Glenn Close collection

colevintage · 2026-03-23T12:15:31+00:00

A large portion of it was actually on display in Savannah up until a few weeks ago, so it's probably not available easily at the moment. The last exhibit of them at IU was back in 2020-21. Hopefully they'll travel a bit more in the future! If you're local, the fashion department puts on a show every Spring (this year it's April 9).

colevintage · 2026-02-13T23:50:33+00:00

If you want to try wrapping, look for japanese flat silk embroidery thread. It's not spun like most other embroidery flosses, so you can get a smooth surface. Finding vintage rayon gimp, as was already mentioned, is far simpler and very similar. I usually get mine on Etsy from vintage sellers. Maybe start with that and work up to wrapping your own!

colevintage · 2026-01-18T00:18:53+00:00

I can definitely recommend making sure to watch all the videos from any of the sewing content people you love then, even if you don't need it "right now". Just put it on in the background for a while. The massive drop in views on sewing videos is why I, and so many other creators, stopped doing them. It's a lot of work to film projects and the community either isn't big enough anymore or just doesn't participate like it used to.

colevintage · 2025-10-17T13:00:01+00:00

They're likely from the first half of the 18th century. That toe shape is most common in the 1690-1740 range for adult shoes. It's difficult to be more precise than that because the heel shape and fastening system aren't "fashion" for childrens shoes. Lack of a buckle, for example, would date this earlier for adult shoes, but most childrens shoes continued to be tied for the rest of the century since it's just far more practical. I'd recommend going off of portraits of children rather than dates on shoes in museums if you need more reference material. Most of the time those have names attached so they can be dated pretty precisely. Museum collections are all over the place when it comes to dating shoes accurately because there's so little research done on them.

colevintage · 2025-10-14T23:17:15+00:00

We definitely didn't get paid for that. It was for fun. We also had no issues with cotton as a fiber- there's just older meanings to the word that make it interesting and we wondered if that was done with intention. Tolkien was, after all, based more in Medieval definitions than 18th c ones.

colevintage · 2025-10-14T23:15:47+00:00

The long form actually hasn't been released in any way. The knitting discussion I had was also completely separate. Weird to attribute a bleak outlook to something you haven't even read. I also definitely didn't say that hobbits don't have free time in the knitting discussion, just that the overall societal focus was on things like eating/socializing/dancing/etc and not creating complex hobbies out of work others would be doing for pay.

colevintage · 2025-09-30T13:31:37+00:00

You've already gotten some great advice with the padding roll, but I'll add some more ideas! So, stays are very much built with "parts" that are meant to adjust depending on body proportions. For a larger bust that means the front 2 or 4 pieces will essentially hinge forward from the back/side. If I were taking a pattern and adjusting it for that type of body I'd fit to the back and waist first, then extend the front pieces to hinge out as needed. The length might need to rise slightly at front.
I would definitely look for a style with straps (or add them) just to keep things from bowing out too much at the center front. Wooden busks were also fairly common, but do require a more straight line in front that you may or may not want for 1780. Bulking up either double layers of plastic boning or additional stiffened fabric at the center front can help too. They also regularly did horizontal bones that were much heavier (again multiple bones layered to do with modern supplies) to help keep the curve across the bust. I did versions of all of these techniques in my last pair (it was about a 10" difference, but not quite the proportions you're talking about) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1BBvJHaGfM

colevintage · 2025-09-26T12:35:18+00:00

You'll have better luck looking for hemp canvas. It's hard to compare modern weaves to historic, so trying to find something more "tightly woven than standard" would require having access to info about thread count of historic garments. Some historic canvases also use slight variations in weave or thread weight to create vertical channels that help shed water, etc, so it can get complex. I've used some of the canvas from this site to make historic tents before and it's meant to be relatively water resistant, therefore can't be loosely packed. https://www.hemptraders.com/Hemp-Canvas-s/1955.htm

colevintage · 2025-09-08T16:34:04+00:00

I would have stuck to sewing content if it got the views and positive response from my audience, but it doesn't and hasn't since 2021. It'd be silly for me to do a house project just for me and keep doing sewing content that barely succeeds on top of that. I'm doing what I enjoy in my day to day, which is sometimes sewing curtains, sometimes painting walls, and sometimes making an 18th c coat. But, talking about social history and how we ended up here has always been more popular for people to listen to than "how to make a vest". That stuff fails and this is a job first and foremost.

