Sleeve cap ease is bogus (2005)
fashion-incubator.com
fashion-incubator.com
"Pattern Design Software (PDS) 3D -- A set of 3D tools that display virtual samples in an innovative 3D digital environment that allows you to fashion your garment and make quick alterations at the click of a button, powered by photorealistic rendering for a true-to-life visualization."
"Inspect simulated cloth using a tension map to view the exact value of tension, distance, and stretch..."
These tools are also used for clothing for characters in games, movies, and virtual worlds. Marvelous Designer is often used for Second Life clothing.
I would be more convinced if the example was a striped coat rather than a plaid coat.
I will just say what I thought was too technical to say. I have actually sewn sleeves and have done pattern matching between the body and the sleeve.
Two things impact the pattern matching.
Most of the ease is in the top of the sleeve cap and not in the body of the sleeve cap. The first thing I do is make sure the pattern is as far away from the sleeve cap as possible. Then I check if I can fool the eye. If you look closely at the plaid closest to the top it is shifted slightly which was disguised by matching the vertical stripe instead. The maker of the coat did both of these things. So - nothing was proved since this is normal sewing practice.
The second thing that impacts pattern matching is the stretchiness of the fabric. Pattern matching in knits is very easy even with ease. I don't think this was used in the particular coat.
I am very surprised that the author thought that a photo from an unknown manufacturer proves that easing was not needed. They could have easily proved it by sewing something. This leads me to believe they don't know as much about sewing as they implied.
Some of my background: I am a retired software engineer. The first half of my career was in 2d and 3d graphics rendering. My mother taught sewing professionally with a home economics degree from UC Berkeley (back when they had such a degree). She taught me as a child how to pattern match plaid. I have been fascinated by the math of sewing - but only as a hobby.
It has a big cousin from the same company, CLO3D [1], which is squarely aimed at professional pattern making.
That said I am glad this made it briefly to the front page of HN where I could see it. Thanks for posting! This is interesting.
"Ease" refers to the extra fabric in the sleeve cap. When I was taught to sew, I was taught that the sleeve cap should be larger that the arm hole, and then you have to do a whole bunch of cinching and stretching to get to sleeve sewn on correctly. The goal is for the sleeve cap to accommodate the shoulder without looking bunched or poofy, but (at least for novixe me) my sleeve seams always looked weird and messy.
That's some Sherlock Holmes stuff right there, to me at least.
A physical therapist told me that the shoulder of the dominant hand tends to be a bit lower. It's probably not common knowledge, but patternmakers and tailors would come across it in their line of work.
Everything Kathleen writes is abrasive, borderline insulting to the reader. I want to read her work, I have her book sitting on the shelf here. But I wish someone would explain to her that kindness goes a lot further than mockery.
Also, sleevecap ease is obviously not bogus. You can just get away without it on this type of fabric.
I also take exception to your use of "bro science" as a derogative. Bro science is most common in the fields of exercise and nutrition, and if you look at the resulting bro bodies, they are strong and athletic. Meanwhile, academic nutritionists have presided over a public health disaster that has left the majority of Americans grossly unhealthy and obese. The experimental conclusion is that bro science is far superior to academic science.
I like the snark in the second paragraph, but I don't think you can draw your conclusions so easily.
Both bro science and academic nutritionists tell you that exercise is good for you. Bros are much more likely to take that advice than the average person.
Whether that different predisposition explains the whole difference in outcomes or not is a much more complicated question. It's all terribly confounded.
(You might very well be right, but your argument ain't tight.)
> Now, if you doubt your arms are on the front of your body, stand in front of a mirror and raise your arms -in their most comfortable position over your head-…where are your armpits? If you’re like every other human on the planet, your armpits are facing you, dead center. If your arms really were on the sides of your body (the way sleeves and armholes are cut) you’d have to turn sideways to see your armpits.
Which is a load of bollocks. It doesn't take more than a minute or two of studying anatomy diagrams to see that. Are they centered horizontally like a lego figure when viewed from the side so they bisect the volume? No, in fact the shoulder joint is BEHIND most of the volume in the torso when viewed from the side; so the humerus hangs roughly in line with the spine. Most of the rib cage(and pecs), abdominal cavity, and etc are forward the head of the humerus.
The real reason the you can see your arm pits when you lift your arms over your head? The insertion point for the pecs in the humerus draws closer to the mid-line as the arm is externally rotated and raised while at the same time the scapula is rotated up and out pushing the lateral border and all the meat away from the mid-line. Effectively the front wall of the "pit" collapses exposing the built up back wall.
> and if you look at the resulting bro bodies, they are strong and athletic
I mean.. That's a primary ingredient in the spread of broscience isn't it? The credibility "results" lends to bullshit? cough supplement industry cough.
It will even be true and applicable once machines scan you and make your clothing directly to your own form; it will just be part of what the machines are programmed to do rather than what a human has to take into account.
Maybe every post should have the article's date, so when I read old HN posts there is no room for confusion.
(it also helps clarify that nagging feeling of deja vu; "didn't I read this a few years ago?")
Not necessarily. The photograph only shows that the pattern lines up at the back, it doesn't show that it lines up at the front.