Landsknecht Cloak

Jan 20, 2010 16:52


For those out there with a better grasp of basic pattern shapes in the 16th C - any thoughts on what the basic 'cloak' shape is in these images?


Read more... )

cloak, research

Leave a comment

Comments 40

virginiadear January 21 2010, 01:00:29 UTC
No; square or rectangular is what came first to my mind.
And the second thing that came to my mind (as I was scrolling slowly) was, "Isn't that drawing a Durer?" (Why, yes, 'virginiadear,' it is!0

And the last thing is, "Check Kohler, and see if he can't shed some light on this. I KNOW his best thing was Germanic fashions in the Victorian era---it's when he lived, after all---but the guy was German and despite editors and a lot of bad SCA press, not stupid. And he *did* understand cut.

Reply

hsifeng January 21 2010, 03:44:55 UTC
We will get draping this weekend (basic rectangle first, modified from there) and see what we get. Sadly, I don't own the Kohler - do you? Any chance you could poke around in there on my behalf?

Reply

virginiadear January 21 2010, 03:55:07 UTC
Yes, I do; the Dover edition. I could and will, but I'm not sure precisely how soon I'll get to do that. In other words, it's at home, and I'm not, so I can't say, "Yeah, give me an hour" or promise "Tomorrow before lunch, my local time."

But I ought to be able to poke around *sometime* tomorrow.
'Kay?

Reply

hsifeng January 21 2010, 04:25:21 UTC
That would be lovely honey, thank you!

Reply


kass_rants January 21 2010, 01:15:04 UTC
The third picture is a totally different shape than the first two. The third looks like a Schaube. The first two look like just wraps of some type. Geometric shapes, like your sketches.

Reply

hsifeng January 21 2010, 03:53:19 UTC
Yes, the shape of the body in the third picture is different, but I don't know if it is really a Schaube either; something about the hang of the front corner over the left arm belies that idea to me.

I have a few other 'hooded' examples, one that makes a lot more sense as a cloak:


... )

Reply


bedpimp January 21 2010, 01:39:33 UTC
I'm thinking square or rectangular based on the second picture. 60" fabric, draped and folded.

The trim gives the illusion of angles < 90 degrees.

I'm pretty sure we could figure out the lay in about 15 minutes with a couple large safety pins/kilt pins and a wool blanket.

60"x60" fabric

Fold 20"down at the top

Center fabric on back of neck with the 20" on top, facing back

Drape center down arms

Pin at the neck

20" fold might double as a hood

Reminds me a lot of how I used to wear the my great kilt on cold/rainy days.

Reply

bedpimp January 21 2010, 02:12:11 UTC
Quick and dirty. Not enough light and too many layers of wool, but this should give you an idea of what I was describing (like you really need *my* help) ;-)


... )

Reply

hsifeng January 21 2010, 03:55:21 UTC
I think that is a good start actually! We can build on that. Worst case we'll end up with a couple of variations!

Reply

bedpimp January 21 2010, 04:08:24 UTC
You know, it's not much different than Hans Sanchez from the event this weekend.

I knew it looked familiar!

Reply


sstormwatch January 21 2010, 01:58:37 UTC
I would suggest starting with a model on a dummy, using basic square or rectangle. Hang it and see how it drapes. Then if it doesn't look right, try the gored portions. I keep finding that many of these garments really are just a rectangle, or very close to it.

Reply

bedpimp January 21 2010, 02:13:16 UTC
Hey! I resemble that dummy! ;-)

Reply

hsifeng January 21 2010, 03:41:22 UTC
*grin*

Reply

sstormwatch January 21 2010, 04:27:00 UTC
I was thinking of a smaller scale dummy, but if you want to volunteer... ;-D

Reply


alysten January 21 2010, 04:55:58 UTC
It flows in a similar way as my shawl. It is more rectangle shaped than square shape. I can get some measurement off it if you're interested.

Reply

hsifeng January 21 2010, 16:45:41 UTC
Certainly! I think this weekend will involve some scale testing - hopefully we will have results to post on Monday...

Reply


Leave a comment

Up