Top ten -- Patternmaking software

[Osphoto]

My experience of CAD/CAM for solid materials works well enough for me. So when I started sewing corsets of all things for my fist project, CAD didn’t work well for the way I create, it could be for my lack of knowledge. So I used spread sheets and Adobe Illustrator to create my patterns and it worked very well for my needs.

Then I started sewing backless cowl neck blouses. Which led to more ladies wanting these and making pattern adjustments. So I started evaluating pattern making software. Well, I don’t want another CAD software, I already have that. I looked at the “home” versions and they are all pre-packaged patterns that you have to modify. None of which really suited my style of creativity.

Some how I came across Valentina.

I agree from whats been said in write ups, Valentina isn’t like those other packages, IMO, it’s better for me in the way I create.

I use raw data in the form of measurements, take that date to create from scratch any pattern I choose! I’m not a pattern maker with any training and I’m learning as I go. But the way Valentina works, It’s teaching me skills at a faster rate, IMO.

Valentina has it’s place among the various software packages available for sewing. IMO, I’d put my money into this project because it’s a fantastic tool for they way I create and think!

Thank you to the creator of this software.

[slspencer]

@Osphoto

But the way Valentina works, It’s teaching me skills at a faster rate, IMO.

Wow! That’s wonderful feedback. It’s good to know.

[valhalla]

@ojd

and most of you lack real world production experience.

While it may be true (it surely is in my case), designing for mass production (or even bespoke, but assembly line based production) is not the only usecase for a pattern drafting program.

My usecase is drafting historical (in my case late victorian - early edwardian) clothing, where most of the community is made by either hobbists or one-person businesses who do everything from drafting to the actual clothing production themselves.

@ojd

The reason most patternCAD suites look like they do is because it works.

they work for the one usecase they are designed for, and that’s good. One could complain of a lack of Free Software alternatives, but that’s another matter.

For my usecase, as an example, a software that forced me to start from a modern block would be useless, while Valentina allows me to use period drafting methods and thus get the right shapes.

This is a niche, and one that is small (and in the case of businesses small scale) enough that it would never be served by conventional software houses, and I consider the existence of software such as Valentina that can cover such needs as a big advantage of Free Software.

It’s not there yet, and using the stable version in many cases I still have to do some pattern manipulation using pen and paper, but the direction is the right one to serve my needs pretty well.

@ojd

If you think you will in some way get a better fit from using drafts from outdated book you are wrong on so many levels it’s sad. […] Proportions of the ideal body have changed over the decades, so has culture.

From my point of view this is especially funny because if I have understood correctly the “outdated book” mentioned here is one that I would consider waaaay too modern for my needs.

In my experience with period clothing, using a drafting method from the past doesn’t change your chances to get a good fit (because some averages have changed, but people have always been made of many shapes), although of course it changes the general shape of the result (e.g. for the same person / measurements a method from the 1900s would give a pigeon breast shape that fits perfectly (above the right underwear), but would look quite out of place even in an outfit from the 1910s, not to speak of one of the 2010s.

@ojd

Think of a guy with a 44 inch chest. He might have a normal chest, he might have a huge chest and small back, he might have a big hunch back and no chest.

Wouldn’t these guys have very different bust_arc_f and bust_arc_b measurements? (I think, the snippet of printout of the measurements svg I have nearby is the one I needed for female clothing)

[245oldsalty]

OJD : Actually good fitting is exactly a formula. You spent 7 years training in a form of cognitive doctrine and intuition (pattern familiarity). But don’t think it cannot be broken down into the smallest of artefacts, and process thinking so technologies can leverage the possible scaleable outputs. FACT > AI is coming, FACT robotic garment manufacture is here, and fashion CAD is now sitting behind the 8 ball of a number of technology platforms that are converging into low entry price points such that they are pervasive - the mobile phone and 3D scan capability will be out this year. And it can measure the human form accurately - and I don’t mean static posture - I mean moving realtime capture.

I have seen quite a few industries over the years shift. And I have experience coming from Aircraft compound shape, Formulae 1 racing carbon fibre pattern forming, and micro-surgical tool creation from 100% digital domains into manufactured product. ALL have gone 100% digital. And now we have our attention firmly on Fashion. Short story > I had a swag of artisan surgical tool makers tell me many years ago that their industry was happily cemented in hand crafting and that it was impossible for automation to impact on such hand making skills & trained people who work under microscopes. We took exactly 3 months to convert all that they knew about barriers to entry, and had trained for into a new approach of continued incremental digitization, that chipped away relentlessly at their domain of hand choreography and micro-shape sculpting. 18 months later we had replaced 80% of what generated their main product income. Radically impacting at speed on how they could adapt. Many sought retirement in the face of such rapid change. 5 years later many whom fought to compete were surplus to requirements as AI combined with laser scanning, reverse engineering of hand making and low cost laser-cutting of 3D into raw metal came of age, as industry accepted the category shift, pushing repeatable quality out as consumer demand picked up for new thinking as technologies collided in an age of increasing productivity. The product outputs are now the highest quality for pricepoint. And to illustrate how quick service innovation can impact we even challenged surgeons to sketch a new tool shape of what they wanted and 100 - 1000 - 10,000 copies would be created in under 48 hours from parametric AI design to manufacture to certification to AI visual inspection. Something inconceivable in terms of hand crafting. Which way did the market shift > it moved to quality and lower risk. The lone artisan took the hit. That is reality.

The opportunity is not in staying still, nor to thinking that training cannot be replicated by millions of processors in realtime and thousands of humans attached to opensource solving complex tasks towards new ways of customisation. That is naive and the musing of Luddites whom refuse a world of change is coming. Human shape can be measured in realtime including posture, fat, bone, muscle. That is a FACT - and where we are currently today. The cost to do this is small, and the technology it can be delivered too is hand-held and scale-able > the pervasive mobile phone. It does not require expertise and the process can be almost friction free - in both learning and expense.

Do you think that tailoring is safe from thinkers & technology looking to leverage the next wave of change and blue waters of market potential? No. It’s well on it’s way - and the opportunity is not in tailoring or craftsmanship. That is the domain of artisans and lifestyle choice. The opportunity is incremental growth of patterns (in parallel) that adapt to body shape in realtime. This is just around the corner in terms of realworld service offering. It will not stop artisans from being tailors, but it will impact on consumer expectations whoms thinking will shift and with it the jobs and those who service this new market space. No longer will it be acceptable for ‘off-the-rack’ Euro-sizing. That will slowly be replaced by tailored fit by AI and computational algorithms that farm out garment designs to a online market space of local makers - whom might well be artisans trained or untrained. The only qualification - a quality end result.

What you have happily missed from your perspective of artisan, and where I see the real opportunity as technologist, and where Valentina has cleverly placed their product. IS THE potential to leverage the online incremental improvement of the garment PATTERN. This is where you should be focused. The pattern itself - combined with authoring tools, combined with an army of online incremental change at the pattern level > is an unstoppable force. And it is that platform shift in concert with low price hand held computational devices with sensors that will govern what happens to your tailoring trade space in future. And note: we have our eye on that space, so expect relentless change.

We currently have AI that can make a garment fit to any shaped body, no measurement files are required as the system works on landmarks that change the dimensions in realtime on the 3D model. That means everything is dynamic, no user training required. So what you need to consider is - if we can get here, today, where does that leave you - tomorrow?