlap. The band was cut at the back and a zipper was inserted to enable donning of the skirt. The

zipper was inserted in such a way that the textile on the left and the right side of the zipper would

have touched if the zipper was absent.

1D skirt

The 3D scan was processed using the TC2 body measurement system (www.tc2.com). The 1D

dimensions hip circumference and waist circumference were derived from the 3D scan and these were

used as input for the pattern design. The length of the skirt was determined by the preference of the

subjects.

Textile and patterns

The skirt was made of jeans textile. The physical properties of the textile are provided in Table I

[Figure omitted. See Article Image.].

The patterns for the skirts were custom made by using Investronica CAD system and converted to DXF

format. The skirt consisted of a front and back part with four darts for each part at the upper side of

the skirt. NARCIS (D&M Technology Co., Ltd) was used for 3D virtual sewing and try-on to test the fit of

variable skirts by investigating strain, ease amount, and relative pressure.

Results

Figure 2 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows a frontal view of 3D scans seminude, with the 1D

skirt and 3D skirt. White paint was attached over the skirts to make them visible for the lasers of the

3D scanner.

3D skirt

The 3D skirts generated by the triangulation process all had a similar shape for the subjects. A total of

37 triangles were generated for Subject 1, 41 for Subject 2 and 38 for Subject 3. The protruding point

of the buttocks was the connection point of several triangles, thus enabling the accommodation of the

buttocks (Figure 3 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]).

The subjects indicated that the skirts fitted tight to their bodies. The enlargement factor of 1.025 was

good with the zipper included (Figure 4 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). Figure 5 [Figure omitted.

See Article Image.] shows the enlargement.

The 3D scans were superimposed to investigate the fit of the skirts. Figure 6 [Figure omitted. See

Article Image.] shows the results. The 1D skirt has a much looser fit than the 3D skirt "band."

1D skirt

Skilled anthropometrists measured the subjects and their relevant body dimensions were derived

using the TC2 body measurement system. Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows the

relevant measures.

The waist circumference was considerably larger (75 mm) using the TC2 system as

compared to manualmeasures, in particular for Subjects 2 and 3. This is probably related to the

observation that the location of the waist circumference measurement was considerably lower (75

mm) for the TC2 system. Hip circumference as derived from the scan was used in the skirt design.

Subjects 2 and 3 considered the 1D skirts too loose. These two subjects had an underestimation of the

hip circumference using the TC2 software.

Comparison of 3D-1D skirt

The surface area of the 1D skirt and 3D skirt were both about 0.2 m2 (Table III [Figure omitted. See

Article Image.]). Figure 7 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows the superimposed image of the 3D

and 1D skirt for a typical subject.

MTM skirt patterns and 3D virtual fit

Depending upon the design preference (skirt length, etc.) and variable shapes of each subject, MTM

skirt patterns were developed and shown in Figure 8 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]. These skirts

were virtually sewn together and tried on to test the fit. The distribution of strain, ease amount, and

relative pressure were shown in Figure 9 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] for the objective

evaluation of the fit.

Discussion

3D skirt

The basic idea of the 3D skirt was to convert 3D information of the body shape directly to a pattern of

a skirt over the hips. The shape of the computer-generated skirt perfectly fits the body, but a scale

factor has to be included in order for the skirt not to be too tight. The scale factor of 1.025

appeared to be correct in this case. The optimal scale factor is expected to be dependent on the

material that is used.

It is well recognized that the described technique in this study is limited to clothing that follows the

body shape. However, since clothing increasingly becomes the platform for sensors to the human

body, for instanceto monitor the vital capacity of soldiers, it can be foreseen that tight

fitting clothing becomes increasingly important for functional clothing. For other clothing, like shirts,

[13] Sul and Kang (2006) recently described a nice draping method to interface the clothing pattern

with a 3D scan to optimize fit.

Putting the triangles together manually is a tedious job. However, since the dimensions of the triangles

are known, computer sewing may be an option. Moreover, recent techniques became

available to reorganize the triangles in clothing patterns ([11] Kim and Kang, 2003).

1D skirt

Increasingly, 3D body scans are used to derive 1D dimensions from 3D scans ([2] Chan et al. , 2004).

In a comparison of two main software packages to perform this process, [8] Hin and Krul (2005) noted

that considerable differences existed between the data of skilled measurers and the software results.

Also, in the study described here, large deviations occurred between manual and scan

derived measures (Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). [7] Daanen (1998) observed that

circumferences could be derived accurately when humans directly interact with a 3D scan. [10] ISO

20685 (2005) is a standard in preparation that defines the acceptation limits for scan derived body

dimensions as compared to manual measures by skilled anthropometrists. The difference between

scan derived and manual measures is dependent on the computer routine that is used. Also, the

absence of skin compression and the inability to palpate the body prior to measuring has an impact. In

the current experiment, the resulting errors caused the patterns to be far from optimal. Recently, [3]

Cho et al. (2005) proposed to convert a 3D whole body scan to an interactive body model suitable for

pattern making. Although, this method is not automated, it may be effective in reducing errors in

deriving 1D dimensions from 3D scans.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the 3D scan generated skirt showed a tight fit. The enlargement factor should be more

than 1.025. In line with previous observations, automatic 1D derived measures from 3D scans may

deviate considerably from measures of skilled anthropometrists and thus cause bad fit.

This research was financially supported by Hansung Universityin the year 2007. The authors

acknowledge: Koen Tan for processing the whole body scans; Mariëlle Weghorst for manufacturing the

skirts; Aard Daanen for the mathematics behind triangulation; and David Bruner for the information

supplied about the TC2 software.

References

1. Burnsides, D.B., Files, P.M. and Whitestone, J.J. (1996), "Integrate 1.25: a prototype for evaluating

three-dimensional visualization, analysis, and manipulation functionality", AL/CF-TR-1996-0095, Air

Force Material Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH.

2. Chan, A.P., Fan, J. and Yu, W.M. (2004), "Prediction of men's shirt pattern based on 3D

bodymeasurements", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 100-8.

3. Cho, Y., Okada, N., Park, H., Takatera, M., Inui, S. and Shimizu, Y. (2005), "An interactive body model

for individual pattern making", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 17 No. 2,

pp. 91-9.

4. Choi, J.H., Hong, S.A. and Kim, S.A. (2005), "3D sewing and virtual fit of stage costume", paper

presented at Seoul International Clothing and Textiles Conference, Seoul.

5. Choi, J.H. and Hong, S.A. (2005), "Pattern development of stage costume for dynamic movement",

paper presented at Seoul International Clothing and Textiles Conference, Seoul.

6. Daanen, H.A.M. and van de Water, G.J. (1998), "Whole body scanners", Displays, Vol. 19, pp. 111-20.

7. Daanen, H.A.M. (1998), "Circumference estimation using whole body scanners and shadow

scanners", Proceedings of the Workshop on 3D Anthropometry and Industrial Products Design, Paris,

June 25-26, pp. 5-1 - 5-6.

8. Hin, A.J.S. and Krul, A.J. (2005), "Performance of human solutions body dimensions software", Report

2005-A9. TNO Human Factors, Soesterberg.

9. Hong, S.A. and Daanen, H.A.M. (2004), "3D scan related research in TNO and its application for

apparel industry", Fashion Information and Technology, Vol. 1, pp. 72-80.

10. ISO 20685 (2005), 3-D Scanning Methodologies for Internationally Compatible Anthropometric

Databases, ISO, Geneva.

11. Kim, S.M. and Kang, T.J. (2003), "Garment pattern generation from body scan data", Computer-

Aided Design, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 611-8.

13. Sul, I.H. and Kang, T.J. (2006), "Interactive garment pattern design using virtual scissoring

method", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 31-42.

Further Reading

1. Robinette, K.M., Blackwell, S., Daanen, H.A.M., Fleming, S., Boehmer, M., Brill, T., Hoeferlin, D. and

Burnsides, D. (2002), "Civilian American and European surface anthropoometry resource (CAESAR)",

Final Report, Volume I: Summary, AFRL-HE-WP-TR-2002-0169, United States Air Force Research

Laboratory, Human Effectiveness Directorate, Crew System Interface Division, 2255 H Street, Wright-

Patterson AFB OH 45433-7022 and SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Dr, Warrendale, PA 15096.

Appendix

Corresponding author

Hein Daanen can be contacted at: hein.daanen@tno.nl

AuthorAffiliation

Hein Daanen, TNO Defence, Security and Safety, Business Unit Human Factors, Department of Human

Performance, Soesterberg, The Netherlands Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit

Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Sung-Ae Hong, Apparel Fashion Business, Hansung University, Seoul, South Korea

Illustration

Figure 1: Gouraud shaded triangles resulting from the reduction process of the 3D scanned data

Figure 2: Frontal view of the scans of subject three seminude (left) and with the 1D skirt (middle) and

3D skirt (right)

Figure 3: Back view of the 3D skirt over the 3D scan of a typical subject (Subject 3)

Figure 4: Back view of the 3D skirt worn by Subject 3

Figure 5: Top view of the computer generated skirt of Subject 3 with (brown) and without (green)

enlargement

Figure 6: Transsections of the aligned scans of subject three seminude (brown), 1D skirt (blue) and 3D

skirt (green); (a) at the upper leg level; (b) just below the crotch; (c) at the hip level

Figure 7: Upper part: the triangulated skirt unfolded. Middle part: superimposed images of the

triangles (red dotted) and 1D skirt (blue lines) seen from the back (left) and front (right). Lower part:

separated hip block patterns of skirts

Figure 8: CAD patterns of MTM skirts for three different subjects seen from the back (left) and front

(right) in each set of patterns

Figure 9: Virtual try-on images of front and back indicating strain (top), ease amount in mm (middle)

and relative pressure of skirts (bottom)

Table I: Physical properties of textiles

Table II: Manual measures and 1D measures derived from the whole body scans

Table III: Surface area of the hip and skirts

Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2008

Development of a commercial made-to-measure garment pattern systemTurner, J P. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 6.   4  (1994): 28.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

A PC-based CAD system for producing made-to-measure garment patterns is described that has been

developed and implemented in the commercial environment of a bridalwear manufacturer. The

software simulates the hand drafting methods of the company while automating pattern production

with the following benefits: 1. very rapid production of made-to-measure patterns, 2. production of

patterns which require minimal alteration at first fitting, 3. a user-friendly interface with a very short

training period, 4. the de-skilling of the pattern cutting procedure so that problems of staff turnover

and training are minimal, and 5. the elimination of human error in pattern cutting. Initial software

development concentrated on bodice patterns. Further enhancements included sleeves and skirts and

the mixing and matching of these 3 components of a dress. Cutting layouts were produced using

automatic layout algorithms so that the whole procedure from order and measurements entry through

pattern drafting and lay-planning to the final full-scale plotting could be carried out automatically.

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Received 24 July 1993 Accepted 12 April 1994

INTRODUCTION

This paper describes the stages of development and implementation of a PC-based CAD system for

producingMade-to-Measure (MTM) garment patterns in the commercial environment of a bridalwear

manufacturer.

The system, which was aptly named MICROFIT, was based on standard PC technology and existing

pattern grading software whose source code was available with the following advantages:

(1) The hardware with its MS-DOS operating system was readily available and inexpensive, with the

prospect of becoming increasingly cheap and powerful into the foreseeable future.

(2) Some existing PC-based software routines used for pattern grading could be utilized.

(3) None of the programming restrictions imposed by a standard CAD package would impede

development.

(4) The majority of companies and colleges worldwide already have PCs installed and would be

able to utilize the software if they so wished.

The project of one year's duration was supported by a Royal Society/SERC Industrial Fellowship and the

host company was Creation Bridalwear of Wigan.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of the research project were:

(1) Development of a microcomputer-based system for automatic construction and plotting of "made-

to-measure" ladies' garment patterns.

(2) Implementation of the developed system, including comprehensive trials and utilization in the

commercial environment of the host company, in particular for bridalwear, the product of this

company.

PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS

Within the environment of the host bridalwear company, namely Creation of Wigan, all aspects

ofmade-to-measure pattern design and construction, size charts used, and the methods

used to takemeasurements for order form entry and to cut patterns to fit a customer were observed

and noted. This was necessary in order to understand how to simulate the hand methods used and

implement them in a computerized system.

The methods used by the company, although tried and proven, showed shortcomings in the pattern

cutting area. In particular, patterns were cut on the large side on the principle that cut patterns can be

reduced (taken in) after the first fitting, but that it is not possible to add on material already cut off.

Erring on the small side entails wasteful and costly recutting of expensive cloth. Additionally, the

occasional human error occurred and this was more likely with new staff who had no(: completed their

training. The time taken to draft and cut a set of individual made-to measure patterns could take

up to two hours. The time and cost to train a new pattern cutter was considerable. A six-month period,

with the constant attention of the proprietor or another experienced cutter, was required for a new

employee.

Bearing in mind all the above points, the objectives of implementation of a computerized system were

therefore expanded as follows:

(1) to produce patterns which would need minimal or no alterations at first fitting of the customer;

(2) to produce patterns extremely rapidly, thus increasing the capacity of pattern cutting massively;

(3) to produce a user interface which was friendly and foolproof, with a very short training period (of

the order of days rather than weeks or months);

(4) to deskill the pattern cutting area completely so that problems of staff turnover became minimal;

(5) to eliminate human error in pattern production.

The benefits to the company of a computer system which fulfilled the above objectives would

immediately be obvious in terms of pattern accuracy, productive capacity, human resources and

training and direct costs of labour and material.

SYSTEM HARDWARE

The MICROFIT hardware used in the project comprised:

IBM compatible PC COMPAQ 386 16MHz processor with 40 Mbyte hard disc, dual 5.25" floppy drives

and EGA colour monitor. (This computer was available for use at the outset of the project and was

adequate for the development work.)

* Hewlett Packard Thinkjet Inkjet printer for file listings.

* Hewlett Packard HP7475A A3 size plotter for miniature reference markers.

* Calcomp 1044 AO size plotter for full-scale patterns and markers.

* GTCO 60" x 40" digitizer for base pattern input.

A current MICROFIT System would utilize a 486 PC with 100 Mbyte hard disk, 3.5" microdisk drive and

SVGA monitor.

