A Designer, I am Not

1/4/2009

I came to this conclusion while trying to work out some dresses for the Amy doll I made before Christmas. I was futzing with skirts and overskirts and draping and sleeves and basically cobbling bits and pieces of various outfits from various fashion plates (trying to come up with something "new" rather than just reproducing the images), and guess what? It was hard! This may seem like a "no duh" sort of thing for many people (especially if you are a designer), but it had never occurred to me for some reason that there's this whole art of fashion design and however much enthusiasm I have for the clothing of the era, I haven't much of a sensibility as to how to begin to design for it.

To make matters worse, the problem of color still haunts me. If you look at the two scribbled designs I have posted here (click to see them in more detail), you'll immediately notice that I used all of three colors to create them: a mahoganyish orange-brown, an ochre yellow-gold, and a deeper brown for some of the detailing on the second dress. Not exactly bold choices. I feel pretty safe in these almost sepia-like tones. The thought of venturing into blue or green or purple (ack!) scares the beejeebies out of me. But I can't make Amy wear nothing but these colors. Much as I would like the various parts of her outfits to coordinate, it's not as though her entire wardrobe was built out of the same two bolts of cloth. Not even in the 19th century where that was sometimes the case!

So I'll be doing a lot of experimenting with colors and fabrics and designs here. I have no dearth of resources for this sort of thing. If I can copy other color schemes with my own designs, that might be a solid way of learning something like color theory in a way that will actually stick. It's worth a shot!

Liana link

1/4/2009 08:09:53 am

I think that's kind of how I feel when I'm doing a historical dress, like the 1800s Fashion Police are going to swoop down and say "That style of hemline decoration is TOTALLY WRONG for 1814." I don't like just copying a real dress, but I think it's hard not to feel like I'm making ridiculous Frankenstein's monster dresses, sewing a bodice based on one dress onto a overskirt based on two or three dresses I looked at earlier... it has to flow together, and it has to be original, and it should be reasonably accurate, which is all a kind of tall order for being based on a couple of hours' worth of reading websites as research. I've got access to the University of Michigan libraries -- I need to get down there, look at some actual books and do, like, "The 1814 Week" sometime!

I really like the designs you put up -- especially the top on the left-hand dress, which seems very feminine and pretty without being too delicate or overpowered by all the ruffles on the skirt, and the edge of the sleeve isn't just straight across, but comes up at the bow in the back, I think that adds some interest to it. And I like the warm colors too :)

Boots link

1/5/2009 08:26:32 am

thank you, Liana!

i know what you mean about worrying about the historical fashion police coming around and raining on the parade. but i think it's certainly possible to be too snobby about these things ~ and i certainly think there's plenty of room for both total historical accuracy and the sort of "fantasia on the themes of" that makes doing this sort of thing fun! besides, just as much as today people don't always wear what the fashion catalogs depict, i am sure the same was true then. there's a real disparity between what you see in your average tintype and what <i>Godey's</i> magazine is saying everybody should be wearing this season!

: D

RLC

1/5/2009 02:15:24 pm

To drop in my two cents, I think it's a matter of what you are trying to do as an artist. I mean, if you're trying to be historically accurate then thats one goal, but theatrical costume designers often talk about the "feel" of an era. It's the concept that periods of history have colors and styles people associate with them even through they are probably not historically accurate. I always think of 19th century England as sepia toned, probably left over from seeing old photographs. I know intellectually that chemical dyes were introduced and the reality is that the colors were garish, clashing, and, in some cases, shockingly bright. I still think of the era as muted, tea dyed and soothing. I'm wrong and I know it, but I can't help myself. Perception is a powerful thing.

As for these two dresses, they're both really very pretty. I agree with Liana that I like the one on the left. The light colored top is a nice balance for the darker ruffled skirt and I can just see it with a parasol and a little hat and some handsome gentleman in the park on a Sunday afternoon. Of course, that is overly romantic for the reality of the era which involved child labor, syphilis and the ability to have your wife committed in most states without a trial. Still it's a romantic dress and very pretty.

Boots link

1/6/2009 07:17:24 am

thank you, RLC ~ !

i probably have the same kind of sensibility about the sepia-tones. sometimes when i see actual 19th century dresses and they're all fuchsia and bright yellow with lavender stripes i think: my God, who would wear such a hideous thing. but looking at today's color choices, i have the same reaction, so i guess little has changed in some ways ~

i also try to be less romantic about the era ~ i really like exploring the grittier, more realistic aspects ~ but it's hard not to love a flashy dress too now and then. i'm compromising and thinking that even if Amy has a nice dress, she probably wouldn't have the parasol to go with it. she just doesn't strike me as a parasol-kind of gal. A big straw hat would suit her temperament better.

: D

Comments are closed.

A Designer, I am Not

Paper Dolls Downloads

Categories

Archives