Hi everyone. When creating a multisize measurement chart in SeamlyME, we are given the options of sizes 22 to 72 in even numbers only. Is there any chance of starting the numbering of the sizes from 0 to cater for smaller sizes?
Could you be mire specific? This is probably one the remaining areas of the application that I don’t have a total grasp of.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but is the multisize not based on a set of Russian (military) distribution tables of (mens) sizes vs height?
Kinda like I have for mens suits in inches…
So the question is … even if we were to change the “size” numbers, how does that affect the rest of the data in the table?
From my experience with working with multisizes, they are just numbers until you apply importance to them, in this case, sizes. All the magic happens once you enter your base size and enter an increment.
When I asked for this feature… long, long ago… I was told that by adding extra numbers would mean adding more numbers to the Pattern Preferences and already, there wasn’t enough space for them:
This is meant to constrain a pattern to certain sizes. Which doesn’t appear properly, anyway. In this case, I have selected sizes 34 to 44 but sizes 62 & 68 are also selected !?! Although, these 2 don’t get listed in the pattern where you change the size (also in SeamlyME):
And, as far as I can see, there’s plenty of space for more sizes and check boxes. The list in the pattern will also get longer if you don’t constrain the pattern to certain sizes.
I think the formula that calculated the is universal based on your base size that you enter when create your new measurement file and the size that is selected at the bottom of the screen and the increments entered. So… (((selected size - base size) / 2) * increment) + base size ( in my best arithmetic style).
How will this help?
It will assist people making doll and children’s clothes. We will also be able to use USA & UK size numbers - at the moment, the sizes are chosen according to the EU sizing system which was also used in UK & South Africa and is based on inches. So this current sizing system is based on Imperial measurements while most of the world has moved on to Metric.
But, as previously mentioned, the numbers can mean anything. I’ve used them to make box patterns that resize. The magic all happens in the base & increments.
I’m not asking for more height sizes, because the magic there lies in the Russian Military standards and I don’t have time to figure out how many fractions things change according to height when a certain size is selected, so I don’t use it.
And in your case, you’ll need an extra Weight increment
That’s a cop out for either not knowing how to properly design a gui or just not wanting to do it. I’ll leave it at that.
I’ll digest your reply, and see what we can do.
Thank you, @Douglas - you’re a star
Well… considering 1/2 the dialog is taken up by a couple widgets in the default height & size groupbox… yes - there’s plenty of space.
That being said… so if I understand correctly the height and size checkboxes are just place holders, and if I hazard a guess the the ones included represent the ones included the Gost vst file? Furthermore, since they’re just place holders, they have no meaning until you enter what ever rules in the vst file? And given that, what we would really want is to have those height and size variables user definable? For ex… sizes 22 - 72 in cm has no meaning or use for me… I would need sizes 34 - 60 in 2" increments. Or maybe someone else only needs size 0 - 40 in cm… or basically being able to define different grades like teens, petite, womans, boys, young mens, mens, tall mens, etc? And within that one could use such standards as supplied by Gost or ASTM?
In reply, no, I think it was just a range of sizes that would include both men & women over a range of sizes and height, so concentrating on adults.
When I was right at the beginning of trying to understand pattern making & Seamly, I was a real nuisance. It may help you if you glance at this topic: Understanding SeamlyMe/Tape - #21 by dismine
Yes, correct. So, I can enter a starting base size of 22 and decide that this is a size 8, enter the base values & increments. In the pattern, if I change the size to 24, my pattern will increase to a size 10 (in real life, a size 10 would be about a 36). So these size numbers really don’t mean anything until you attach a meaning.
Not really. All I want is for those size numbers to start from 0, exactly the way they are now, with the option to constrain a pattern over a number of sizes, please.
No, these would need a separate measurement file for each of these catagories - named accordingly - and the appropriate measurement file will need to be loaded into the pattern according to the requirements.
Nothing else is to change at this point. This way, Seamly will still cater for both Gost & ASTM, which I do think is important. And I think the only measurement systems we won’t be catering for are the Chinese & Japanese ones (sorry to them, but I think they use 1, 2, 3 instead of 2, 4, 6.) and we won’t be catering for sizes 000 & 00. Our numbering will start at 0 and increment by 2.
The only other thing that I’d really like is for the Imperial measurements to be brought back to the multisizes when you create a new file:
It used to be there & then it disappeared a year or 2 ago.
Grace hat recht:) Da ich seit Jahren mit meiner vor Jahren angelegten Mulisizetabelle arbeite ist mir das nicht aufgefallen. Meine Basis ist die Größe 40 mit der ich dann hoch und runter gehen kann. Ich ersehe es aber wirklich als wichtig, dass man individuell seine Basisgröße bestimmen kann.
Thank you, @Scholli. Yes, for years we have been doing the best we can but I think this small change will help a lot of beginners to come to terms with the multisize measurements
Well I starting reading through the topic from the start, and this stuck out… which makes absolutely no sense.
What, are Russians a different species? I get that ethnicity can have some role in size distribution amongst a population, but I see no correlation to nationality and size.
What is more important, and Susan mentioned this, and even RT alluded to this, the sampled group for a size distribution table is what determines the grade rules… ie boy, young man, men, regular, tall, stout… girl, teen, petite, woman, large woman… etc. In other words… a pattern will not size correctly for large women if you used the Gost_mens.vst… not because it’s Russian, but rather because it’s based on a given sample of men.
Yeah, the multisize feature wasn’t well thought out, somebody didn’t know what they were doing and didn’t want to discuss it. They implemented one specific Russian table for men’s coat sizes using the chest circumference. There’s not a good way to create and edit additional multisize files, I think we’re restricted to the range of chest circumferences implemented in that initial table. It’s very weird.
This feature needs to be redesigned and reimplemented.
I’m revisiting this topic because I once again have a problem with the selecting the sizes in Menu > Pattern Preferences.
I was busy exporting the SVG’s per size to nest externally when I was suddenly missing a size… Size 56 just wasn’t showing in the size selection:
Checking the Pattern Preferences… And it is checkmarked:
But size 68 is also checkmarked but I removed the checkmark previously and it doesn’t show in the size selection.
I removed the checkmark at size 56 and put it back immediately, Applied & Ok. And size 56 is now showing in the size selector:
I noticed this last week and it was fine for a few days and this morning I see it’s missing again. I can’t think why it reverted back to missing the size 56. Perhaps it my client sent an updated file that hadn’t been fiddled with.
Hey Grace… I will take a look, but not sure what I’d find. I haven’t touched anything lately that I’m aware of that touches on the multisize. In fact, other than looking at the Pattern Preferences dialog I haven’t done anything to it - as the annoying “?” is still there.
That would make sense as applying it is going to trigger a refresh in the main window, and it’s going to redraw the size dropwdown - or as the case is dropup.
Well, if it happens again, and and nothing was changed by you or the client, then there’s an issue. A strange one if it’s just picking those 2 sizes.
Yes, before, it was checkmarking 62 & 68 when they weren’t checkmarked. Now I’m using 62, so it is checkmarked by me but it just checkmarks 68 and ignores the checkmark at 56. Very strange
Will let you know.