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

Bodice patterns chosen for initial experimentation were of a style which accounted for more than 50

per cent of the company's customer orders.

The computer program logic developed was one that closely mirrored the hand drafting and fitting

methods of the company's pattern cutters. It was, therefore, amenable to modification

according to advice from the staff as and when required. Briefly the method adopted is as follows.

A base size set of patterns is input through the digitizing board. This pattern set is graded

according to the company's size chart which has also been entered into the computer system. These

together form the base information for the pattern style.

Production of a set of patterns takes place following input through the keyboard of the individual

customer'smeasurements directly from an order form. Rules are built into the system so that either a

set of drafting rules are followed or drafting adjustments to the fitting are applied automatically to the

base graded patterns. The MTM patterns are displayed on the computer screen and subsequently

plotted out onto paper using a suitable layout. The COMPAQ computer was able to draft a set of made-

to-measure bodice patterns and form a layout in about 40 seconds. (A modern PC with 486 processor

would be able to reduce this to about ten seconds.) An order queuing logic allows many orders to be

processed in succession without operative interference. The whole process of measurement entry,

pattern processing and pattern plotting averages about six minutes per customer order giving the

system the capability of producing about 300 customermade-to-measure pattern sets in a 30-hour

week. Off-line customer order entry and plotting could, of course, increase this capacity many times.

THE PRINCIPAL OF MADE-TO-MEASURE DRAFTING UTILIZED

Computerized made-to-measure pattern drafting has been described by Turner[1]. who has outlined

the methods used by Burtons (The Centaur Clothes Group) at Goole and Hepworths (whose system

was subsequently moved to Complan Computer Bureau) for the production of men's suits. He also

developed computer programs for the drafting of ladies' tailored jackets and skirts and men's suits

using traditional tailor's code methods. Similar programs which follow the instructions defined by

Aldrich[2] for the generation of pattern blocks are described by Jo and Harlock[3,4] in their work on the

development of an educational garment design system.

Made-to-measure pattern production may be carried out by either of two methods, namely:

(1) Making alterations to standard graded sizes of the garment as in Gerber (used by Centaur Clothes)

or Camsco (used by Complan).

(2) Drafting a block or styled pattern to measure by programmed instructions.

The MICROFIT method chosen for the production of bridalwear patterns combines the strengths of both

of these methods by using drafting rules (instead of grade rules) which in combination with a size chart

can produce all the standard sizes automatically and can equally produce any one-off made-to-

measure garmentto a set of personal measurements.

The versatility of the alteration method is retained whereby the base shapes for a style may be

entered by digitization, while the drafting instructions laid down in drafting rule tables modify the base

shapes in girth and length according to the input measurements. The rules applied at each point on

the pattern pieces are functions of the measurements rather than the numerical values as used in

grading. Table I shows a bridalwear size chart which spans the sizes 8 to 20. (Table I omitted) Notice

that the measurements are all in imperial inches, indicated by an I entered under the column headed

"U" (units). An M in this column would indicate metric centimetres. Inch units are still commonly used

in the UK made-to measure business.

Notice also that under column "a", the abbreviated single letter names B, W, H, C etc. represent the

incremental values of BUST, WAIST, HIPS, CROSS CHEST etc. These abbreviated single letter names

are used in the drafting rule tables.

Tables II and III show two examples of an individual person's measurements as taken in the bridalwear

shop and entered on to an order form. (Tables II and III omitted) The base size 14 measurements are

also shown so that the incremental difference can be calculated and shown in the last column of each

table.

Table IV shows a drafting rule table. (Table IV omitted) Notice that all the rules, both for length x and

girth y, are functions of length or girth measurements, or alternatively zero (0) indicating no

movement.

The pattern in Figure 1 is an example from a bridal dress bodice and the rule number applied at each

cardinal point is one of the drafting rules in Table IV. (Figure 1 omitted) For example, Rule 2 is Deltax =

0, Deltay = C/2. This means that the point moves by half the incremental value of the cross

chest measurement in the girth direction (vertically), but does not move in the length direction.

For the personal measurement set of Table II, C = -0.5" and C/2 = -0.25", and the points redrafted by

rule 2 move one quarter of an inch vertically downwards due to the narrower cross chest.

Similarly, Rule 3 is Deltax = D, Deltay = B/8. From Table II, D = -0.5" and B = 1", B/8 = O.125".

Thus the bust depth is half an inch less than on the standard size and the point is moved 1/2" to the

left, while moving also 1/8" vertically upwards. Rules 4, 6 and 14 are interpreted using the same

method. The new draft through these points for this individual customer's measurements is seen

superimposed over the size 14 in Figure 2 where it can be seen that there is not a great difference

between the new pattern and the original 14. (Figure 2 omitted) These changes, however, make a

significant difference to the fit of the eventual garment on the customer.

In the case of the pattern produced from the personal measurements in Table III, Figure 3 shows very

great differences between the new pattern and the base size. (Figure 3 omitted) In particular, the girth

of bust and hips is large (between sizes 18 and 20 on the size chart), whereas the waist girth is

relatively very small (between sizes 10 and 12 on the size chart). The waist suppression on the side

panel is particularly severe. A good fit would be impossible from a standard size garment.

RESULTS OF INITIAL DEVELOPMENT PHASE

During this phase nearly 100 orders of the most common style were processed by the system. The

results showed that all the objectives of computerization were achievable: patterns fit the customer

more closely; the sewing machinists can allow smaller seam allowances; the pattern cutter's role of

pattern drafting has been almost eliminated and the skilled designer/pattern cutter employed by the

company can now concentrate on creative designing. The computer programs are menu driven and

extremely user friendly -- a new operative would easily learn to perform the task of order processing

within a two-hour training session.

SYSTEM ENHANCEMENTS

The system was enhanced to cover the full range of bodice patterns and all the sleeves and skirts

produced by the company. The software allows bodices, sleeves and skirts to be mixed and matched

so that the pattern pieces of the chosen styles in each may be brought together and formed into a lay-

plan. Automatically formed lay-plans ready for cutting are produced on the system by programming

the order of pattern insertion and manipulation. This saves the time of an operative moving the

pattern pieces on screen interactively until an efficient layout is formed. It also allows uninterrupted

automatic processing of a queue of orders.

THE NEED FOR A DISCIPLINED APPROACH

The MICROFIT computer system, while having the capability of producing very accurate patterns which

fit well at first fitting, imposes responsibilities and disciplines on the company in order to achieve this.

The base size pattern set of each must reflect exactly the base size measurements in the size chart.

Themeasurements taken of individual customers must be carried out in a consistent way. This

necessarily means that if more than one employee has this responsibility, they should all be

trained to use exactly the same repeatable measuring method.

The size chart itself must have correct measurements throughout the whole size range. This is

important for the production of standard sizes, if these are required, because the software produces

these directly from the size chart measurements, rather than by grading. One of the strengths of such

a system is that it can produce standard sizes from any size chart, whether this be a company or

national chart, and in either inches or centimetres.

The setting-up of a completely new style on the computer does require a skilled pattern technician.

This, of course, only happens each season when new styles are introduced to the company's range. In

the case of bridalwear the pattern range is very traditional and stable.

SUMMARY

The PC-based system MICROFIT has been developed and implemented in a bridalwear company in

order toautomate the production of made-to-measure brides' and bridesmaids' dress patterns.

The system addresses well the needs of the company in that the patterns produced are accurate, the

day-to-day skills of pattern production are eliminated, the system itself is relatively easy to operate

and the potential production from even a slow PC is more than sufficient for the company's pattern

output requirements.

The company has now purchased its own hardware and is operating the system with all the benefits

envisaged in the original objectives.

CONCLUSION

While made-to-measure software is available on Gerber, Lectra and other commercial CAD/CAM

garment systems, these are more costly and more complex to operate than the PC-based MICROFIT

system developed during this Industrial Fellowship. The MICROFIT system combines customer order

entry and measurementvalidation, with pattern processing, lay-planning and plotting all on the same

PC, thus providing an inexpensive and compact solution for the small and medium-sized company. The

versatility of MICROFIT makes it a suitable basic system for other made-to-measure garments such as

ladies' jackets, skirts and trousers, men's suits and specialized wear such as wet and dry suits for

divers. For college use, MICROFIT can be added tostandard PC based grading systems in

order to familiarize staff and students with made-to-measuretechniques.

REFERENCES

1. Turner, J., A Computerised Technique for the Production of Clothing Patterns, PhD Thesis, UMIST,

1986.

2. Aldrich, W., Metric Pattern Cutting, Bell and Hyman Ltd, London, 1985.

3. Jo, J.S. and Harlock, S.C., "Developing an Educational CAD System for Garment Design",

International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 1, 1990, pp 16-20.

4. Jo, J.S. and Harlock, S.C., "Developing an Educational CAD System for Garment Design",

International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 2, 1990, pp 23-30.

Copyright MCB University Press Limited 1994

Word count: 2469

Fit evaluation within the made-to-measure processChin-Man, Chen. International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology 19.   2  (2007): 131-144.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

Purpose - The purpose of this study is to evaluate fit of the basic garments made for Taiwanese female

students with various figure characteristics. The basic garments are produced according to patterns

derived from the PDS 2000 and APDS-3D systems. Design/methodology/approach - This study

recruited ten Taiwanese female subjects who represented various figure characteristics. After scanning

each subject, the body measurements with additional functional ease were manually entered into the

APDS-3D system accompanied with the PDS 2000 system to generate the block patterns. These

patterns were used to make basic garments worn on the subjects for fit evaluations. T -test and one-

way ANOVA were employed to investigate if any statistically significant differences between figure

characteristics of subjects exist. Findings - After statistical analysis, results showed that the

percentage of tolerance allowed by the system in preventing incorrect measurements has to be

revised and more measurements have to be included into the APDS-3D system. Furthermore, female

students who exhibit multiple figure variations complicate fitting problems. For example, sloped-

shoulder subjects with narrow shoulders and forward stance generate the problem of extra fabric

gathering at the shoulder tips as well as looseness at the upper chest. Therefore, figure variations

have to be analyzed in a future study. Research limitations/implications - The convenient sample with

limited size does not allow generalization of figure variations associated with fit problems in all

colleges or universities located in Taiwan. Originality/value - Few researchers have analyzed fit

problems on garments made for females with figure variations, but none of them use 3D body

scanners in combination with computer-aided design systemsto test fit on basic garments for females

with various physical characteristics. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Introduction

Fit problems have plagued the women's apparel industry for a long time. Kurt Salmon Associates, a

consultant company, has found that more than 50 percent of consumers are unable to find well-fitting

garments. Also, research shows that fit problems are the primary factors causing customers to return

apparel products they purchase from catalog to web site retailers ([3] Anderson, 2004). The fit issue

has been so critical in influencing sales that some companies apply technological tools to improve

apparel fit. Manufacturers and retailers install 3D body scanners and computer-aided design (CAD)

systems to assist a made-to-measureprocess. The made-to-measure process is aided with a 3D body

scanner that extracts body measurementswithout physically touching human bodies. Then, the

extracted measurements are entered into alteration systems of CAD where existing patterns are

stored. Finally, existing patterns are selected and modified to be individual patterns ([13] Istook,

2002). Using a 3D scanning system accurately transfers body shape andmeasurements to CAD

systems and efficiently helps improve the quality of fit, according to the [2] ASTM (2005). Indeed,

using a 3D scanner is more effective in analyzing body shape and evaluating fit than the photographs

or videotapes that have been used to for decades ([4] Ashdown et al. , 2004).

Although research indicates that the 3D scanner is an efficient tool to help improve fit, apparel firms,

such as Levi-Strauss and Brooks Brothers, have conducted the customized process but not successfully

turned a profit. The high rate of customer returns could be a result of fit problems ([17] Lee et al. ,

2002). Most fit problems occur due to figure variations in body contour, posture, and proportion ([15]

Kwong, 2004). Few researchers have analyzed fit problems on garments made for females with figure

variations, but none of them use 3D body scanners in combination with CAD systems to test fit on

basic garments for females with various figure characteristics. This study applies a 3D body scanner

and a CAD system to produce block patterns for ten Taiwanese female students, as diverse apparel

technologies have been promoted in Taiwan. Specifically, these female students who are scanned

exhibit figure variations related to proportion between shoulder and hip, shoulder and chest shape,

curve of back, and posture. Block patterns altered to fit the females are cut and used to produce basic

garments. Fit evaluation on the basic garments is conducted, and results and suggestions are

provided.

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study is to evaluate fit of the basic garments made for Taiwanese female students

with various figure characteristics. The basic garments are produced according to patterns derived

from the PDS 2000 and APDS-3D systems.

Review of literature

Apparel fit

Apparel fit is defined as the relationship between the size and contour of the garment and those of the

human body. Fit problems arise as an incongruent relationship between the garment and the human

body occurs ([12] Huckabay, 1992). Whether the garment conforms to the body depends on five

criteria; they are ease, line, grain, balance, and set. Ease, including functional ease and styling ease, is

the dimensional difference between the garment and the individual wearing the garment. Functional

ease is considered as the amount of fabric allowed for body movement, and styling ease is defined as

the amount of fabric needed to demonstrate the design of the garment. The second criterion is line

associated with seams of garments. A well-fitting garment presents vertical seams

perpendicular to the floor and parallel to the body center when it is worn on the body. The third

criterion is grain focusing on the relationships among fabric, patterns, and wearers. Grain lines of

garments should be parallel or perpendicular to the floor as well. The fourth criterion is balance. A

balanced jacket evenly hangs on the body, so the distance from the right side of the body to the

center is the same as the distance from the left side to the center. The last criterion is set which

refers to the absence of wrinkles on garments ([9] Erwin and Kinchen, 1974).

Fit evaluation is a complicated process in which the relationship of the garment to the body is analyzed

based upon certain criteria. Fit evaluation determined by individuals wearing garments tends to be

subjective. Two individuals who have the same body measurements may perceive clothing fit

differently ([1] Alexander et al. , 2005). On the other hand, fit evaluation conducted by expert panels is

more objective. Trained judges follow criteria to analyze fit, and they discuss and negotiate rating

scales to reach consensus before final decisions are made. Therefore, the fit analysis by trained judges

is believed to provide reliable and valid data ([4] Ashdown et al. , 2004).