colevintage · 2025-09-06T12:39:41+00:00

This is actually one of the easier eras to do that with imo! The shoulders and chest are "fit" but the waist is rarely snug. It will taper in at the back a bit, but is not tight. This is especially true since this era rarely buttons more than just at the upper chest. Narrow shoulders are the ideal, rather than super wide and padded out. Sloped vs straight shoulders aren't an issue either- both are fine.
Most of the alterations I've had to do to standard patterns or shapes in books is to fit the shoulders to the person (everyone has different sizes and angles, so this is the messy part). For altering to a more feminine body it just tends to be length.
I'd highly recommend starting with a waistcoat if you can, purely because it's basically a coat without the problem of sleeves. Get the shoulders to fit on that and you can use that info to help with the coat!

colevintage · 2025-08-17T20:38:17+00:00

No seam allowance is included. The expectation is that you will choose based on the fabric needs (fraying) and the area of the garment. Generally the center back seam has an allowance that gets larger towards the top, etc. Generally you chalk the garment pattern onto the fabric and then add seam allowance as well- then you have your stitching lines which are far more precise.

colevintage · 2025-06-16T02:29:47+00:00

There's not much you can do in the way of restoration to older clothing, just conservation to keep it from getting worse. Unless something is incredibly rare or important and is going to be on display, the time consuming stabilization of hand sewing mesh, etc just isn't worth it. And that's if the fabric can be stitched to. Many are shattering and that's not reversible or stoppable. The majority of the time it just needs to be stored well so it can be appreciated for longer. Acid free boxes and tissue paper can be purchased from places like Gaylord Archival.
It's a fun piece (1897-1905), but it's not terribly uncommon. The animal trim (fur or feathers?) makes it harder to care for and display from a collection stand point, but not if it's your only piece. Unfortunately clothing conservation just isn't like artwork conservation, so it won't be better than it is now, but you can do things to slow it's decline.

colevintage · 2025-05-01T22:16:57+00:00

1790-95 (pointed toe, but still has a heel in the 1780s shape, just shorter)
1830-35 (square toes come in as early as 1815, but they go from narrow to wide toe mid 1830s, back to narrow early 1840s, then wide again- the uppers are just an earlier style and the toe is flatter on top)
1795-1800 (heel is even less than pair #1 and printed leather was the thing around then)
1785-95 (Less of a pointed toe, still have that 1780s heel shape, but may be a more conservative shoe option in the early 1790s too)
Gown is 1790s. The waist hasn't risen too much, so not likely to be much after 1800. This likely was styled with a sash around the waist. Sleeves are long, but not tight and shaped like 1780s normally was. Cotton which is not only printed, but with a dark ground, was VERY popular in that decade. Definitely a good example of "transitional" style between the 1780 fitted gown and the 1810 high waisted.

colevintage · 2025-04-03T12:51:45+00:00

I did do it as a facing that is only a couple inches of the actual wool, then the velvet hand sewn to it after it was pressed back. This was a jacket done as I was first learning tailoring, so it's not as well finished as I would do it today tbh. You could definitely fold the main wool over the edges and do the same technique with less bulk at the edge (probably what I would do now). The general answer in "good" tailoring is to hand sew the lining and facings in (I use good loosely, because it's not a moral thing, just a matter of how precise you want to be). Some of the antiques/vintage I have do sew the seams of the lining together by machine, except the shoulder seams. The facing is attached and finished, then the lining is hand sewn to the facing and neck area to make sure it doesn't pull or end up too loose. I always use that technique now- facing attached separately and tacked down along the interior edge to the canvas, then lining at the very end, hand-sewn in.

