I give up on event summaries.

[ktlovely]

Regency Exhibition Ball 2009: Lansing, MI

• In the car moving by 10:03 a.m. as per Mike McCarty's orders.
  
• Went to The Dressmaker's Shop in Leslie with lachwen and Mike.
  
• Went to Mike's parents' house, wrapped Gwendolyn in duct tape, got ready for ball.
  
• Went to ball, saw Julie.
  
• Danced lots.
  
• Had fun.
  

I'll probably sit down and type up my customary blow-by-blow later, just for my own reference, but for now, enjoy!


Gwendolyn, Julie, Mike, Katie



All wrapped up.


I made Mike cut her out so I wouldn't screw it up.




Gwendolyn and Mike very kindly stopped by and let me see my grandparents (who live right in Lansing) for a few minutes on the way to the ball.

And then there was dancing:








Then we took some group pictures to commemorate the occasion.






Julie and I took some pictures while random strangers raved over Mike and Gwendolyn. "I never get noticed," indeed. Whatever! ;)




We're cute.






Now that my I-have-an-event-every-weekend month of March is over, maybe I can go clean my apartment and go grocery shopping and all those sorts of things! I wouldn't have traded any of it for the world, though. Good events, great friends, wonderful times. And some pretty nice pictures, too.

Comments

[belluthien.livejournal.com]

Nice! Looks So Freaking Fun!
And the cute comment cracks me up... Yes, you are.
;-)
y

[ktlovely.livejournal.com]

It was great! Thanks; I think we're all pretty darn adorable, especially when we all coordinate.

[quincy134.livejournal.com]

All of you look awesome. Your new dress is very flattering on you.

[ktlovely.livejournal.com]

Thanks! It was pretty fun to wear, although going upstairs was really difficult.

[princess-mia.livejournal.com]

You are indeed cute!:)

[ktlovely.livejournal.com]

Haha, thank you. :)

[nuranar.livejournal.com]

Yeah, you're cute! :D Man, I wish I could've been there!

Y'know what? I have a sort-of Regency dress I made up in college, using a Simplicity pattern as a base (yeah, shut up) and LOTS of research from online and Costume in Detail. It's in a woven cotten JUST LIKE YOUR SILK! The checks a little smaller, maybe; 1/4 or a little larger. But the same color and proportions. Ee!

[ktlovely.livejournal.com]

I wish you could have been there, too! And thanks. :)

I really love windowpane checks. And don't feel bad about a simplicity pattern base; I used the old Butterick pattern as a base for my first forrays into Regency, though I did some pretty heavy alterations along the way. I had someone stop me and ask, "Is that the new Fig pattern?" Um, no. I made this myself, thanks. It's my pattern, mine! For me! O.o

Anyway. So. Civil War ballgowns. Tell me everything. We've already established it'll be silk taffeta. Very light off-white and light blue. Worn over a 95" hoop (because that is what I have) and the Laughing Moon Silverado corset. Pointed waist, dropped shoulders with a rounded neck--I'm thinking it'll sit either right on or right below the point of my shoulders (that's pretty much the same thing; dang sloping shoulders).

So I should start with undergarments, probably, i.e. finish my hoop, bind my corset, and think about a chemise, drawers, and petticoat. Any pattern recommendations? For those or the dress?

...I should make a sketch. Er, well, I did, but it was on a napkin at Big Boy back in February and I'm pretty sure I don't have it anymore. Maybe I should get on that.

[nuranar.livejournal.com]

*chuckles* You're right, it was Butterick! With heavy alterations! The sleeves were the hardest. But it was fun moving the side and shoulder seams to the back. And learning how to do gauging, and running drawstrings.

Ballgowns, yay! Unless you really want to drape it/pattern it, I recommend the Past Patterns ballgown bodice pattern. (Actually, I highly recommend just about all of Past Patterns.) Of course fit it to yourself, and definitely come up with your own design for the sleeves, trim, etc. But you know all that.

That pattern may be late 1850s; the deep bodice point moderated a lot in the early 1860s, vanishing entirely post-war. Some straight-waisted dancing dresses appeared, like mine. Also, I think a pointed bodice would almost always have been worn with a bertha. They very rarely survive with their bodices, which might be why the pattern doesn't show them. But I can't think of any fashion plates that show these bodices without berthas.

I'm partial to sateen for lining light-colored garments.