Self-reported body types and fit problems

Fit evaluation can be achieved by either general individuals or expert panels. Few researchers have

investigated fit problems perceived by individuals with various body types. [1] Alexander et al. (2005)

studied fit problems of females with four body shapes: pear, hourglass, rectangular, and inverted

triangular. Their study acquired 223 questionnaires from female ages 18 to 29 years. They found that

the participants who identified their body shapes as rectangular, pear and hourglass were more

likely to express fit problems at the bust area than those who perceived themselves as the inverted

triangular shape ([1] Alexander et al. , 2005).

In contrast to [1] Alexander et al. (2005) who studied females aged between 18 and 29, [16] Kind

(1995) focused on fit preference of college females on ready-to-wear garments. [16] Kind (1995) used

the heightmeasurements of 358 college females to classify their body types into petite, average, tall,

and large sizes. [16] Kind (1995) surveyed their fit perceptions and found that the college females,

with exception of the average group, were dissatisfied with pant length ([16] Kind, 1995).

Rather than focusing on fit perceptions of general college females, [10] Feather et al. (1997) collected

data from 503 female collegiate basketball players from two southeastern states. These researchers

investigated self-perception of body type and fit problems of uniforms and street wear. They reported

that almost 50 percent of the players identified their body types as ecto-mesomorph. More than 25

percent of the participants perceived themselves as ectomorphs. The players rated the sites of hips,

crotch of pants and buttocks on both uniforms and street wear the lowest satisfaction scores ([10]

Feather et al. , 1997).

Body-type classification and fit evaluation

The body-type classification of ecto-, meso- and endo-morphs is originated from the study of [20]

Sheldon (1954). [20] Sheldon (1954) and his colleagues excluded subjects with extreme figure

variations from their well-known study. Human subjects who had irregular development of bone and

muscle and imbalanced deposits of fat in their bodies were not recruited. By applying a somatotyping

technique, the body types of the male college students were categorized as meso-, ecto-, and endo-

morphs ([20] Sheldon, 1954). Although the body-type classification developed by Sheldon and his

colleagues has been applied by many researchers in various fields, [14] Johnson (1990) suggested that

two more categories, ecto- and endo-mesomorphs, neededto be added into the body classification,

because the two additional forms in a revised body classification system would more accurately reflect

the physical characteristics of current individuals ([14] Johnson, 1990).

Based on the somatotyping technique developed by Sheldon, [8] Douty (1968) established a method

of "somatometry" to analyze the body shape. She photographed 300 college females as they stood

silhouetted against a grided screen. The photographs were called somatographs which were

used to evaluate postures, body masses, proportions, and body shape. Three experienced judges

evaluated the somatographs, and the body shapes were classified into five categories of the body-

build and posture. [8] Douty (1968) concluded that the back shape, shoulder shape, buttocks shape,

posture, and body build were important elements that researchers needed to pay more

attention to while conducting a fitting test on female bodies. Directed by Douty, [6] Brinson (1977)

incorporated the somatometry method to alter patterns and to make basic garments of bodices and

skirts for ten female students. Among the ten subjects, six were in the experimental group and four

were in the control group. [6] Brinson (1977) measured the angles on the somatographs of the

experimental group, and she used angle measurements to determine how darts and side seams on

basic patterns could be altered. The traditional pattern alteration method used for her study applied

only length and circumferences to produce basic garments for the group members. Results showed

that there was no significant difference on the fit between the two groups of subjects. However, the

experimental method allowed a subject with figure variations to easily obtain a good fit without

numerous fittings and alterations ([6] Brinson, 1977).

Unlike [6] Brinson (1977) who tested the fit of bodice and skirt garments, [19] Pouliot (1980)

incorporated the somatometry method to develop pant patterns and test the fit of altered pants. She

used a computer program, designed to correct the distortion of measurements which resulted from the

somatometry method,to acquire body shapes, proportions, and angle measurements of 36 female

subjects between the ages of 12 and 55. Finally, she chose five models representing hip shapes of

round hips, pear-shaped hips, weight-in-front, weight-in-back, and average-figures for a fit evaluation.

Each subject wore basic pants altered by both the unit method and the experimental method. The unit

method referred to the application of length and circumference measurements to alter patterns, while

the experimental method combined length and circumference measurements with

angle measurements taken from somatographs. [19] Pouliot (1980) determined that using the

experimental method was better in creating pants that fit well on front waist position, front waist darts,

back crotch, and horizontal grain orientation. [18] Lesko (1982) further used the somatometry method

and same computer software to produce bodice garments. She photographed 30 subjects and selected

eight subjects who exhibited one or more of these figural variations: erect vs slumping posture, large

bust vs small bust, high bust vs low bust, square shoulders vs sloping shoulders, and overweight vs

underweight. Two garments were made according to patterns drafted using the unit and the

experimental methods for each subject. She concluded that there was no adequate evidence proving

that one method was better than the other ([18] Lesko, 1982).

Because the experimental alteration method that incorporated angle measurements did not

significantly improve the fit of garments, [11] Heisey et al. (1986) tried to improve the method. They

realized that the transformation of 2D patterns from the somatometry method could be derived from a

conical relationship between the 3D body form and the 2D patterns. Thus, they established a conical

theory to formulate equations and to apply equations to certain areas in patterns that can be modeled

as cones ([11] Heisey et al. , 1986). Their conical theory was not tested on the human body until 1993.

[22] Shen and Huck (1993) tested the conical theory by producing basic garments to be worn on the

human body. They used somatographs in combination with four body measurements to develop bodice

patterns for 12 female subjects with a variety of upper torso configurations. Bodice patterns for each

subject were drafted using both the experimental method incorporating angles with four body

surface measurements and the traditional method requiring 27 body surface measurements. They

particularly treated the bust area as a conical shape in the experimental group, and the cone was

transformed to a 2D wedge form as the basis to adjust darts in patterns. Garments made using the

experimental method were judged to have significantly better fit on most areas ([22] Shen and Huck,

1993).

In summary, previous research relied on photographs to extract body angles, and the

angle measurementsare incorporated with length and circumference in an attempt to create well-

fitting garments. The attempt toimprove apparel fit for female customers with a variety of body shape

has been a challenge. As new technologies such as body scanners and CAD systems have been

updated, the tests of fit on garments madeby applying these technologies are practical and profound.

However, none of research has used these technologies to create garments and test fit on females

with various figure characteristics. This study extracts body measurements from a body scanner,

deprives patterns from a CAD system, produces basic garments for fit evaluation, and analyzes female

body shapes associated with fit problems.

Methodology

In the apparel industry, pattern construction is a necessary step to produce garments. Most apparel

firms construct block patterns to develop patterns for new styles or design. The shape and size of

block patterns should accurately represent the human body ([7] Burns and Bryant, 1997). The block

patterns used in this study were derived from the APDS-3D system. Asahi Chemical Industry Co. Ltd

introduced the APDS-3D systemto the market in 1995. The APDS-3D system starts with the dress form

which contains 88 measurementpoints. The standard dress form can be viewed from different angles

on the screen, and the dress form can be modified using measurements that are extracted from 3D

body scanner ([23] Tait, 1995). The system incorporates with the Gerber Pattern Design Systems (PDS)

2000 into a complete CAD system enabling the function of design, pattern making, and production.

In addition to the CAD system, the VITUS 3D body scanner developed by Vitronic, a Germen company

is also used in this study. The VITUS body scanner is accompanied by a software system equipped with

VITUS View, RAMSIS Individual, and VITUS Measure to extract anthropometric measurements (Figures

1 and 2 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). After taking the six body measurements on each subject

(Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]), the scanning measurements with additional functional

ease were manually entered into a size-9 dress form measurement table of the APDS-3D system. The

size-9 dress form was selected because it represents the average figure of Taiwanese women. The six

scanning measurements were added toadditional ease measurements of 8 cm for bust circumferences

and 4 cm for waist circumferences. The values were entered into the measurement table, shown on

Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]. When entering the values of measurements, the APDS-3D

system only accepts values that are within a specific range. If measurement input is outside the

tolerance of a selected form's measurements, a white frame is marked around the measurement and

the form modification screen becomes non-functional. Therefore, themeasurements of waist

circumference 81.3 cm for subject 4 and 82.5 cm for subject 8 were rejected, and they were

limited to 79.3 cm and 78.5 cm instead. Once the measurements were accepted by the system, they

were transformed into 3D visualization. The 3D visualization was then converted into 2D patterns of

bodice front and bodice back. Both block patterns of bodice front and back with shoulder darts and

waist darts were imported to the PDS 2000 which allows users to make changes on the 2D patterns.

The completed block patterns were cut out and used to make basic garments for the ten subjects who

had different figure characteristics (Table III [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]).

The body forms of the ten subjects were categorized by a panel of three professional judges who were

faculty teaching clothing construction and apparel fit. The ten female subjects, who enrolled in the

advanced fashion design class, were voluntary for this study. The judges followed the illustrations

taken from the book Pattern Making for Fashion Design written by [5] Armstrong (1987) to classify the

subjects' body characteristics (Figures 3-8 [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]). The physical

characteristics of the subjects were categorized as "body type," "shoulder type A," "shoulder type B,"

"chest type," "back type," and "posture." Eventually, the judges evaluated the basic garments worn by

the subjects whose ages between 20 and 25. These subjects wore the basic garments over

undergarments for the fit evaluation. The judges received copies of the rating scale created by [21]

Shen (1991) to evaluate fit based on the appearance of the basic garments. They marked a score

ranging from -4 to +4 on the 25 items of the rating scale. The closer the score was to zero, the better

fitting the basic garments were. T -test was employed to test differences on the means of 25 items

between the physical characteristics of the shoulder type B category. One-way ANOVA was

run to investigate the potential presence of significant differences on the means of 25 items between

characteristics of each category: body type, shoulder type A, chest type, back type, and posture. When

the ANOVA tests showed significant difference, the Tukey multiple comparison test was

used to examine differences between possible pairs.

Results and discussion

The mean scores show that the basic garments have adequate ease and proper seam placement.

However, a particular concern is the mean of 1.73 on the back armhole shape. This score indicates

that most of the basic garments have the armhole shape much outside the natural body curves.

Because the size-9 dress form has a wider across back measurement than that of the subjects' bodies,

the form used in the Taiwanese apparel industry has to be remolded. Otherwise,

the measurement across the back must be included in the basemeasurement table of the APDS-3D

system. The same problem occurs in the front armhole shape as well. Although the mean of the front

armhole shape, 1.30, is not as high as that for the back armhole shape, the basic garments for

subjects two, four, and five have front armhole shapes much outside the curves of their bodies.

Along with inaccurate measurements of the dress form, the APDS-3D system's tolerance limits and

figure variations also cause fit problems. The APDS-3D system limits the measurement input of the

waist circumferences if the values exceed the selected dress form's waist circumference ±25 percent;

waist circumferences outside this range are rejected by the system. Since, the

waistline measurement inputs for subjects 4 and 8 went beyond the system's tolerance, their

waistline measurements were limited to the allowance and the tight waistline on the basic garments

generated fit problems. Indeed, software designers need to consider eliminating the waist darts on the

block patterns or develop a formula to adjust the waist darts. The waist darts can be eliminated

because the block patterns with shoulder darts still portray the 3D shape of female bodies.

Furthermore, software designers might create a formula to calculate the differences between the block

pattern's waistline circumference and the person's waistline circumference containing basic ease. The

intake of waist darts is the difference resulted from the block pattern's waistline circumference minus

the person's waistline circumference.

Either using patterns with only shoulder darts or adjusting the intake of the waist darts would solve the

problem of an exceedingly tight waistline. In fact, the software designers should revise the tolerance

limits of the APDS-3D system in terms of waistline circumferences as well as neck circumferences.

Particularly, the tolerance of ±25 percent is too big to prevent incorrect input when used for

neck measurements. The unusual neck measurements, 30.1 and 30.6 cm for subjects 7 and 10,

respectively, were resulted from an inaccuratemeasure during the scanning process. However,

these measurements were accepted by the APDS-3D system, so the basic garments appeared poor fit

on the necklines. The necklines of the basic garments were so small that they became stuck before

they reached the bottom of the neck; the necklines did not fit and could not be smoothly positioned on

the subjects' necks. Therefore, the percentage of tolerance allowed for the neckmeasurement should

decrease to assure proper fit.

The fit problems occur due to the APDS-3D system as well as figure variations. After a series of ANOVA

tests, significant differences exist between the physical characteristics within the categories of body

types, shoulder type A, chest type, back type, and posture. First, the findings indicate that the subjects

with the hourglass characteristic are significantly different from other groups on the items of bustline

circumference and strain/looseness at the bust level; p -values for bustline circumference and

strain/looseness at the bust level were 0.023 and 0.0001 (<0.05), respectively. The hourglass type

exhibit the fit problem - tightness around the bust area. The subjects with the hourglass characteristic

appear to have more prominent bust than those who are not the hourglass type. This finding

seems to be consistent with the study of [1] Alexander et al. (2005) who report that the hourglass type

expresses fit problems at the bust area.

Findings also show that those with narrow shoulders and large hips are significantly different from the

groups of straight and broad shoulders and small hips on the item called "strain/excess at shoulder tip"

(0.009 < 0.05). The subjects with narrow shoulders and large hips accompanied with sloped shoulders

have excess fabric around the shoulder tips compared with the groups of straight and broad shoulders

and small hips. Moreover, the shoulder seams of the narrow shoulders and large hips group move

much toward the front bodice. A possible reason for the occurrence of improper shoulder seam

position could be the subjects' narrow lengthmeasurement across the chests. In combination with

narrow lengths across chests, the subjects who exhibit narrow shoulders and large hips stand in a

relaxed posture. Their arms drop down and the shoulder seams are pulled toward the front bodice.