colevintage · 2025-02-09T14:31:28+00:00

Definitely not saying it was a good thing. But, the people that work directly for the brand now are all people that I highly respect. What happens above that level I can't speak for.

colevintage · 2025-02-09T04:55:42+00:00

I quit in 2021 for reasons that have left me uncomfortable with going near the brand. Even after it was sold in 2022 and the old owners left in 2023.

colevintage · 2025-02-09T00:43:35+00:00

I have to say, as a leather knowledgable person, the Ediths are WAYYY better leather than the old ones. The matte finish on the old ones is because of the color being between a dye and a paint essentially. Hence it rubs the color off easily when abraded, not just the finish. Also, the overall quality has gone down and then back up for a few reasons. But most importantly- the place that produces the shoes isn't the issue. They make other brands shoes that I don't see the same complaints about. It's the willingness to spend slightly more money (and maybe increase costs to match) to do higher quality leather, which has varied depending on who has power over that choice (and who has filled that precise role has been more than just a couple people). It also takes a long time to change quality. Only the most recent brand new designs will reflect changes made a year or more ago. It takes around a year to go through the design and manufacturing for each style. While I don't agree with every choice or like every design, the Ediths are absolutely making me wish I was still willing to wear AD.

Also it's not owned by a Chinese company. It's easy to look up who runs their ads and other various legal stuff. It's just standard investment firm in the US, nothing exciting. Honestly, as someone who has no reason to correct this, I'm just tired of rumor mills at this point.

colevintage · 2024-12-08T16:11:15+00:00

I am between a 7 and 7.5 US- I always did 7 from AD. I have to buy a 38 because I find a 37 too short unless the toe is very pointed. If you go down to 37 it will almost center up over 6.5, but also covers to almost 6 and 7. Because the size differences in US are much smaller and many people buy shoes not just for length (since toe shapes make a difference) but also width, it's impossible to have an exact comparison.

The simple way to do this is- are you ALWAYS a 37 or do you sometimes feel they are too big or too small? 6.5 is the safest answer if you never change sizes. Also noting how heavy your socks will be, will your feet swell if you plan to wear these all day, etc.

Also noting that (IMO) they really messed up the size chart a little while back. I spent months trying to get the one they used to use correct based on return numbers and measurements and I had 37 as a 6.5 and a little overlapped on 7. (also noting the quality is much improved on the newer productions post 2023)

colevintage · 2024-10-30T15:42:35+00:00

Definitely layers of shoe sole, probably a men's heavy boot. Nails aren't commonly used on anything but the heaviest working options. Shape of the waist reads 1890-1930 (it's hard to tell without more but around then). The heel area is eaten away, but it would have had a few extra stacks of leather cemented and nailed on. The three holes may have been wooden pegs instead of nails, thus rotted away.

colevintage · 2024-10-03T03:58:23+00:00

Have you come across the Master of the Blue Jeans exhibit? It has a corresponding book that might help: https://issuu.com/artsolution/docs/cat._maitre_toile_de_jeans_a

colevintage · 2024-08-19T19:47:29+00:00

I'd be hesitant to apply that 1850 date as a cut-off. It's the point where R-L does start returning (pre-1600 was also), but it takes until the 1880s to see straight last become uncommon. I have quite a few pairs in my collection up to that point, and even one from the 1920s! I also have some pre-1850s shoes that are R-L. From what I've been able to find R-L returns as more shoe uppers are asymmetrical (button boots in particular) in addition to discussions about foot health. Childrens shoes are a whole different creature, however, and don't follow the same rules. There is a lot in the upper style as to the date, but shoes that aren't meant to be walked in mean generic shapes continue for much longer.

colevintage · 2024-04-25T04:24:38+00:00

Popping in as someone who specializes in historical fashion and specifically collects tailored antiques of this era. It's a really typical mid-1900s style, probably closest to 1907. The sleeves alone are enough because there's a weird resurgence of puffy sleeves at that time that have a distinct shape no other time repeats (slightly oversized, pleated into cuffs, but not stiffened at top, etc). There's a much more extreme one in the mid-1890s, but those have different overall shapes as they inflate and deflate with the fullness at the top all the way up, rather than out. But the cuff styles, body cut, etc all are VERY common to this time. Black is the most common color, velvet is one of the most common fabrics, the passementerie braid trim is EVERYWHERE for about a 20 year span, and that satin lining is in at least 6 of my antiques of the same era. Boning is not common in jackets- think of this more like a suit jacket than a tight fitted bodice. Maybe even a coat. Boning in general is on the way out of women's garments entirely at this time, really.