One point - "rounded neck" sounds like a jewel neck or a boat neck. You probably don't mean that, I know, but I want to clarify. A boat neck is a child's dress. An evening dress neckline is wide, either just at the tip of the shoulders or off them. And it really isn't supposed to be low; a very shallow V. The pattern grading tends to give a too-deep V in larger sizes, in my opinion.

Undergarments! In this period, that's chemise, drawers, and multiple petticoats. Also shoes and stockings.

Chemise and Drawers: There was a fair amount of variety in both chemise and drawers designs. Past Patterns has both, here and here. Elizabeth Stewart Clark offers free patterns for both; like the Corset Generator, it shows you how to diagram the pattern based on your measurements.

The PP chemise is very pretty; I wore one at Fancy (the one with the fancy yoke), and I want to make more, both views. I've used both ESC patterns. The chemise is very very basic (i.e. not pretty), but it's pretty easy as well. It includes a method for minimizing the amount of fabric that is crushed under the corset that can be used with any chemise pattern.

I have not used the PP drawers pattern. It appears to be closer to the two-tubes-of-fabric variety with no overlap. The ESC design has lots of front and back overlap, so it's more comfortable for people who aren't used to going commando. :p Don't make the drawers too long; they're not supposed to show easily.

[nuranar.livejournal.com]

Two comments! Yay!

Petticoats: Very simple, no pattern needed, just like skirts: full widths of fabric, no goring. ESC has a instruction sheet at the link above you'll find very helpful, including instructions on how to "balance" them to make sure the hem is level all around.

You'll want to wear one or two petticoats over the cage, depending on how "lofty" they are. If they're substantially starched (not to my extreme necessarily, but still way more than spray starch) you can get away with one. Your cage is small for a ball dress, though, so it'd be easy to get a lot of loft with two fluffy pettis. The upper petticoat was usually fairly ornamented, often with whitework or sets of tucks. Doesn't have to be, though. The longest petticoat should be several inches shorter than your skirt. Keep in mind that it's smart to make your under-skirt waistbands a little larger than the waist measurement, so all your waistbands don't stack up in the same place.

A petticoat worn under the cage is a personal preference. The chemise and drawers cover everything, of course. And your 95" cage shouldn't be able to fly up very high. But if you make one, it'll be shorter than the others (no shorter than mid-shin) and less full.

Use white cotton for all underpinnings; linen is now expensive and very scarce in surviving undies. Cheapo Joann muslin works. However, it is on the coarse side, and as I've learned to my cost, it makes very limp petticoats. Pimatex from Dharma Trading is supposed to be very very nice stuff, smooth with woven-in crispness. I have a bunch I ordered a year ago but haven't gotten around to using yet. It *is* lovely; I just haven't worked with it.

Stockings - white cotton. I don't know if you have any, but they were all knitted of silk or cotton; no sewn stockings. No clocks, I think; but lacey patterns were around. Hence my Sock Dreams specials. ;)
Shoes - black slippers. Check out Robert Land for the shape. Pretty much completely flat. Toe is a distinct chisel shape, definitely more square than pointed or round.

Tips on the skirt - I've always made mine about 180" around, although based on originals that's pretty much on the big end. 150" is the usual max. (Although there's a sheer in Costume in Detail, IIRC, with a 220-something inch circ!) The important thing is the look. You want there to be enough material in the skirt that it drapes and floats lightly on the cage. 120" would be the absolute minimum in my opinion. Always err, if possible, on the large side.

Making the skirt itself is simple, but much easier to show than explain. ESC has a really good booklet called "Skirting the Issue" that puts it very well. (I noticed that the Dressmaker's Shop carries it.) You still do the balancing as for the petticoats, but be even more careful with the hem length. Looking at pictures, mine at Fancy may have been too short, even for a dancing dress. 2" off the ground is supposed to be standard for an indoor day dress. Maybe 4-6" for a dancing dress. And with a petticoat, whereas the waist is gathered into a waistband as with modern skirts, an 1860s skirt is folded down at the top, gathered or pleated or gauged, and that folded edge sewn directly to the (finished) waistband. The waistband can be cloth or petersham ribbon (as my white one was). I would do pleats; 1" directional knife pleats, stacked as necessary are very common. Also, throw a little more fullness into the back than the front; like 12". If viewed from above, hoop skirts were never completely round; they were always slightly oval, with the body more forward in the skirt.