Within the category of shoulder type A, there are significant differences on the items of gapping/strain

at back armhole, strain/excess ease at shoulder tip, and shoulder seam position. The p -values for

gapping/strain at back armhole, strain/excess ease at shoulder tip, and shoulder seam position were

0.014, 0.046, and 0.001 (<0.05), respectively. The group of subjects with the physical characteristics

of square shoulders is significantly different from the others on these three items. The square-shoulder

subjects have more strains at the back armhole of the basic garments compared with those whose

shoulders are ideal. The subjects with square shoulders tend to have flat backs that lead diagonal

strains toward the shoulder tips. Furthermore, the group with square shoulders is significantly different

from the group with sloped shoulders on strain/excess ease at the shoulder tip. Square-shoulder

subjects showed much more strains at the shoulder tips compared with the subjects of sloped

shoulders. Moreover, the square-shoulder group of subjects significantly differs from the ideal- and

sloped- shoulder groups on the shoulder seam position; the shoulder seams of basic garments worn on

the square-shoulder subjects move more toward the back bodice. The possible reason could be that

the subjects' shoulder points tend to be closer to front bodices, so their shoulder points do not match

the shoulder points of the basic garments.

Within the category of the chest type, significant differences exist for the items of gapping/strain at

back armhole and side seam position. The p -values for gapping/strain at back armhole and side seam

position were 0.001 and 0.046, respectively, among the three characteristics (ideal-, hollow-, and

pigeon-chests). Subjects with hollow chest have more gapping at the back armhole compared with the

group of ideal chest because subjects with hollow chest also have round back generating gapping at

the back armhole. Meanwhile, the protruding back creates another fit problem on the side seams in

which the hollow-chest subjects' side seams move toward the back bodice. Owing to prominent back

and smaller bust, the side seams move more toward the back than the side seams of the ideal-chest

group.

The group of round back is significantly different from the group of flat back on the items of

gapping/strain at back armhole, strain/looseness at bust level, and bustline circumference; p -values

were 0.009, 0.037, and 0.037, respectively. It is a common occurrence for the group of round

back to have more gapping at the back armhole, more strains at the bustline circumference, and more

strains at the bust level. The round back produces gapping at the back armhole, and the subjects with

round back accompanied with big bust causing tighter bustline circumference and strains at the bust

level.

There are significant differences within the category of posture on the mean of gapping/strain at back

armhole, bustline circumference, and strain/looseness at bust level; p -values were 0.049, 0.039, and

0.021, respectively. Subjects with the characteristic of forward stance have more gapping at the back

armhole, strains at the bustline circumference, and strains at the bust level than the subjects with

upright stance. The possible cause is that subjects with the forward stance could also have round back.

Limitation and conclusion

This study recruited subjects who enrolled in the Department of Fashion Design at Shih Chien

University in Taiwan that represent various physical characteristics. The convenient sample does not

represent a generalization of figure variations in Taiwanese college women. However, the findings

provide some information valuable for software designers. This research suggests software designers

need to addmeasurements such as across back, across chest, and front center length that will enhance

well fitting. Also, the tolerance for neck circumference in the APDS-3D system has to be decreased in

order to ensure accuratemeasurements. Meanwhile, the intake of the waist darts has to be adjustable,

depending on the difference between the females' waist circumferences with additional ease and block

patterns' waist dimensions. Furthermore, this research reveals that fit problems become complicated

when one figure variation combines with another and when the physical characteristics are not all

ideal. Future research can focus on investigating commonly occurring figure variations among females

and combination of figure variations.

References

1. Alexander, M., Connell, L.J. and Presley, A.B. (2005), "Communications: clothing fit preferences of

young female adult consumers", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 17 No. 1,

pp. 52-64.

2. ASTM (2005), Global Notebook, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,

available at: www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/SNEWS/NOVEMBER_2002/gn_nov02.html?

L±mystore±druk4676 (accessed December 2005).

3. Anderson, G. (2004), If The Clothes Fit, Buy 'Em, available at:

www.retailwire.com/Print/PrintDocument.cfm?DOC_ID = 10058 (2005, December).

4. Ashdown, S.P., Schoenfelder, L.K. and Lyman-Clarke, L. (2004), "Visual fit analysis from 3D scans",

Abstracts of the Fiber Society 2004 Annual Meeting and Technical Conference, p. 111.

5. Armstrong, H.J. (1987), Pattern Making for Fashion Design, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, NY.

6. Brinson, E.G. (1977), "Pattern alterations predicted and quantified using angle measurements",

unpublished master's thesis, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

7. Burns, L.D. and Bryant, N. (1997), The Business of Fashion, Fairchild Publications, New York, NY.

8. Douty, H.I. (1968), "Visual somatometry in health related research", Journal of Alabama Academy of

Science, Vol. 39, pp. 21-34.

9. Erwin, M.D. and Kinchen, L.A. (1974), Clothing for Moderns, 5th ed., Macmillan, New York, NY.

10. Feather, B.L., Herr, D.G. and Ford, S. (1997), "Black and white female athletes' perceptions of their

bodies and garment fit", Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 125-8.

11. Heisey, F.L., Brown, P. and Johnson, R.F. (1986), "A mathematical analysis of the graphic

somatometry method of pattern alteration", Home Economics Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 115-

23.

12. Huckabay, D.A. (1992), "Perceived body cathexis and garment fit and style proportion problems of

petite women", unpublished master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,

Blacksburg, VA.

13. Istook, C.L. (2002), "Enabling mass customization: computer-driven alternation methods", Journal

ofClothing Science and Technology, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 61-76.

14. Johnson, K.K.P. (1990), "Impressions of personality based on body forms: an application of

Hillestad's Model of appearance", Clothing & Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 8 No. 4, p. 34.

15. Kwong, M.Y. (2004), "Garment design for individual fit", in Fan, J., Yu, W. and Hunter, L.

(Eds), ClothingAppearance and Fit: Science and Technology, Textile Institute; CRC, Cambridge, pp.

196-233.

16. Kind, K.R.O. (1995), "Specialty-size college-age females: satisfaction with apparel fit, body

cathexis, and retail attributes", unpublished master's thesis, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.

17. Lee, S.E., Kunz, G.I., Fiore, A.M. and Campell, J.R. (2002), "Acceptance of mass customization of

apparel: merchandising issues associated with preference for product, process, and

place", Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 138-46.

18. Lesko, L.J. (1982), "Bodice fit compared: conventional alterations with and without graphic

somatometry", unpublished master's thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.

19. Pouliot, C.J.T. (1980), "Pants alteration by graphic somatometry techniques", unpublished master's

thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.

20. Sheldon, W.H. (1954), Atlas of Men, Harper, New York, NY.

21. Shen, L. (1991), "Bodice sloper development using somatometic and physical data: an exploratory

study", unpublished master's thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.

22. Shen, L. and Huck, J. (1993), "Bodice pattern development using somatographic and physical

data", International Journal of Clothing Science & Technology, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 6-16.

23. Tait, N. (1995), "The Asahi apparel CAD 3D-PDS system", Apparel International, Vol. 26 No. 11, pp.

35-7.

Appendix

Corresponding author

Chin-Man Chen can be contacted at: chinmanchen@yahoo.com.tw

AuthorAffiliation

Chin-Man Chen, Department of Fashion Merchandising, Shih Chien University, Taiwan, Republic of

China

Illustration

Figure 1:

Figure 2:

Figure 3: Body type

Figure 4: Shoulder type A

Figure 5: Shoulder type B

Figure 6: Chest type

A ready-made business: The birth of the clothing industry in AmericaZakim, Michael . Business History Review 73.   1  (Spring 1999): 61-90.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

The birth of the clothing industry in the US after 1815 is recounted. It is contended that, in

contrast to recent historical literature, the clothing business was at the center of the American

experience of industrialization. This was not because ready-made clothing was a novel commodity. Nor

was it because of new production technologies, social innovations, or legal structures adopted by the

industry. Rather, clothing entrepreneurs were significant because they integrated several important

markets - a trans-Atlantic trade in cloth, an urban trade in labor, and a market for manufactured goods

in the interior regions of the US. This helped to make the ready-made clothing business among the

country's largest industries by 1850.

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Headnote

This article recounts the birth of the clothing industry in the United States after 1815. It contends, in

contrastto recent historical literature, that the clothing business was at the center of the American

experience of industrialization. This was not because ready-made clothing was a novel commodity. Nor

was it because of new production technologies, social innovations, or legal structures adopted by the

industry. Rather, clothingentrepreneurs were significant because they integrated several important

markets-a trans-Atlantic trade in cloth, an urban trade in labor, and a market for manufactured goods

in the interior regions of the United States. This helped to make the ready-made clothing business

among the country's largest industries by 1850.

By the eve of the Civil War there were 430 clothing houses doing business in New York City. This stood

in marked contrast to the twelve "slop sellers," as dealers in cheap garments were known, listed in the

city's New Trade Directory just half a century earlier. The numbers added up to the birth of

a clothing industry. As Hunt's Merchant's Magazine enthusiastically reported in 1849, "It used to be

one job to seek for the cloth, and another to repair to the tailor, causing not unfrequently great loss of

time and much vexation. We now see everywhere, not only the economist, but the man of fashion,

saving his time and his money by procuring the very articles he requires all ready made to his hand."

Personal utility, though, was not all that qualified a ready-made suit as archetypically modern;

producing goods on speculation for sale to an anonymous public while standardizing consuming habits

and body sizes were also obvious criteria of industrial revolution, as was a rate of growth "even faster

than the great increase in commerce and population justify." And so, when the New York Chamber of

Commerce published its first Annual Report in 1858, it acknowledged the new industry's

contribution to the city's rise to continental pre-eminence. "The appetite grows by what it feeds upon,"

these Merchant Princes, long indifferent to such ordinary pursuits, noted of the clothing trade's

seemingly limitless elasticity, still a novelty in a world until recently prescribed by Ricardian

assumptions of implacable limits. "There is no telling the extent it may not reach."1

In 1747 an English survey of business opportunities observed that "the most general use of cloathing

makes the Experience of their commodiousness almost universal."2 What was a logical inference in

the eighteenth century, however, became an indisputable reality in the nineteenth. Clothing was

tied to the dumping of British cloth in America after 1815, the fitful rise of a domestic textile industry

during the same period, the concomitant decline of household manufacturing, the creation of a

transportation infrastructure connecting distant and disparate regions of the country, the consequent

growth of demand for finished manufactures in the hinterland, and the mass mobilization of cut-rate

labor in the country's major cities by means of a system of subcontracting which the New York

feuilletonist George Foster began to call "sweating" in 1849.3

By 1850, men's clothing constituted the largest manufacturing enterprise in New York, the country's

largest manufacturing city. In addition, clothiers were the leading employers, leading aggregate

investors, and leading producers of goods in Cincinnati, Philadelphia, and Boston.4 They did business

at the intersection of the two great trading triangles of the age, where southern cotton and western

produce met northern and European cloth and capital. The "ready-made" proved to be a practical

way to sell the cheap cloths and labor available in the city to the rest of the nation. Clothiers, thus,

staked out a heretofore nonexistent position in the country's developing networks of exchange and, in

so doing, helped to usher in the industrial market. They coordinated long and short credit cycles

between different parts of the commercial world. They overcame one of the central problems of doing

business in industrial conditions-bringing the new material abundance to market-by integrating two

traditionally distinct enterprises, dry goods jobbing and merchant tailoring. They balanced the

exigencies of a local retail and a distant wholesale market. And they connected the individual

consumer-in this case, only the male citizen, as the manufacture of ready-made women's garments

was still several decades away-to the ethos of mass production.5

Indeed, the commodity itself came to exemplify the social possibilities immanent in industrial

revolution. Alfred Munroe & Co., exhibitors of "ready-made wear" at New York's Crystal Palace

Exhibition of Industrial Arts in 1853, declared that the era had passed "when every man or boy in want

of a new coat or other garment, must resort to his tailor, and pay exorbitant prices in order to be

satisfactorily suited." The savings were presented as proof of the democratizing effects of the market.

Foreign visitors invariably concurred. "A mob in the United States is a mob in broad-cloth," Lady

Emmeline Stuart Wortley characteristically observed in 1851. "If we may talk of a rabble in a republic,

it is a rabble in black silk waistcoats." Americans were the last to take issue. just a few years

beforehand the United States Magazine and Democratic Review had pointed to the "clothingrevolution"

as a true measure of republican progress: "Articles of clothing are now at the command of the lowest

members of society, which, but a century since, were scarcely within the reach of crowned heads."6

Clothing and the Industrial Revolution

Clothiers were pioneers of American industrialization. Nevertheless, their activities entailed no great

leaps of the imagination, technological wonders, or political privileges. Clothiers called for no special

tariffs. They utilized no incorporation laws and had no reason to secure eminent domain. What's more,

the capitalist production ofclothing was technically little changed from that which preceded it. Hunt's

might have considered the "perfect order and system" in evidence at the veteran Pine

Street clothing firm of Lewis and Hanford to be paradigmatic of the new age in 1849, but the cloth was

still being cut into suitable shapes there by a highly trained artisan and then sewn back together by

someone paid considerably less to do so. This was the same division of labor that characterized the

production process of colonial tailoring shops. The same modest collection of tools-shears, needles and

bodkins, a sleeve board, an iron-also remained in use. And the garment itself was constituted of the

same parts: a relatively expensive outer fabric, cheaper materials used for inner linings and less

exposed sections, buttons, and threads. Even when a much-anticipated sewing machine was

introduced in the 1850s, dramatically increasing productivity, no re-organization of the production

process ensued, a traditional measure of industrial change. Instead, mechanization was integrated into

the extant system of put-out labor. Nor did the mobilization of all those working hands-close to sixty

thousand persons were in the employ of New York City firms alone according to an 1857 estimate in

the Herald-entail the conscious social innovations characteristic of Lowell, or even Rockdale.7

The ready-made commodity itself wasn't even new. Inventories of presewn garments made up in

advance of their sale were already in evidence in the sixteenth century, when English tailors nervously

invoked traditional guild prerogatives in order to suppress the "trade of Salesmen." In 1700 a single

London merchant reportedly kept one thousand suits in stock. By the middle of the eighteenth century

the merchant tailor Jacob Reed was offering a choice assortment of "ready made cloths, both for Men

and Boys" in New York. And John Shephard, who counted some of New York City's most refined

personages among his 11 custom" in the mid-1780s, did a brisk business in ready-made clothing,

principally satin breeches and silk jackets, which were among the most expensive items in his ledger.8

The development of the clothing industry, then, does not conform to traditional visions of the industrial

revolution as a catalytic combination of entrepreneurial genius and sublime machines. At best,

clothiers could be said to have applied well-established arbitrage practices to the new domestic

market. But they still resembled an early modern "mercantile estate" insinuating itself between

purchase and sale. In the nineteenth century, however, this meant integrating the revolutions in textile

production (the plethora of cloths), labor (the mobilization of urban workers), and transportation

(canals and railways). Clothiers took control of both purchase and sale, and combined the traditionally

distinct roles of buyer of raw material, jobber, factor, wholesale manufacturer, and retailer in

integrating production and distribution. Change and continuity, in other words, were not mutually

exclusive terms in the industrialization of clothing. As a writer for the National Association of Wool

Manufactures cryptically explained in 1873, the ingredients of this giant new industry were "so simple

that the results to which they have led seem inconceivable."9 The apparent "contradiction" was really

evidence of the confusion and circumstance intrinsic to industrialization.

