. . . when no one comments (actually, two people did comment, thanks!). Come on people! They make my legs look huge and I look about 3 feet tall when wearing them. I can't say much because I do the same thing. When I see some serious fugly I rarely comment because I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. But seriously, that width, on me? No.
I drastically reduced the width of the pants (about 5" in each leg) from top to bottom and I think they are much better. I took off the old pockets and made new flaps. I interfaced a single layer of fabric and just stitched it on. It is no longer a loop. I figured if I stitched them directly to the pants, there would be less flaring. To combat the wide, wide legs, I continued the pleat all the way down to the hem. This gets rid of the hem and the poofy front thigh thing. I know that was a "design feature" but it didn't work with this fabric. Now I am debating whether to topstitch all the way to the hem or to do that abbreviated topstitching to upper thigh. What do you think? I put some lines in for reference. I may still take a bit of width out of the knee area. 
Okay, now what do you think?? Really, comment even if you hate them. Especially if you hate them! The pleats are sewn with a basting stitch right now.
I am going to start working on 06/2008 #105 while I ponder the pants. After I topstitch I just have to hem them and add buttons (or snaps)!
9 comments:
The pants look so much better:)
These are darling, and yes, a much better silhouette for you. We all try things that look great on the model. It's live and learn! :)
They are much more flattering this way. I like the topstitching going all the way down, I think it gives a nice long look to the legs.
Much better! I like the topstitching going all the way down, too. Based on your experience, I'm going to scratch these off my to-do list.
Better, but now more shows up. There is something wrong with the shape of the front crotch seam. Those wrinkles shouldn't be there.
Same for the wrinkles in the back. there is too much fabric on the inside of the leg. Sorry, but I don't have a suggestion for correcting these wrinkles.
Linda
Okay, these pants are looking mighty fine on you! But let's face it, Dawn. You got a terrific figure and even if the pants are loose, they're still going to look just fine. Model figures like yours can pull off varying degrees of ease pretty well IMO.
As for the height issue, what's funny is that you look like you're 5'9" or thereabouts in your pics. It's really hard to tell height sometimes. So if you feel they make you look short, then that's what you should go by. Certain things are hard to tell my Internet pics and IMO height is one of them.
I was the third person that commented on that last post and I thought they were fine IF you were trying to keep them accurate to the pattern. Though what is always most important is how you feel in them and you didn't want full legs.
However, I agree with Lindanan, that altering the full legs to tapered ones has now created wrinkles where the pants had draped well in the last version.
Saw today's post and went back to look at the other one. Actually, I think the first version looks just like the Burda photo, but you've got the bottom cuffed up and it's not letting the bottom hang properly. It's hard to comment without sounding negative (so I didn't) since I personally don't care for the style of the original pants - not just on you, but on anyone. However, since you asked .... LOL ... I prefer the narrower silhouette on you.
Well, I LOVE how they look from the front. They look a little big in the back, but you did a fabulous job in the construction of them.
Post a Comment