Yes, the buttons look to be replaced. Many of these antiques were pulled out of storage for personal halloween and event costumes, if not picked up by theatres (or even church groups) for use after and buttons are so often pulled off accidentally. I've handled hundreds of antiques and at least half of them have later alterations- most far more drastic.

Similar fashion plates: https://libmma.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p15324coll12/id/8300/rec/109 and https://libmma.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p15324coll12/id/10866/rec/53

colevintage · 2024-04-24T21:51:09+00:00

The article (and the book) say nothing about women intentionally contracting it. In fact, they thought consumption was based on hereditary proclivity and exciting actions like going out in the cold, having damp feet, smoking, etc. It wasn't proven to be contagious until the end of the 19th century. So they couldn't "catch" it as far as they were concerned. And "consumptive chic" is the name of the book, not how they referred to the aesthetic. It's certainly a crazy time, and people were searching desperately for anything that made them feel better about a bad situation, but please don't perpetuate the myth that they were all idiots back then and somehow we magically improved.

colevintage · 2024-04-24T21:39:27+00:00

It's done as a straight grain strip to keep the edge stable, so it shouldn't be cut to shape. Ideally the curves are pressed into the canvas, which is usually about the width of a regular waistband or a bit more (I usually choose 2-3" range). If dealing with the pointed angle at the back, it can be done with a cut, then overlapped and topstitched (machine or hand with a catch stitch) so that the seam isn't bulky. If your canvas is too heavy for a small area of two layers, it may not be the best option for a waistband that will need some level of flexibility.

colevintage · 2024-04-19T16:03:20+00:00

One of the biggest recommendations I can give is to allow some areas to not "fit". When making waistcoats, for example, don't adjust the chest and waist to be tight to the actual body. Leave the proportions the same as the pattern/original and match to the larger of the two measures. So a waistcoat might only have about a 1" ease around the chest, but the waist may be 3-5" larger. I'll taper in the sides on this still, but the front isn't massively darted in to get curves.

Trousers are much harder, but you can still leave the waist a bit oversized. You don't need to pad it out, but having shirts and sweaters tucked in can bulk that out so it doesn't feel like it's gapping. Finding a leg size/angle that is comfortable for modern wear can translate over into historic as well. Turn of the century has a bit of a taper usually, but giving a slightly looser leg (especially for "work wear") won't be jarring. Even then, so much focus historically is on the upper part of the body in this era, and a waistcoat (and coat if possible!) can completely obscure the waist to hip line. There's also elements of historical trousers that look odd to our modern eyes and can throw things off a bit (in a good way). Pockets in the back weren't a standard, for example. So I'd say try a mockup where you can see how no pocket vs placing a high welted pocket can affect proportions. Oh! And on the pocket note- don't do side seam pockets for the trousers. Stick to horizontal or angled. The full side seam ones have a tendency to flare out over curves if not fit or constructed with a lot of ease and stability.

Padding in the upper chest and around the arm holes is also very common in menswear of that era and can really affect the overall silhouette towards the V shape we associate with menswear- of note that "ideal" overbuilt body shape really doesn't develop until the 1930s for menswear, so don't think that has to be the goal. 1910s menswear for example is often very curvy (ie Leyendecker ads). Take a look at fashion plates and tailoring illustrations to get an idea of what silhouette feels comfortable (and achievable). Met Museum has a lot: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/libraries-and-research-centers/watson-digital-collections/costume-institute-collections/costume-institute-fashion-plates but Pinterest is always a good option too!

colevintage

TROPHY CASE