Contemporaries seemed unsure of how to account for this new industry. This was clear in the fact

thatclothing production was absent from all manufacturing statistics until mid-century, despite the

industry's dramatic growth after 1815. And when clothing was finally accorded an official presence, it

came as a result of the reconceptualization of industrialization itself.10

Early economic statistics had a singular design: to identify the sites of industrial change (whole

production sectors such as textiles or iron, for instance) and then gather as much information about

them as was bureaucratically possible. Such a taxonomy informed Alexander Hamilton's landmark

1791 Report on Manufacturers. It continued to guide all subsequent efforts as well. Even the ambitious

Sixth Census of 1840, which generated an unprecedented statistical representation of the nation's

economic life, adhered to the same epistemology: investigating commercial activities that were

chosen, a priori, for their presumed centralityto the political economy.11 "Manufacturing" itself

denoted that act which turned raw materials into "a form suitable for use." This was the creation of

something out of nothing, which was synonymous with the creation of value-a definition rooted in the

previous century's "producerism." In this order of things, making clothingwas an appropriation of the

value already manifest in the production of cloth. It was, at best, a commercial elaboration.12

Then, in 1850, clothing not only appeared in official statistics for the first time, it suddenly constituted

a giant industry. This was because Congress had instructed census marshals that year to record "the

name of each corporation, company, or individual producing articles to the annual value of $500." The

result was at once a more perfunctory and a far more exhaustive list of commodities than had ever

been compiled. It redefined manufacturing to mean no longer the physical transformation of nature, ex

nihilo, but the manufacture of surplus values.13 The ambitious New York City merchant tailor George

P. Fox, who sold ready-mades in his San Francisco store, thus revised the old political economy: "Until

the goods of the [cloth importer] have passed through the [tailor's] hands, their value is in a dormant

state, and they contribute nothing to the embellishment or the utility of life." In addition, no one was

going to "produce articles to the annual value of $500" without intending to keep some of it for

himself. The official record of industrialization now became a business document. That is, it reflected

an entrepreneurial logic rather than a productive one, an industrial revolution driven by the pecuniary

appetites of thousands of small firms and proprietary shops making up what they hoped would sell.14

Curiously, this version of industrial progress has been lost on modern scholarship. While in the latter

half of the nineteenth century most major accounts of industrial change included a chapter on "ready-

to-wear," recent histories ignore the subject altogether.15 Such important studies as Alfred Chandler's

The Visible Hand, Stuart Bruchey's Enterprise, and Walter Licht's Industrializing America confine their

accounts of the early industrial economy to "the large ... establishment, with its battery of machines,

foundries, or furnaces"; or to "the animating effects of cheap iron," McCormick's reaper,

interchangeable parts, and Crampton's mule; or to a neat bifurcation of the manufacturing project

between specialized "craftsmen-entrepreneurs" in the city and "large-scale" producers of mass

consumables in the countryside. Even Thomas Cochran, who, in moving the industrial revolution back

half a century, correctly noted that "it pleased early nineteenth-century Americans tohave the price of

cottons reduced, but the `new world' they lived in was more the product of faster and cheaper finance,

trade, and transportation than the result of steam engines, power saws, and other new machines,"

took no notice of the explosive growth of the clothing trade that grew precisely out of the interplay

between cheap cloths and cheap finance and transportation.16

Shoes and boots, on the other hand, are the industry of choice for illustrating how an ambitious

merchant agenda could transform smallscale, artisanal production into a giant business, which was the

underlying dynamic of the clothing trade as well. However, what actually recommends

shoes to historians of industrialization is the fact that their production underwent dramatic

mechanization and centralization. By the mid-nineteenth century the shoe and boot industry far more

resembled capital-intensive, factory-based production than it did its mercantilist-inspired origins in the

putting-out system, thus satisfying the view of industrialization as a singular process of escalating size

and sophistication. By 1860, in contrast, the clothingindustry had begun to move toward smaller

production units.

Industrial Beginnings

If the clothing industry had an actual birth, it was in the emporiums and warehouses that appeared in

New York and other American seaboard entrepots after the end of war and the reopening of European

trade in 1815. These businesses responded to the unprecedented amount and low cost of British cloths

in circulation. This allowed them to aggressively proffer the widest range of "fashionable apparel" for a

varied clientele of "gentlemen." James Burk opened a store on the still largely residential Wall Street in

1821 where he sold garments made up of the freshest imports: London cassimeres, fashionable

mixtures, William Hirst's superior blues and blacks, Sheppard's velvet cloths, real Tartain plaids,

elegant Valencia vestings, rich black Florentines, and silk camblets. Burk, a prolific copy-writer,

excitedly updated his inventory of fabrics in prolix and precise advertisements regularly placed in the

Evening Post, There he listed the latest brand names, colors, and cloths arriving from Liverpool, all of

which he promised to make up "in the first style." Burk appealed to the good taste of the self-

consciously fashionable while also offering them real savings of "33 1/3 per cent on the amount of

every six months clothing."18

Burk's store was certainly not a tailoring shop. Burk was no craftsman who sold his own skilled labor

and hoped that the resulting income, less trade expenses, would leave a sufficient margin to support

his household. A different ethos of accumulation informed his actions, one guided by anticipation of

what would sell tomorrow rather than what was available today. The commodity had become a means

of generating capital rather than vice versa, and surplus values were reinvested in the business rather

than devoted to personal maintenance. Clothing was simply a convenient means for Burk to do this. He

had formerly worked as an accountant and commission merchant before this latest career move, no

doubt prompted by the influx of cheap cloths to America at war's end.19 He began selling clothing in

his native Philadelphia in 1817. By the end of 1822 he had opened a third store, a mile or so up

Manhattan in the growing village of Greenwich. Moving goods between his three stores facilitated an

economy of scale which helped him realize his incessant exhortations to the public for "economy

in clothing." At the same time, Burk's enterprise did not at all resemble the low-end "slop" shop in

which merchants with no artisanal pretensions sold cheap clothing to a clientele of mechanics, sailors,

itinerants, and other urban rabble. The unabashed commercialism of these "salesmen," as slop dealers

were professionally known, was the traditional antipode of skilled tailoring.20

Burk's was not the only type of response to new business opportunities presented by British dumping.

Samuel Whitmarsh, who, unlike Burk, was a tailor, opened an establishment on Broadway where he

insistently promoted "genteel ... ready-mades," in contrast to Burk's decision to principally devote his

store to the "Measure Business." Whitmarsh kept the traditional appellation of draper and tailor but

called his business an "original." He promised visitors the standard rich assortment of cloths,

"constantly on hand." But instead of economy he offered an admixture of gentility and convenience.

Whitmarsh's store faced the City Hotel, a favorite meeting place for city residents and tourists located

at the half-way point along Broadway's fashionable promenade. There they could buy complete suits

available "at a moment's notice" and shop in spacious apartments expressly

fitted to appeal to fashionable sensibilities. By the end of the decade Whitmarsh also carried a wide

assortment of cravats, handkerchiefs, hosiery, suspenders, collars, undervests, and drawers-"a

splendid collection of Goods in his line," that line now being distinctly men's wear.21

A few blocks below Whitmarsh, also on Broadway, John Williams operated a Gentlemen's Fashionable

Wearing Apparel Warehouse that he opened in 1816. Thanks to the full page illustrated advertisement

he ran over several years in the city's annual directory, Williams allows us a glimpse inside the store.

His over-sized entrance fronted the avenue's broad walk, a backdrop to refined male strollers in no

hurry to get anywhere. Light floods inside and we can espy someone busy at work with his shears at

the front of the shop. Is it Williams? Perhaps. But he called himself a clothier, not a tailor, and so

underscored his role as a seller rather than maker of clothes. At the same time, the facade of this

Apparel Warehouse was dominated by a large window, not for display-finished garments advertising

the store to passersby hung outside on the door frame-but to provide the illumination essential for

sewing. Was Williams a tailor or clothier, a manufacturer or merchant? Or was such a distinction an

artisanal artifact, no longer relevant in the expanding, variegated market?22

Another clothier, Henry Brooks, opened a store at the corner of Catharine and Cherry Streets in 1818,

across from one of New York's busiest public markets and two blocks away from the bustling East River

wharves. This was the city's old slops district. "What a tide passed through that narrow street in those

days hurrying to the horseboats, hurrying to market, hurrying to the shops." It was an ideal retail site.

Indeed, Brooks had been selling groceries at the same address several years earlier. When the War of

1812 interrupted his provisioning trade he retired to an upstate farm in Rye. With peace, however,

Henry decided to return to business, though not to groceries. He joined a younger brother, David, in

the latter's clothing store on Cherry Street. In 1817 the two dissolved their partnership but both stayed

in the trade, with Henry moving a few blocks down Cherry, to the corner of Catharine Street, across

from Henry Robinson's well-known clothing store. A year later Henry bought the building for the not

inconsiderable sum of $15,250, and in 1825 he opened a second store two blocks away, near James

Slip, on the water. By then the business on Catharine Street was averaging sales of almost $50,000

per year. Unlike Burk and Whitmarsh, Brooks specialized in the pea coats, monkey jackets, duck

trousers, and smocks made from cheap cotton and mixed cloths that identified the city's less genteel

consumers. While "extraordinary cheap" coats in the vicinity of Broadway still cost between $22 and

$32 in 1819, for instance, most of the coats Henry Brooks sold in these years were for less than $15.

Nevertheless, he was taking advantage of the same new business opportunities as the more refined

retailers in other parts of town.23

Those opportunities were described at mid-century in an apocryphal story concerning A. T. Stewart, by

then New York's most famous retailer. Stewart had turned for help one day in the early twenties to a

veteran merchant. "A lady came into my store and asked me to show her some hose," he

explained to his senior. "I did not know what the goods were, and I told her I did not keep the article.

What did she want?"

Stewart, having arrived from Scotland a few years earlier, was just one of innumerable new men who

now saw their chance to profit by buying cheap and selling at small margins. It clearly mattered far

less to them what exactly they were selling.24

Many enriched themselves by acquiring goods at auction and passing the savings on to their

customers. Auction sales, in fact, became the primary means of marketing the flood of English cloth

after 1817, when New York State began to regulate the auction system in order to generate the

revenue necessary to build the Erie Canal. Once built, the Canal then brought provincial

merchants to the metropolis in search of bargains at the very auctions which had financed the

Canal to begin with.25 Auctions also became the focus of rabid controversy, opposed by an unlikely

alliance of veteran merchant houses nervous about losing their hold over importing, champions of

American industrialization who dreaded the effect of so many cheap imports on domestic

manufacturing, and mechanics who feared for their livelihood-all of whom somewhat disingenuously

expressed their opposition in the nostalgic terms of "the mutual confidence and courtesy that

subsisted in our better days." Now, they complained, business was characterized by fictitious bidding,

false news, rigged markets, evasion of duties, and dishonest sales reports. There was a growing sense

that too many taboos were being broken. Upstart merchants aggressively advertised in the "new

papers" and exhibited none of the old mercantile qualms regarding commercial limits, impelled

onward, as they were, "by the fear of losing something that another man as quickly bestirs

himself to acquire."26 Niles' Weekley Register was a leading voice of protest. It characteristically

reported, with the opening of the fall season in 1826, the recent arrival of English blue cloths,

"beautiful to the eye," which turned reddish brown after a few days exposure to the air. This was

representative of the state of things, complained Niles', a situation that victimized American tailors

who were then "compelled to take back the clothes made of these goods, or disoblige and lose their

customers."27

On the other hand, there were obvious advantages here for clothing entrepreneurs. Half the fabrics

reaching New York in these years sold at auction below wholesale rates. What's more, small lots were

regularly available. Many were cottons, or cotton mixed with more expensive wool, such as the

cassimere that was a staple of James Burk's business, a cheaper but respectable choice for one's coat

and vest which helped make Burk's "experiment" in lowering the price of fashionable clothing possible.

For that matter, the price of all-woolen cloth dropped throughout the decade, auctions remaining the

cheapest way to acquire them as well.28

These opportunities sundered the early commercial identity of master and merchant, integrated in the

eighteenth century by the merchant tailor who began to sell cloths in addition to his tailoring skills.

Now, as the market widened and the lower end beckoned, a striking journeyman tailor in 1819 accused

his employers of having only one object in mind, to "accumulate money." A similar complaint was

heard from the other side of the political and social spectrum. Charles Haswell later recalled that

tailors' search for profits in the 1820s had annulled the sartorial order between men who were

personally fitted and the less genteel who had traditionally dressed in slops.29

A new type of clothing entrepreneur appeared, equally active in a second market in addition to that of

cloths, the buying and selling of labor. Thus, even when the clothes were still personally measured for

a specific customer, such as at Burk's store, that customer effectively purchased them from a

middleman-whether he called himself a tailor or clothier-- who mediated not only between him and the

purchase of the cloth, but between him and the terms of (others') garment-making as well. The

product now became a set of abstracted inputs, to be properly-that is, profitably-manipulated.

