Thursday, April 9, 2009
I didn't think much of this 07-2008-126 tank when the July issue came out. I liked the idea of the interest being in the back, but it's much more casual and sporty than my usual style.
However, when I started planning for my beach trip it came back to me. I was also thinking about a tank BWOF published sometime in the past year or two that has a split back, but I ran across this one first. I had the fabric left over from the batwing top view of Simplicity 4020 I made about two years ago. I didn't have much left and I love the print and colors so much that I had been "saving it." "Too good to use," for me, sometimes has nothing to do with cost, as I'd gotten this from the $2.97/yd table at G Street. I decided to just go ahead and do it, even if I would end up with a trendy, rather than a timeless piece.
It's an interesting pattern--the tank is one piece with only a CB seam and then the inset piece. To get the back hem to hit me in the right place--right above the curve of the bum rather than sort of pulled over it, I increased the height of the cut out/the gather distance. I liked this better anyway as it wasn't quite gathery enough along the sides as drafted. I don't know how many people would need this adjustment. I'm petite but long waisted, so I think it had more to do with my curvy bum than my height.
The first thing I did to the back inset is interface the fold line with knit interfacing, which is not recommended in the instructions. I actually wish I had interfaced the whole thing. I don't know why they don't recommend this, as very few knit fabrics have the body to hold a press without interfacing. The instructions have you fold the inset in half along the foldline, wrong sides together, and basically treat it as one piece after that. I creased the fold line, and the sewed the upper/out half in place with the sewing machine. Then I turned up the inner/facing half and stitched that to the seam allowances by serger, just to make sure I got it right. You do need to put in the hem before setting in the inset.
The instructions have you make a bias binding, fold in half wrong sides together, sew right sides together with front, and turn over and topstitch. I didn't have enough fabric to cut the binding on the bias, which was really no problem in this stretchy jersey. I cut the binding an inch shorter than called for and stretched as I sewed. I actually liked the way the binding looked before turning it under so I left it out. This is the first time I've done that sort of look and I am a fan. I will try it again the next time I am binding the neck of a t-shirt.
This isn't much to look at from the front, but it's a fun little top. I am considering making it for the gym, scooping out the back armscye to give it more of a racerback. I always wear fitted tank tops in the gym because that way the fabric doesn't get in the way, but I think this could be a really cute look. If I don't end up liking it to work out, it won't be too much wasted time or fabric. For all I go to the gym twice a day, I have never made any workout clothes! I'm just not a sporty person so I have not been motivated/interested in sewing for the gym.
This is actually the first project I've sewn from the July 2008 issue, though I have another one planned, the 107 dress. Yes, I am shamelessly copying Christina; I even plan to use a hem trim. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, right? Depending on how long I subscribe to BWOF, I assume that eventually I will end up sewing at least one thing from each issue. I love having the library to flip through when I'm looking for ideas.
All photos of this project are here and the review is here.
Thank you for the encouragement on the yellow eyelet dress. I really didn't think before posting the picture. I really, really, really did not intend it to be "Look at me! I'm skinny but I think it's cute to act like I believe otherwise! Say nice things to me!" and I apologize deeply if it came off like that. I try to avoid inflicting my neuroses on the general public! I just looked in the mirror that day, and whoa.
It's not that I think I look bad in the Vogue dress. I am very happy with my body and proud of how strong I am from working out (millions of pushups yesterday at boxing--ok, only 50--and I didn't have to drop to my knees for any of them). It's more like this story: I have a friend who is well endowed in the chestal region and one day she said that she felt like her boobs were unprofessional. I was like, "That's ridiculous! They are a body part. A body part cannot be inherently unprofessional. Inappropriate excessive cleavage, sure, that can be unprofessional. But the ownership of boobs cannot." And yet, I guess I sort of feel like that about my booty. It is just so out there! But I don't have to hide the fact that I'm a woman to be professional, especially in my very female-empowered office.
I think I will make the eyelet into BWOF 04-2008-115 instead. I love the lines of it, and the CF and CB seams give me room to adjust the fit. And it's a petite pattern! Do you think the pieces of this one will break up the eyelet too much? The motif is fairly large; the flowers are about 2.5 inches in diameter. But it's a graphic/stylized pattern that doesn't immediately read "large flower," which I think will avoid choppiness. (And I'm still looking for the perfect pattern for my 1.5 yards of silk jersey also in the pic. Why oh why didn't I get 2 yards????)