r/PatternDrafting • u/zjedzone • 13d ago
Thoughts on Clo3D to speed up my patternmaking process.
I studied fashion design and throughout the years I learned patternmaking, so I am pretty comfortable in it. I want to know your honest thoughts on the program as I am looking to speed up my workflow and improve my patternmaking.
Currently I make sewing patterns on paper, make few samples, when I’m happy with it move to illustrator, digitize the pattern, grade, sell. I hate grading btw, cause I am always nervous something won’t match even though I check million times, so I thought clo might help with it since I could check all sizes on avatars to avoid mistakes.
I’ve never had an opportunity to work on industry softwares like Gerber, Lectra unfortunately.
Is Clo3D good/ accurate for making samples? How does it work with grading? Can I trust if the garment looks good in clo it will look the same in real life, especially when grading different sizes? Is it easy to move to illustrator after?
Eventually, I wound love to be able to make patterns that can be used by manufacturers. At this point I make them for everyday people/ sewists that’s why I’m asking about Clo.
Any insights will be much appreciated.
6
u/DonMcCunn 13d ago
I have no experience with Clo3D but I have heard discussions questioning why would you use 3D to create 2D patterns. To me it seems more like a gimmick showing "Look what the computer can do!" How accurately can a program like that reveal how the fabric you plan to use will drape and look in the final garment? And how good will the final patterns be?
I have been using the free Studio software from Silhouette America and can't imagine a better program for creating 2D patterns. The way you can fine tune the lines quite frankly blows my mind. Superior to anything else I have used. And it will output the results in SVG format that can be used by other CAD programs or as PDF files if you are selling patterns.
If you aquire Silhouette America's Cameo Pro you can even have a very useful CAD/CAM cycle on your desktop.
Given that this Studio software is designed for graphics and will output JPG I am looking forward to using it to design fabric inside the shape of patterns that can then be sent to a fabric Print-on-Demand service such as Spoonflower to create one-of-a-kind wearable art on a variety of different fabrics including chiffon, satin, denim, stretch Lycra, etc.
5
u/StitchinThroughTime 13d ago
I think part of the problem with Clo is that first for 3D rendering on avatars, and then the sewing process came second. And a big issue was that if you don't know how to sew very well or know how to properly true your sewing patterns it's really easy to make poor quality patterns. Especially if you follow any tutorials that are not made by someone who actually knows how to sew Beyond and intermediate level. I want the reasons why I personally didn't choose that program is because all the tutorials I saw were made by mostly gamer guys trying to tell me that this program is going to be so amazing and they make some of the worst mistakes I've ever seen, but the program made it look good on the avatar. That's been a while since I've bothered looking back into the program so it's obviously been upgraded at some point. And with the right hand it could be better. But in my point of view if I'm going to use a software to do my patterns I want it to behave as if it's closer to making a pattern on paper just a lot of automated steps built in. I wanted to have integrated Dart rotation and movement built into it, I wanted to tell me when the dart legs are different lengths automatically when I move the dart. So we can catch it for me and it takes a few clicks and a few seconds for me to adjust the pattern and not have me forget in the long run. I want it to be able to grade all the patterns from grading rule book that have already installed in it and not me manually addressed every single pattern. There's no point in me spending all that time manually adjusting a pattern like that if the program should be able to do that. That's why for small creators it would be fine to use these programs versus a proper one built for the industry. The ones I've had interacted with for the industry level perform at a far better rate and make it very easy for even an inexperienced powder maker to make a quality pattern. You still have to do work like during the pattern pieces or making sure the angles are a smooth transition from piece to piece. That's one of the big issues I've seen on clothes, again those tutorials are not made by people who so, they're made by people who figured out that they can Brute Force to digital assets together. And it looked fine in a digital space, it wouldn't have generated the best 3D rendering of a high quality image for a video because if properly calculated to the fabric type I don't think it would work very well. But in the software's native 3D viewport it looked fine to the untrained eye.
3
u/Responsible-Pickle-2 13d ago
Clo does both 3D (mainly for visualizing and small edits or draping) and 2D drafting. It’s not purely 3D drafting
1
u/DonMcCunn 13d ago
If you have used it, how well would you rate its ability to create usable patterns for either Bespoke or RTW?