Balancing the cloth and labor markets so they would yield the greatest return became the essence

of clothing production. The clothier bargained with all the pertinent agents necessary for executing

work. He contracted to give them a certain income and appropriated the difference between the sum

of these contracts and the outcome of production. This made him a "windfall absorber" of the

economic system. But he was also a new kind of capitalist-not a passive investor of funds but an active

coordinator of production. And so, the commercially ambitious removed themselves from the craft in

order to run their clothing businesses. By the early thirties the "draper and tailor" Samuel Whitmarsh

was a busy wholesaler. Meanwhile, non-tailors like James Burk could only dress the economic and

fashionable gentleman as long as he hired "as good cutters as any in America."30

A National Market

As Burk intimated, the emergence of the clothing industry was no local event. For all his self-professed

devotion to the "Measure Business," for instance, Burk courted "Southern merchants and dealers in

readymade clothing" with any wholesale quantity they required of dress coats, frock coats, pantaloons,

and vests.31 These were the same years that the trip upstream from New Orleans to St. Louis was

reduced from three months to ten days by the steamboat and the Mississippi and Ohio valleys filled up

with clothing stores selling eastern products. Kennedy Foster, for instance, opened a store opposite

Allen's Hotel in Louisville; John Torode operated a clothing business on Main Street in Pittsburgh; James

Waddell's "New, Cheap & Fashionable" clothing store advertised for customers in St. Louis; and R. Lusk

ran an Emporium of Fashion on the south side of Nashville's city square, across from Benson, Hunt, &

Co.'s clothing house on the north side.32 They were representative of hundreds of others, supplied

directly from the east or through New Orleans, where there were over a hundred stores

selling clothing by the early 1830s. New Orleans city boosters had declared in 1822 that the four

thousand miles of inland navigation separating them from New York were "evidently

intended to answer some wise purpose, as nature never exerts herself in vain." Clothiers now proved

themselves instrumental in furnishing such "nature" with a real, commercial expression.33

New York's emergence as the undisputed center of credit and the distribution of both domestic and

imported cloths in these years made centralized, large-scale production of clothing possible. Now,

before leaving portto the provinces, dry-goods would be turned into garments. The added costs of the

extra transaction were saved by manufacturers who marketed the clothing themselves, either to their

own far-flung stores or to the legions of country merchants who came to New York each

year to restock. This vertical integration bypassed established dry goods jobbers and accounts for the

early specialization of the men's clothing business-an innovation which satisfied traditional business

reliance on a few trusted partners while also facilitating the more modern desiderata of extended

control, scales of economy, and efficiency. In a specialized trade the provincial retailer could purchase

in larger quantities. With fewer types of goods to attend, he was better positioned to discover cheaper

sources of supply and to become an expert in his "line." And by buying and selling to greater

advantage he undercut the retailing standard of old, the general store.34

Augusta, Georgia provides a case in point. Augusta was located at the head of steam navigation on the

Savannah River and served as a trading junction for a wide swath of the Georgia-Carolina black belt. In

exchange for all the raw cotton it sent out of the region, eastern seaboard packets refilled the town's

warehouses with northern and European manufactures.35 A stroll down Broad Street in the mid-1830s

is illustrative. If one could not satisfy one's sartorial requirements at E.D. Cooke's new clothing store at

197 Broad, it was possible to continue up the street to Price and Mallery's Clothing Emporium at

number 258, located between the Globe and United States Hotels, or down the street to Francis

Cooke's clothing house, or past that to Samuel Lane's men's wear establishment. If that was still

insufficient, B.B. Kirtland & Co. offered an equally wide selection of garments next door to Price and

Mallery. One could also have once continued farther up the street to Joseph Moss's store, at no. 305,

though in 1834 Moss succumbed to the intense local competition, closed up shop before his lease ran

out, sold off his stock at reduced prices, and returned to his New York Fashionable Clothing Ware-

House in Charleston. However, Mr. D'Lyon Thorp's "old and long-known establishment" was still doing

business between Kirtland's and Moss's stores. Messrs. V. Durand & Co. were also to be found on

Broad, next to the post office. But the largest clothing inventory in town was not to be found on Broad

Street. Clarke & Holland regularly filled a whole column of advertising space in the Chronicle and

Sentinel, declaring it to be only a "partial list" of their goods available for sale. The most telling

evidence for the clothing business's importance in Augusta's economic life, however, was the fact that

both Francis Cooke and B. B. Kirtland were elected city Alderman in 1837.36

Volume and variety were the sine qua non of business success in "a fluctuating market such as

Augusta." As James Edney assured Francis Cooke in 1836, after being sent by the latter to New

York to oversee manufacturing for Cooke's clothing store, "I do not intend that you shall be behind any

other shop in your market." A decade earlier Augusta clothier William Hills was still announcing that his

"first quality clothing" was priced so cheaply because it had been made the previous summer. By the

thirties no such admissions were forthcoming and Augusta's retail competition had become keen.

Francis Cooke, for instance, had to quickly purchase an extra fifty or sixty coats in New York at the

height of the season in October, 1835, "even if wemade nothing on them," in order to satisfy local

demand.37

Advertisements boasted of receiving new goods from the North every day. This might not have been a

great exaggeration. Francis Cooke regularly wrote to James Edney in New York to apprise him of local

business developments and request he make up favorite styles and colors, often delineating price

ranges and specific sizes. Edney, his work force in place and under contract for the season uptown on

Grand Street, would then search the city for the desired fabric, always checking the auction houses for

bargains. The garments were ready by week's end, loaded in trunks and sent south by steam or sail on

packets that left New York every day for Charleston, and from there shipped the nine hours by

rail to Augusta, arriving in Cooke's store a few days after leaving Edney's shop. Thus, within

two to three weeks' time, Cooke could fill his shelves with clothing made up in New York specifically for

his Georgian clientele on his order.38

A "New York suit" offered a distinct cachet, a practical opportunity to buy into metropolitan culture.

Local fashions were informed by a bevy of promoters of modern male taste. The Spirit of the Times

and Life in New-York kept a subscription agent in Augusta. The New-York Mirror, The Knickerbocker,

The Salmagundi, and the Gentleman's Vade Mecum were also generally available, as were sundry

"Reports of Fashions" put in national circulation by big city tailors. As Price and Mallery promised, their

inventory could "not fail to suit the tastes of the most fashionable or fastidious," selected as it was "by

one of our firm now in New York." Francis Cooke, then, who upbraided Edney for sending him "old

fashioned pants" at the height of the spring season in 1835, proved to be an agent in the exchange of

cultural goods as well as simple raiment.39

In the winter of 1837 E. D. Cooke-no relation to Francis-advertised fine and common dress and frock

coats in over ten different colors in the Chronicle. He also had a selection of overcoats made from

mohair yams, or from a camblet weave of German goatshair, or a heavy, coarse Petersham woolen

identified with the pilot coats worn by seamen and used for hunting. His stock of vests likewise

constituted a seemingly endless permutation of colors, yams, weaves, and cuts, ranging from valentia

which imitated silk to "common" blue and black cloth vests. Clarke & Holland offered the same

cornucopia. True, they had no mohair goods in stock in January; Cooke apparently cornered the local

market in mohair that winter. But the business principle was the same: figured silks and satins,

superfine cassimeres, and merino woolens alongside negro cloth, kerseys, and cheap satinets.40 Up in

New York, Edney simultaneously devoted his manufacturing energies to making up and shipping in the

same week overcoats of expensive "drab" wool-to sell for "no less than $25"-and an assortment of

"negroe" pants and vests, though of a "finer" grade. Indeed, the low end of the provincial market

appears to have been as stylistically diverse as the upper reaches.41

Inventories were "manufactured ... expressly for the Augusta market," which included a broad social

and geographic range of provincial burghers and upcountry farmers buying clothing for work or for

their Sunday best. Augusta also lay on the Federal Road, a byway for families from the Georgia-

Carolina Piedmont migrating west.42 But the city's clothing merchants actively sought to extend their

market as widely as possible. Steamboats regularly plied the Savannah River and daily stages ran

southeast to Savannah, northwest toAthens, southwest to Milledgeville and Macon, and

northeast to Columbia, South Carolina, and, less frequently, to Greensboro and Fayetteville in North

Carolina and to Chattanooga, Tennessee. The rail connection to Charleston was, for a passing moment,

the longest railroad in the world and in 1833 the Georgia Railway Company received its charter and

began to build new roads connecting Augusta to the center of the state and from there to the

Tennessee River and Knoxville.43 E. D. Cooke collected debts in Greene County, one hundred

miles to the west, and Paulding County, which was all the way across the state on the Alabama border.

Augusta clothiers also sold wholesale to general stores further inland as the latter began to keep

several dozen men's garments on hand in addition to the more customary yards of uncut fabrics.44

The only ones not included in this expanding market were the bulk of the region's slaves, which comes

as a surprise since the two million or so chattel field hands in the southern states would seem a natural

mass market for cheap, standardized wear. Most stores carried "Negro Clothing." But larger

plantations often undertook their own cutting and sewing of the garments they issued

seasonally to their slaves, buying the cloth directly from the North through their factors. No one

produced their own cloth, of course, since that required a considerable investment which would divert

resources from staple production. Clothing, however, was easy to make and could be done by

pregnant and older slaves, under the supervision of the plantation mistress, producing unfitted

garments of the coarsest fabrics cut in two or three standard sizes, at best. This was what was

universally recognized as the dress "crop negroes usually wear."45 For that matter, the northern

textile mills themselves could put out their cloths to local householders to sew into coarse, unfitted

garments for a modest extra cost. This, for instance, was the practice of the Peace Dale Mill of the J.P.

and R.G. Hazard Company in Rhode Island. The price was, thus, kept to a minimum and no city-

based clothingmanufacturer could possibly compete. The same production process was occasionally

used by the Army too when it contracted for cloths for its enlisted men's uniforms. Both systems were

certainly designed to mass produce, though not in the same way that drove the commercial city

trade.46

Meanwhile, Edney did his best to deliver Francis Cooke the fashionable goods the latter demanded-

garmentsmade of a popular cloth called Honeycomb for the summer season, new vest patterns, extra

pocket flaps, alterations in the extant pantaloon styles, 11.62 vests" and 14 or $5 pants," or "plain buff

valencias." Edney: "I have been in intense anxiety to know what to buy for the spring trade, to know

what articles suited, what articles did not suit, what was most wanted, what remained most on hand,

sizes, quality, etc."47 Production, in other words, seemed market-driven, attuned to demonstrated

consumer preference and closely managed by the retailer in a position to best gauge popular tastes.

Indeed, all the retail minutiae-the incessant advertisements for hundreds of varieties of coats, jackets,

vests, pantaloons, and cloaks, not to mention shirts, drawers, collars, bosoms, hosiery, gloves,

umbrellas, suspenders, cravats, handkerchiefs, hats, and shoes-were an ode to abundance, a

provincial "culture of consumption" manifest in Augusta and in countless other southern and western

towns, large and small. They constituted the industrial transition to a world of plenty where goods

were not only desirable but were attainable. What most impressed the public in these early years of

industrialization was not novel production processes anyway, but the unprecedented quantities of

goods that resulted. This appeal to consuming sensibilities did not always make straightforward

business sense, however. Edney complained about the wide range of goods Cooke requested for the

store, specifically boys' clothing and women's cloaks (cloaks being the only women's garments

Edney made, and which Cooke sold). There was an ongoing tug of war between retailer and

manufacturer over such items. For Edney, they were an unwelcome diversion from the real business at

hand-men's wear. They forced him into the market for small amounts of extra fabrics and patterns,

costing him time, effort, and money. Certainly, for this reason, Cooke could not have made much of a

profit on them. But Cooke knew they had a merchandising value not tobe measured by any itemized

bottom line. A range of goods brought customers into the store. Certainly, all his competitors offered

the same for sale. And in the bustling southern retail market, in which Cooke's mark-ups ranged from

15 to 50 percent at best, a high turnover of goods was necessary to finance production, which, in turn,

was premised on a steady turnover. Cooke financed Edney's salary and the much higher one

paid toEdney's foreman/cutter, the tailors' wages, rent, coal for heating, and the occasional emergency

purchase of finished goods-sums that reached several hundreds of dollars a week during the

production season-from his weekly sales in Augusta.48

But the plethora of goods obscured the other side of the equation, namely, that production exigencies

sharply delimited the nature of the commodities reaching market. Despite appearances, the seemingly

limitless variety of fabrics was not necessarily a response to popular demand as much as it answered

the manufacturers' own production requirements. Mills would sometimes make a new fabric because it

offered the most profitable use for their machines that year. One wonders, anyway, if all those

verbose clothing advertisements were meantto be read literally, item for item, or whether their real

intent was to create a general aura of plenty, an aesthetic of "capitalist realism."49 Francis Cooke, for

instance, eventually received "fancy drilling" instead of the Honeycomb he asked for because the

latter could not be had in New York. Edney found no substitute at all for the plain buff valencia; Cooke

simply had to do without. In the fall of 1835 common grades of woolens became very expensive.

Because the cost could not be passed along to customers of modestly priced goods, Edney substituted

cheaper satinets for them. Presumably they found a market. But when satinets became scarce the

next year Edney simply made no clothes of this class at all, even though they were a retailing staple.

The situation, in fact, provoked a crisis in his relationship with Cooke. Cooke demanded that Edney use

cheaper labor in order to compensate for the higher cloth prices. Edney demurred. The result, he

insisted, would only be "miserable trash, ... a hard bargain at nothing." Edney held his own and Cooke

was forced to acquiesce, though he remained unconvinced. Edney, in fact, suspected that his

employment might soon be at an end.50

The differences between Cooke, the merchant, and Edney the manufacturer were based on the fact

that theclothing business was still largely dependent on its cloth supply. Labor savings, which had

been a key in the business's early rise, were pulled taut. A skilled work force was essential, and

perhaps increasingly so as the growth of the market for fine clothing increased the number of

fastidious customers. Cloth, on the other hand, was a highly fickle affair. It constituted not only the

single largest expense by far for clothing merchants, but also the least dependable one. The price of

such domestic staples as flannel and twilled cloth in the early 1830s, an important part of Edney's

purchases, fluctuated by as much as 40 percent.51 During the winter of 1837-8 Cooke made repeated

requests of Edney to send him clothing of mohair, camblet, blankets, and green, brown, and black

cloths, but Edney could not get hold of the fabrics. This was not because they were nowhere to be

gotten. By the thirties there was little that could not be had in the New York market. Edney's specific

problem arose from Cooke's insistence on dealing with a single cloth supplier, one with which he had a

personal relationship. Edney protested that widening their circle of suppliers was essential for

business: the only way to make up for the inelasticity of labor costs was to enhance their

ability to acquire the fabrics they wanted when they wanted them, and to do so on more competitive

terms, namely, a lower price or a longer credit arrangement. Cooke should have been the

first to accept his reasoning. Who better knew the importance to retail success of a varied selection of

goods? But Cooke was loath to complicate his exclusive relationship with Staples & Clarke, one of the

new breed of dry goods firms specializing in men's clothingmanufacturing. Staples & Clarke sold tens

of thousands of dollars worth of cloths each season to Cooke, which he paid for with his personal notes

on six months' time. The cloth supplier, in other words, was not just the source of the all-important raw

material, but of the no less indispensable long-term credit. Staples & Clarke consequently enjoyed

great leverage over Cooke's business and even over his day-to-day operations. Mr. Clarke would

travel to Augusta himself and observe business first hand, apprising Edney upon his return toNew York

of what and what not to make up, advice which Edney suspected was informed more by Clarke's than

Cooke's interests. But there was little he could do. "You have placed me in your employ and have put

both the employer and the employed in the grip and wholly at the will and entire disposal of Mr.

