talieps
Member since 10/29/08
Posts: 3 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 10/14/09 1:27 PM Im sorry if this is in the wrong place, but i need very badly a womens measurements chart, kind of like a seamstress measurements chart. like this for example, but only cheaper or free: http://www.astm.org/Standards/D6829.htm
Please help me! |
ccris
Intermediate
Member since 10/27/05
Posts: 4165 |
Login to reply to this post
In reply to talieps
Date: 10/14/09 3:04 PM This may, or may not help. Click here.
|
talieps
Member since 10/29/08
Posts: 3 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 10/14/09 4:03 PM thanks, its good, but it is missing a ton of measurements... |
Rustybobn
 
Intermediate
USA
Member since 4/5/02
Posts: 275 |
Login to reply to this post
In reply to talieps
Date: 10/21/09 2:26 PM Did you find anything? I found this one (and more):
http://www.northtipton.com/national.htm
by Googling for "standard body measurements."
------
Beth H in Georgia
Blog: http://www.rustybobbin.com/blog/ |
Kathleen Fasanella
Advanced
NM USA
Member since 1/12/05
Posts: 698 |
Login to reply to this post
In reply to talieps
Date: 10/21/09 3:31 PM Do you mind if I ask what you need this for? Sizing (anthropometry) is a particular focus of mine and I know quite a bit about various data sets, when they were done, who did them, the demography, provenance (in the case of D6829 etc), the costs, validity and what not. I collect them; a harmless activity.
Unless your need is outside of the ordinary, the National Bureau Standards (aka Commercial Standard) is fine and for several reasons. This data set is actually newer by some 40 years than the D6829 altho this particular set is for juniors, not women that you mentioned needing. The women's set is D5585 (95). More on those is here.
When I go to ASTM for D6829, all the data loads for me on the page, do the rest of you get that screen? The site may be reading my cookies. If you do get a bunch of data, I can save you some money by saying the paper or pdf won't give you much more than that. Copy and paste and be done with it. I can tell you, officially (I've been a voting member of the D-13 committee for years) that the only changes made to ANY of the sizing charts this year was the addition of the Alvanon mannequin depictions illustrating points of measure AND that the D5586 (sizing for women 55+) has been dropped.
I realize ASTM is very official looking but you need to know the provenance of their standards. The women's standard is from the 1930's. All they've done with it in ensuing years is to bump up the sizing designation numbers, it's not new data. The CS standards are actually more current and much preferable to still another standard used by the pattern companies from the 1940's (the Sheldon study).
On top of it all, I'm a pattern maker. There is very little I'd need over and above the NBS standards -along with the Handford grading book- that everyone already linked to. If you could be more specific, I might be able to provide more guidance rather than blathering on about one of my perseverations. ------
http://fashion-incubator.com
Lessons from the sustainable sewing factory floor
|
dscheidt
Member since 6/8/09
Posts: 250 |
Login to reply to this post
In reply to Kathleen Fasanella
Date: 10/21/09 7:24 PM Looking at you link for D6829, I get the numbers for odd sizes. Don't know if there should be even sizes or not. |
Kathleen Fasanella
Advanced
NM USA
Member since 1/12/05
Posts: 698 |
Login to reply to this post
Date: 10/22/09 5:39 PM As I mentioned, are you sure you want this data set? It's for juniors, not ladies. Juniors sizes are oddly numbered, it's how you know it's a junior size. ------
http://fashion-incubator.com
Lessons from the sustainable sewing factory floor
|
|Login|Help]
Printable Version