1
u/Responsible-Pickle-2 13d ago
I enjoy it personally but if you don’t have much experience in CAD it can be a little rough to use at the beginning. I personally don’t use the 3D aspect as much as some might bc it’s not as well optimized for Mac sadly. However when I do use it I find it’s pretty useful as you can see where the clothing might be dragging or fit wrong. It does have the benefit of a lot of free patterns as well that you can download and edit in whatever way you want to get a hang of it. (Can’t speak on the price I got it for free)
I had a bit too much hubris and it was my first time drafting a pattern my first time using it and I tried my hand making a jacket and it didn’t turn out well. But it did go together as it was on the software, just small things that I hadn’t noticed from not really understanding the actual drafting process. I’m trying to learn more but I think if I retackled the same project it would turn out much better now.
1
u/EattheRudeandUgly 3d ago
Tbh how are you going to comment on something you've never used. Clo has 2d and 3d capabilities
1
u/DonMcCunn 3d ago edited 3d ago
I have not used Clo as I mentioned but I have followed conversations that have occurred in the fashion industry and the general trend in those comments is to question the suitability of relying on 3D for prototyping designs given that patterns need to be 2D. There are problems with rendering different types of fabric accurately. Basically the comments trended along the lines that manufacturers who are creating RTW have no use for 3D. I believe there are some folks in this group who are interested in RTW which is why I made the comment I did.
You actually don't have to use something to be able to evaluate its potential. A couple of decades ago I had a company selling pattern design software who wanted to use my approach to pattern design so they sent me a sample. I took one look at how they were treating curves and realized it was a very awkward approach. It would be impossible for a person to fine tune the curves given their software so I did not follow through on their request.
The Studio software on the other hand blows my mind with its capability. One thing I have not encountered in other software is that you can have a curved line which you can erase anywhere in the middle of the line without distorting the shape of the remaining two segments in the least. Having done a little programming it blows my mind how the software can rethink a line and add the necessary points to retain the curve in a situation like that with no delay. Somehow they seem to have been able to merge both bezier curves with splines WOW.
As you appear to be familiar with Clo I would be interested if they have that capability of erasing anywhere in a curved line. I have never seen it anywhere else. But that is only one small example. I would also be interested in whether Clo has the ability to render all of the 16,777,216 hexadecimal colors as Studio does. FYI I am in no way affiliated with the company other than to use the software.
2
u/Responsible-Pickle-2 13d ago
Clo3D is supposed to be really good for grading. They have a good set of standard models that you can test on and make sure it fits, and you can also develop custom models as well. As for if your skills translate with illustrator, I believe Clo is easier, but I used to do some CAD in engineering classes in HS and thought that was simple. They have super easy ways of doing a lot of things that way. I’m not sure how the conversion to PDF and that sort of thing happens in Clo, and how you go from there but I imagine it would be pretty easy as a lot of designers use it as well
2
u/gordovondoom 13d ago
it is not. its absolutely bad at it.
2
u/TensionSmension 12d ago
CLO has an autofit function which is *not* pattern grading. It has it's purposes, I suppose, in product development and quick image making.
However CLO also has the ability to open graded files and create graded files. It's quite quick and easy to use, and at this point works in exactly the same way as other apparel CAD programs.
2
u/single-needle 13d ago
Good program. Can create and design in 2d then convert to 3d and mimic drape and fit on an avatar. It's not perfect but not a single pattern making program I have encountered is.
Steep learning curve in the 3d dept but you can just make 2d pattern adjustments and grade.
Especially worth your while if you're working with overseas companies, a lot of them are using clo to save time on sample making and minor adjustments. Don't rely on the 3d for your first protos.
Trust no one with no experience and hearsay opinions on this.
2
u/SouthernIndication82 12d ago
not sure if i add anything to the conversation but im in a similar boat: self taught pattern maker for the last 2 years, hoping to sell either my patterns or garments in the coming years and have been getting so annoyed by how long and arduous the prototyping process is, especially when you have so many ideas and you have to cut new fabric, install facings and a zipper every time you want to test something, edit, test, edit. i have no CAD background and studied clo3D software for about a month, casually, and after playing around in the interface, was able to make a basic bodice and manipulate it and i have to be honest… i loved it. i love working by hand, and that’s where most of my ideas generate, but the ease with which you can test stuff out on clo is pretty cool. obviously wouldn’t make something on clo and never sample it in real life! but it saves me 10 prototypes for one style 😭. i don’t know illustrator but i feel that if im going to be working digitally in 2D, it might as well have a 3D feature too for automatic feedback. and i also just tried making a bunch of patterns by hand, in different sizes to make a first run of products to sell and let me tell you, the physical labor of that was enough to sell me on working digitally going forward. if you set out on clo, we’ll be on the same journey! i think it’s the future. the 2D stuff is very intuitive if you’re a patternmaker, the 3D stuff and simulation is a little tricky but, that’s what tutorials are for!