Clarke." In the end, both employer and employee, Cooke and Edney, stood their ground. Neither

cheaper labor nor cheaper fabrics were used to solve the conundrum, but the business prospered

anyway. And Edney eventually learned an important lesson. When the high-flying economy crashed in

1837 it was Cooke's reputation as a careful and loyal borrower which allowed him to survive the Panic

and subsequent depression by opening accounts with other cloth houses who knew they could trust

him with their money during such stringent times.52

Cooke and Edney were everymen. Their business was pursued in the same fashion all over the

country, not only in Augusta but in Milledgeville and Macon, Tuscaloosa and Vicksburg, Dubuque and

Peru. Upon reaching the frontier during his grand tour of America in 1842, Charles Dickens woke early

one morning to ride out of St. Louis through swamp and bush for a glimpse of the proverbial prairie,

the edge of western civilization. Along the way his riding party passed an abandoned wagon lodged in

a miasma of mud and muck. On its side was printed the motto "Merchant Tailor." Dickens thought it

highly ironic to meet with such modern commercial ambition in this forlorn landscape of wretched

cabins and isolated villages. It was an incongruity he best left unexplained, if it was explainable at all.

Little did he understand, apparently, that there was money to bemade here too.53

Those half of all Americans in 1850 who lived in lands settled only after 1800 never organized a

system of household production that had been an integral part of pioneering in earlier centuries. They

counted, rather, on the growing networks of continental exchange to make their new life out West a

better one. By the 1820s buckskin and homespun were replaced by eastern fashions. A decade later

Tocqueville noted the cultural meaning of these market achievements: "The man you left in New York

you find again in almost impenetrable solitudes: same clothes, same attitude, same language, same

habits, same pleasures."54

Hunt's Merchant's Magazine elaborated on this cohering national identity in 1840. America, it happily

declared, had become a "nation of shopkeepers." This meant that the farmer "was becoming quite as

dependent for clothes upon the manufacturer, as the manufacturer is dependent for food upon the

farmer." Hunt's was not oblivious to the revolutionary, and even anti-intuitive, nature of the new,

national division of labor: "Now, abundant harvests, barns bursting with grain, herds of fat cattle and

fatter hogs, will not make a farmer prosperous." The farmer required a healthy exchange economy in

order that his produce realize its value. Only the market, in other words, enabled him to turn his labor

into the "great number of articles which habit hasmade essential to his comfort." This was the moment

at which the market was "transformed from something acted upon to something acting," as the

historian Winifred Rothenberg has described the transition tocapitalism. In fact, not only did the

marketplace now become a market economy; it constituted a new civic ethos as well. Thus, Hunt's

concluded its paeon to the commercializing continent: "Now the interests of everyone are all

intertwined together ... unit[ing] men everywhere into one society, having common interests, which

can best be promoted by the joint prosperity of all." In that way, the reciprocity of life in the Republic

could be equated with the circular relations, and pseudo-symmetries, of commodity exchange.55

Metropolitan Production

All the pioneering was manifest in the frenzied dimensions of New York's clothing production. A single

issue of the New York Sun during the fall manufacturing season of 1835 carried thirteen separate

notices announcing work for over two thousand men's clothing makers (showing how the democratic

penny press played its own part in industrialization).56 The Herald and Transcript were likewise filled

with scores of advertisements each fall and spring promising "constant employment and good wages"

for city needleworkers. In June, Young & Van Eps sought four hundred sewers to make up clothing "in

the best manner." A month later they were ready toinvite clothing dealers from the South and

West to examine their "very large stock ... in the latest fashion" and discuss credit arrangements.

Hobby, Husted & Co. needed an extra three hundred tailors and five hundred tailoresses, in

addition to six cutters "accustomed to southern work," to fill their wholesale orders in the spring of

1836. The cutters were to report to the firm's new store on Liberty Street, in the heart of the business

district where they had recently moved from the old slop district, William Hobby for the first time

separating his residence from his business. The tailors and tailoresses were sent a mile and a half

uptown just above Grand Street, not far from where Edney was busy manufacturing for Francis Cooke.

There they received pre-cut bundles of fabric and trimmings (buttons and the such) in exchange for a

cash deposit, taking the goods home or to rented work spaces to sew, and thus saving employers the

prohibitive expense of providing a workplace in the city.

Two weeks before Hobby, Husted's call for eight hundred hands, twelve hundred "plain sewers" were

required at the corner of Chrystie and Stanton Streets, a few blocks away. Similar operations

were to be found on adjoining Canal Street, Grand Street, Division Street, and Madison Street. On

Stanton Street, in addition toeight hundred plain sewers, another firm required one hundred additional

"girls ... to do fancy work in the house." But the clothing business was not restricted to a specific

neighborhood. It was organized all over the city: in Greenwich Village, in the Cherry Street shops, on

Chatham Street and the Bowery, on Courtlandt Street just off Broadway. The Tailoresses' and

Seamstresses' Clothing Establishment, a benevolence project sponsored by middle class do-gooders,

solicited southern and western business at their location at Broadway and Leonard Street. Nor was

production confined to the city. In the mid-1830s, it was later recalled, every country village within one

hundred miles of New York "became as busy as a beehive" with men and women sewing for the

city's clothing houses.57

Sewing requirements were highly varied since businesses strove to offer inventories "adapted to the

means and wants of all classes of society." Better garments, for instance, were constructed with

finished edges, with pockets that matched, or with darts and tucks similar in length. Some seams were

double-stitched-which, of course, required far more labor time-or back stitched with fine linen thread.

The top of the back of a more costly pair of trousers might be faced with cotton twill sewn in place

before the center back seam was finished. Its hem could be secured with silk bias tape. Formal and

evening wear was often braided along the outside seams of pants. Sometimes pockets would be

added to the breast, or a button would be put on the watch pocket, or three buttons sewn onto the

cuff. All these variations belonged to the innumerable permutations of style and construction

adapted to a highly segmented market which required more or less time, expertise, and experience

from the sewer. How else could Lewis and Hanford, employing four thousand persons in an average

week in 1850, profitably issue a spring catalogue listing four distinct "qualities" each of hundreds of

separate styles of garments? Messrs. Lewis and Hanford had to be able to order up labor much like

they did their cloths.58

Putting-out answered the need for a fluid, flexible, giant work force which could be immediately

forthcoming when necessary, depending on seasonable fluctuations. Manufacturers saved money

since they then passed expenses and risks on to labor, including the costs of unemployment and of

unused capital in the form, not only of workspace, but of tools as well (threads, needles, and candles,

not to mention wood for heating one's room). What were inhibiting factors for other large industrial

enterprises-the lack of a power source, high rents, and, no less, social fluidity-were only incentives for

clothiers. Their production practices, in other words, were ideally suited to the exigencies of profit-

making in the city. The casual nature of putting-out was not just a function of commercial priorities

either. Married women, for instance, often entered and exited the labor market in accordance to their

family's material needs (not that those could ever be divorced from general economic conditions or

from the business cycle). They sold their sewing skills when income from other sources fell short of

needs: when a doctor's bill was due, new shoes were needed, or a husband was out of work. This was

possible because most women knew how to sew and because clothing manufacturers preferred

keeping a minimum number of permanent employees and improvising the rest, a business

strategy made possible, in turn, by the large numbers of occasional hands available in the city. In fact,

while complaints were often heard in other industries about the temporary nature of female labor, and

particularly about the unreliability of married women's employment, clothiers made few such noises.

Of course, this meant that those searching for full-time employment in the trade often had a

problem.59

The coordination of variable labor costs with the business's multifarious markets was, first and

foremost, a social process. Hierarchies of in-house trimmers, southern-work cutters, vest

embroiderers, journeymen sewing surtouts with side linings creased in half-inch blocks, and

subcontracted plain shirt-makers earning what contemporaries acknowledged to be starvation wages-

they were all expressions of how the material facts of production were applied to social reality and how

social reality was integrated into production. When there were no machines increasing productivity or

technologies redividing the labor, when the product itself underwent no physical

transformation to speak of but became a commodity in every respect, industrial production could only

be organized through a proper manipulation of the extant organization of society.

Such a system was not without its problems. The same low piece rates which sped up the work and

maintained an impressive degree of control by the absent boss were also the source of concerns that

temporary hands would disappear with the goods. Hard-pressed wage earners in the city, for instance,

not only pawned their own clothing to raise cash for rent or groceries. They also pawned the garments

they made for the firms, redeeming them with a new job when the previous one was due. They could,

thus, keep turning over their debts with a cycle of ostensibly free credit borrowed from their

employers. In fact, however, payment was exacted. Clothing houses required deposits of up to several

dollars-the value of the whole job-from those taking cloths home to sew. The money was returned

when the finished goods were delivered and approved, although that too might depend more on the

cash flow of the clothing house rather than on the fact that the work had been delivered. Stories

abounded of employers postponing payment, withholding wages until alterations were made, or even

keeping deposits under the pretext that substandard work had ruined the value of the cloth. If a

deposit was not required, then references were. Putout pieceworkers kept their own ledgers of past

jobs that constituted an employment history available for the perusal by each new boss. Records of all

incoming and outgoing work were also maintained, of course, by the firms. Such

documentationmade it practical to organize put-out production on a mass level and left little doubt but

that employers enjoyed a structural advantage in the system.60

The scale of business is best grasped by looking again at James Edney's relatively modest operations

in the mid-1830s. Having just arrived from Augusta in the late spring of 1835, new to both the city and

the trade, Edney bought $20,000 worth of fabrics and paid $4,600 more in wages and rent to make

them up. A year later, getting an earlier jump on production than he had in 1835, Edney purchased

$50,000 worth of cloths between August and January: his volume had grown 150 percent from one

year to the next. He employed nearly a hundred tailors to sew it all up into garments. These were the

not insignificant sums required tostock a single clothing store-just one of many-in Augusta, Georgia for

a single shopping season in 1836.61

The large wholesale businesses, of course, such as Frederick Conant's, who was a busy presence in

almost every southern state, manufactured for more than one store. They were engaged, in a way that

Edney was not, in industrial production for an anonymous market. They had to think about advertising

strategies, creative credit arrangements with buyers, and the risks inherent in any time gap between

the commitment to produce (the purchase of the cloth) and the product's arrival to market, particularly

in a market influenced by fashion. But while all these risks were compounded by the ambitious size of

operation, volume also helped toameliorate them.

Edney, for instance, could not compete with the wholesale prices of some middle-range goods made of

cloths bought long beforehand at auction and sewed with labor hired on the off-season when it was

cheaper and skilled hands were more available. This also allowed the large firms to more economically

provide the provincial market with the wide variety of clothing it demanded, from the coarsest

apparel to the most expensive fabrics and cuts. Hobby, Husted's advertising motto encapsulated the

business strategy: "Wearing apparel in great variety, adapted to all seasons and climates, and

suited to every taste and condition." Young and Van Eps gave the slogan practical expression, listing a

range of coats for sale from five to twenty-five dollars, pants from sixty-nine cents to eleven dollars,

and vests from forty cents to seven dolars and fifty cents. This madethem suppliers of last resort for

the whole trade, selling to other city clothiers who, for one reason or another-usually an

inability to acquire a certain fabric-couldn't manufacture the goods they needed. Edney, for instance,

went to F.J. Conant's in early October, 1836 looking for a mixed lot of long overcoats which Cooke was

anxious to have and which Edney would not have the time to manufacture himself. Other firms

competed for the business of country merchants who purchased their cloths from someone else.

Kershaw & Co, operators of a wholesale clothing warehouse on Pearl Street, promised to manufacture

goods from cloth bought elsewhere "at the shortest notice and for the lowest price." This would lower

profit margins, but also the risks, and it opened up opportunities for smaller firms with less credit.

There was no lack of points of entry into the fast-growing business of clothing American men.62

"Democratic Capitalism"

In fact, the clothing business was almost too easy. In 1831 the Working Man's Advocate complained of

the "hundreds" who knew nothing of the trade but had established themselves with their own money,

hired cutters to prepare the work, and exploited the labor of impoverished seamstresses to sew the

goods. A few years later, in the wake of the Panic, the Philadelphia Public Ledger condemned the

hordes of "speculators" who had entered the clothing business because of the lure of quick and easy

profits. These "mere mushrooms of bank credits" had been proliferating throughout the decade, to the

point where the wholesale clothingtrade was "running riot."63 Edney, who some might have

wanted to include in that category, nevertheless gave voice to the opprobrium. Men "who knew

nothing of the business," he wrote to Cooke, who were "entirely strangers to it in knowledge and

practice," made up huge quantities of clothing. They then sold the goods to "Tom, Dick and Harry,

here, there and everywhere," moving their giant stocks by extending credit for up to eighteen months

even though they themselves often owed on notes which came due in half a year. No matter, for in the

short run they showed a dramatic profit, which was enough to arrange another round of credit.

Meanwhile, "the fool countrymen" coming to New York to buy their goods "got in the `speculation'

while they were here and saw fortunes staring them in the face." They bought up all

the clothing offered at such easy credit. The cleverest converted that credit into western land holdings-

the ultimate object of the inflated economy-so that when the bubble burst in 1837 they could leave

their bankrupt stores behind for a farm, or reestablish themselves in business with their landed

collateral.64

Clothiers proved to be ideal men for the Age of Jackson; industrial success could become

available to those without any special claims to privilege or capital. Haiman Spitz's experience was

emblematic. Spitz left Posen for America in 1840. His brother was already established in the cap

business in New York and upon his arrival, Haiman bought some goods from him and traveled to New

Orleans to sell them. He peddled the caps, along with "Yankee notions," in the Natchez area. Within a

few months he had accumulated two thousand dollars. Returning to New York, Haiman now

bought clothing, both at auction and from several city firms. He traveled back to New Orleans in

September, selling at good profit. In the spring he returned north to replenish his stock, this time

manufacturing the clothing himself. He continued in this way for several years, coming to New

York to produce clothing in the summer for sale in New Orleans in the winter.

By the mid-forties Haiman was in business with his brother, who had since moved his cap

firm to Boston. Spitz & Brother became wholesalers and retailers of clothing. Peter oversaw the

manufactory in Boston. Haiman, who was now known as Philip, managed the branch store in New

Orleans.

After dissolving their partnership, Philip moved to Bangor, Maine, and again opened a clothing store.

When the 1857 Depression wiped out his wholesale trade in the region, he moved to Boston and sold

liquor and cigars; he then relocated to Baltimore after temperance legislation was passed in

Massachusetts.65

Conclusion

When searching for the historical meaning of the ready-made clothing industry, it is not

enough to note how the consumer was removed from the actual making of things, initially from the

sheep's fleece and the flax patch, and then from the uncut yards of cloth as well. This distance

between production and consumption was both physical and social, often peopled by men of modest

means who had found a niche in the widening sphere of market relations. Their search for profits was

no less central to the making of a ready-made world than was the production of things. Indeed, it gave

industrialization its revolutionary nature.

Footnote

1 Wilson's Business Directory of New York City (1860); New Trade Directory for New York (1800); Hunts

Merchant's Magazine (Jan. 1849): 116; Chamber of Commerce of New York, Annual Report, 1858, 38-

40; Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, 1606-1865, vol. 2 (New York, 1946),

593-7; Maurice Dobb, Theories of Value and Distribution Since Adam Smith: Ideology and Economic

Theory (New York, 1973), 69-73.

TODAY, PREMIUM JEANS; NEXT, MADE-TO-MEASURE?GELLERS, STAN. DNR 36.   35  (Aug 28, 2006): 180.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

Now for the bottom line. [Alan Flusser] related that these first-timers usually order their second suit

when they pick up the first, and they couldn't be happier. "We haven't advertised; we've just used

word of mouth," he added. "In the last three months, we've introduced 20 new men to the product. Not

a lot of people, but each has three friends. Also, it's really a feeder program for our custom shop."

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Off the wall? Not if you talk to custom tailor Alan Flusser, the man who does the made-to-measure at

Brooks Bros., or the specialists on the manufacturing end. They're all gushing over the latest wave

of clothingcustomers who aren't exactly refugees from jeans stores selling True Religion, Diesel or 7

For all Mankind denims. These dudes-the 25-plus, post-boomers-are beginning to build their wardrobes

of posh suits that look like they belong on executive row at investment banks like Goldman Sachs or

Lehman Brothers. It's not a coincidence that these prestigious companies, among many, slammed the

door shut on casual-anytime a few years ago. The result? The brainy young guys just entering the

world of finance started dressing for the occasion.

Is a $1,250 or $1,500 made-to-measure suit too pricey for them? Or premium jeans with a $300 price

tag? Not really, if they drive a BMW 3 series and weekend in the Hamptons.

Why my sudden interest in the top end of the clothing market at a time when the business is stumbling

badly? (Check the latest NPD survey, on page 138, that shows the precipitous 17 percent drop in suit

sales for the first half of this year.) Made-to-measure suits are booming, according to people at IAG

(which owns Tom James, which is in the process of buying Hartz & Co.), Coppley Apparel with its one-

week turnaround, and Hart Schaffner Marx.

But what really stopped me in my tracks a few weeks ago was the mailer from Alan Flusser announcing

the custom tailor's new made-to-measure clothes. His reasoning: "There was a void in the marketplace

for young men who love to dress up and aspire to wear real, custom-made clothes, but can't afford the

$3,500 price tag."

For some background, he said, "One of our largest corporate clients for custom clothes are executives

from Goldman Sachs. The company has many young men, roughly five years out of college in their

mid-to-late twenties, who are now earning enough money to get beyond Brooks Bros. and Joseph A.

Banks. They're ready for a $1,500 Armani or Zegna off-the-rack suit."

Flusser went after the guys who wanted to look like their boss, explaining, "We told their bosses-our

regular clients-that the service was now available. You can imagine the impact telling the managing

directors of companies like Goldman Sachs that their high-flying money managers can get the look of

custom without breaking their budget."

Who are Flusser's first-time customers? His description: "The guy working in an investment house and

making over $125,000. He brings his friends here, and we tell them about the shirts and the suits on a

one-on-one level. They immediately relate to made-to-measure, and they can appreciate it with their

scholarly background."

Now for the bottom line. Flusser related that these first-timers usually order their second suit when

they pick up the first, and they couldn't be happier. "We haven't advertised; we've just used word of

mouth," he added. "In the last three months, we've introduced 20 new men to the product. Not a lot of

people, but each has three friends. Also, it's really a feeder program for our custom shop."

Reading the classics at Brooks Bros.

Martin Greenfield, the major domo of custom at Brooks Brothers, reported that the retailer "gets a lot

of younger customers in their thirties and younger. It could be as much as 25 percent. Sometimes we

make a bigger sale with a younger guy than with our regulars." He explained these are the young men

entering the business world-financial and other areas-and they come in to buy made-to-measure,

running from $1,250. "Very often, the fathers, my regulars, bring their sons."

Like Flusser, he also plays teacher with the newbies, and primes them on details like functional

buttonholes, hand-stitching-everything that looks custom. "Today, money isn't the object, because

they're making a lot of money," he announced.

Greenfield's made-to-measure 101 curriculum starts off with a navy or banker's gray pinstripe or solid

in a safe two-button, flapped pocket model with a center vent. How big is the first sale? Said

Greenfield, "They usually buy two suits, a navy blazer and a pair of charcoal pants. And the younger

guys buy no pleats because Brooks is known for this."

More retail feedback from Warwick Jones, Coppley Apparel, the Hartmarx division in Canada, who gets

his input from Harry Rosen, the retail chain based in Toronto. He told me, "We're finding that the

younger guy in his late twenties is accepting made-to-measure, because he's used to customizing

everything in his lifestyle, from his courses at school, his iPod, his car, etc., and it's the same with

suits. He can create something that's just for him, and he doesn't go to a rack in a store and see the

same 10 suits."

Coppley gives them the works when it comes to fashion, with slim-bodied silhouettes to double-

breasteds topeak-lapel, one-button models. Retails run from $795 to $1,295, and Jones' ace in the hole

is "Saturday-to-Saturday delivery." His made-to-measure business is up 26 percent this year.

Modern suit, modern lifestyle

Likewise, Eric Jones at Hart Schaffner Marx reported that his company has a new model and

fabricmade-to-measure package, broken down by the rejuvenated labels. He noted, "The ones showing

real growth are Travelor and Monogram. Travelor is all about sexier piece goods, and the model is

younger, cooler, hipper. What we like to see is the 27-year-old guy in good shape-the first-time, made-

to-measure customer-buying this one.

"It's the right model for him, a two-button trimmer coat with side vents and a slightly narrower, point-

to-point shoulder. In other words, a modern suit for modern lifestyle." He said Travelor made-to-

measure retails for $825 and Monogram, at $1,295 and up, depending on the better piece goods." This

is the first season the various HSM labels have been separated, and Jones is projecting double-digit

growth.

The big surprise about this end of the business came from Mimmo Spano, the clothing designer/stylist

at the flagship Saks Fifth Avenue, who said about 20 percent of his regular custom-suit business was

with men from 23-years-old. And what do they order? Vintage styles and 1930s vintage stripes.

He continued that first-timers often come in with their girlfriends, and noted, "They find my suit

silhouette sexy and love the way their guy looks." First-time customers, he explained, go for the

advanced styles, and he sold a slew of his own three-button peak or double-breasted models.

The typical young Saks custom-clothing customer will spring for one suit, a sport coat and a pair of

trousers." Not bad, considering the suit goes for $3,200 a pop. And the same young man can pick up a

pair of pricey jeans just one floor up at Saks.

Comments? Write to Stanley.Gellers@fairchildpub.com

Copyright © 2006 Fairchild Publishing Inc.

Barneys' Made-To-Measure SuitePalmieri, Jean E. DNR 38.   37  (Sep 15, 2008): n/a.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

Addition of 1,100-square foot department expected to increase sales 10-15 percent in the short term

Barneys' Made-to-Measure Suite

Addition of 1,100-square foot department expected to increase sales 10-15 percent in the short term

NEW YORK

--Barneys New York is creating a made-to-measure mecca at its Madison Avenue flagship.

In a move that "reflects the changes in the business," the luxury specialty store will today unveil a

1,100-square-foot suite on its seventh floor comprised of four rooms that are designed to capitalize on

the explosive growth of this tailored clothing category.

In the short term, sales are expected to increase 10 to 15 percent, and 5 to 10 percent a year after

that, projected Tom Kalenderian, executive vice-president and GMM of men's. "But that doesn't factor

in the extra business," he noted. "The physical boutique will attract more attention."

Kalenderian said the floor hadn't been renovated since the store opened in September of 1993. "We're

redeploying the space to fit the needs of the business as it has matured. We're dedicating a significant

amount of square footage to customized clothing."

Noting that this is "an area where no ready-to-wear will hang," Kalenderian said this is "very new" for

Barneys. "In the past, we would do made-to-measure at a desk within rtw," he said. "But now there will

be four independent spaces that are connected but not designed as one room."

The first "and most important," he said, is the "library," where customers can sit at a desk and sift

through fabric choices "in a quiet, contained setting. It's not behind closed doors; there's a glass wall,

so it's private but you can still see in."

Next up is a lounge where friends and family can relax while the shopper is making his choices. This is

followed by the dressing chambers, which are "more private and discreet; near the lounge but away

from the traffic on the floor."

Last up is the home of the master tailor and head fitter. "He's right on the other side of the wall,"

Kalenderian said.

"Everything works in concert to create the best shopping experience for the customer," he said. "It's

really about customer service. It was a big decision to take square footage away from ready-to-wear.

But this new step will enhance the customized clothing business."

Kalenderian believes the new suite will appeal to the existing made-to-measure customer and attract a

new one as well. "The men who already shop there will spend more time because they'll be less

distracted and can concentrate. And other customers who walk by the suite will be intrigued and

want to come in."

Kalenderian said that when the store opened, there were three floors of tailored clothing. The fourth

centered on contemporary lines, while the sixth focused on traditional vendors and the seventh offered

luxury clothing.

But in 2002 the store revamped the offering, compressing clothing onto two floors--with contemporary

and classic lines on six and luxury brands on seven. The fourth floor was converted to contemporary

sportswear.

"We needed more square footage for contemporary sportswear, so we consolidated

tailored clothing into fewer brands," he said. "But the editing of the business and resources actually

allowed it to grow, so it was a positive process."

The made-to-measure suite will offer fabric books from Battistoni, Brioni, Canali, Zegna, Incotex, Isaia,

Kiton and Lanvin 15 Faubourg.

"This is just what the business needs," Kalenderian said. "It's important to be doing something different

in an area that is viewed as classic. That doesn't mean that it also can't be modern."

He pointed out that in addition to the made-to-measure suite, the entire seventh floor is being

renovated. That revamp of the part of the floor that includes Amani Collezioni, Battistoni, Canali, Dolce

& Gabbana, Giorgio Armani, Zegna, Isaia and Paul Smith is expected to be completed by the end of

this week.

Kalenderian pointed out that by capturing some unused space on the floor, the 5,500 square feet

devoted tortw has been retained. "It's all part of the continued evolution of the building."

Credit: BY JEAN E. PALMIERI

Illustration

Caption: A rendering of the new department

COPYRIGHT (c)2008 FAIRCHILD FASHION GROUP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Word count: 685

Custom clothing co. a high-tech fit for Newbury St.Goodison, Donna. McClatchy - Tribune Business News [Washington] 19 June 2012.Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsersHide highlighting

Abstract (summary)TranslateAbstract

Alton Lane uses a 3-D, white-light body scanner to capture about 70 percent of its customers'

measurements and a traditional tape measure for a dozen others to ensure a proper fit for its

"bespoke," or custom-made,clothing.

Full Text Translate Full text Turn on search term navigation

June 19--A custom men's clothing company that marries old-school tailoring techniques with new

technology is headed to Boston.

Alton Lane uses a 3-D, white-light body scanner to capture about 70 percent of its

customers' measurementsand a traditional tape measure for a dozen others to ensure a proper fit for

its "bespoke," or custom-made,clothing.

The company will open a showroom at 91 Newbury St. in the fall or early winter, selling custom suits,

shirts, blazers, trousers, overcoats and tuxedos by private appointment.

"If you go to England and Savile Row, you're guaranteed to have four or five fittings," co-founder

Peyton Jenkins said, referring to the London street famous for its traditional men's bespoke tailoring.

"Our goal is toget it fit perfectly out of the box, and technology can help us to achieve this."

The company uses its iPad app to take orders from customers who sit at a showroom bar to choose

their fabrics, cuts and detailing, including lapel type and width, and lining color.

"Our role is not to be the designer, but to put the design in the customers' hands so they really get

what they're looking for," Jenkins said.

Once Alton Lane has a customer's measurements, it sends a 3-D image to its factories in Asia.

Customers also can shop online using the company's 3-D "virtual design lab."

Alton Lane launched in New York three years ago and expanded to Washington, D.C. Jenkins co-

founded the company with best friend and fellow University of Virginia grad Colin Hunter, both 30.

"We had different bodies, but similar problems -- nothing fit us off the rack," Jenkins said. "We

wanted to do custom (clothing), but it was just inaccessibly priced for the most part. We felt that there

had to be a better way."

The company's pricing is one of its best attributes, according to Jenkins. Suits start at $500 and shirts

at $89.

dgoodison@bostonherald.com

Credit: Boston Herald