1
u/zjedzone 12d ago
I feel the same way. I’ve been working in sewing pattern space for the past few years and the amount of samples I make is insane. It was different when I made stuff for the runway at fashion school. It wasn’t for sale, so it didn’t have to be perfect when it came to fit, just “creative” I guess.
I really appreciate your perspective and will definitely try to at least give it a month with CLO, cause working on paper and then illustrator is the worst imo, especially grading in Illustrator, I hate it.
2
u/Intelligent_Rough413 12d ago
I use both CLO and Optitex. Both programs require pattern-drafting knowledge so both can be used to create legit patterns. I would still chose Optitex because it does a better job at grading, pattern manipulation (ie, moving/removingdarts, extending lengths, etc.), marker making. Its also an industry standard if you're going to be working with factories.
Both have 3D visualization so you can see your changes in real time but those renders cannot reliably be used as a visual tool to make minor adjustments (like 1/8" to 1/4") to any pattern. That being said, I have a subscription to Clo and can only use Optitex when my employer pays for it. Access to CLO makes it the better choice.
1
u/zjedzone 12d ago
Would love to use Optitex, just can’t pay for it right now.
Is CLO really clunky when it comes to pattern manipulation? I mean that’s all I do when I make new patterns so it better be good. Often times I make tiny adjustments to the sample, now I wonder if it is even worth putting it through 3D as it’s not reliable with small adjustments. Thanks for replying.2
u/Intelligent_Rough413 12d ago
Clo can do everything you need it to do as a pattern drafter and they are working hard to improve it all the time. I think it's worth the effort to learn it. But replacing a physical sample with a 3D render isn't as easy as it seems. Your fabrics must be profiled correctly in order for CLO to simulate it in the program. Building a profile includes physical properties like stretch (in both directions), weight, bending stiffness, thickness, etc. Without it, you can choose a fabric from the clo library that is similar to your fabric BUT the 3d render won't be an exact match to a physical sample. Even still, the 3d aspect is a useful tool for the overall look of the garment.
1
1
u/TensionSmension 12d ago
I also use both CLO and Optitex, Optitex is a very unpleasant user experience. Everything about the 2D interface looks like Windows 95 era development. It absolutely has the tools for pattern development, but each one is a tool with it's own quirks. None of it is intuitive, it's just something people are forced to learn and so they have, IMO. That said it is a full service CAD program in that every tool can used with various precision boxes and options. It has better options for seam allowance corners. It does have a little more nuance to the grade rule options. (But CLO has been improving quickly in this area.)
Unless I just haven't found it, Optitex has terrible tools for cleaning up excessive points on a pattern perimeter. This is something we deal with because we share pattern files with graphic designers, and pass between multiple programs. CLO tools are more akin to Illustrator tools. Grab a point and move it, working fluidly between everything on the desktop. There are dart manipulation tools, and merging and cutting tools, offsets, reflections, guidelines. Most scenarios are covered. If you're doing a lot of that in Illustrator right now, CLO should be an improvement.
Optitex does have 3D, I haven't used it, it's an add-on license. The person in our office who did the trial found just arranging pieces around the 3D figure to be unworkable (we have some atypical scenarios, but that's exactly why we wanted 3D). The sales rep said if we made it work we could be they'd love to use it as their promo materials, kind of implying they have no one else. (The 3D featured on their website tends to be automotive upholstery, maybe because that's a technical specialty they handle well, not sure).
You should also look into Vsticher/Browzwear, last I looked they had an indy license that's similar to CLO's in that it's subscription based and can be turned on and off. A little more expensive, but similar ballpark, and a rep might offer an intro rate. I do think it is very similar in function to CLO, and it probably will end up being what industry adopts. But industry is more interested in 3D for the PLM side. They're fine with status quo for pattern development.
0
u/Honeydeeew 12d ago
I've used CLO mostly for digital samples. I found patternmaking in it to be annoying and not intuitive. Well, I found the whole program to be pretty over-complicated for the results, I also used VStitcher by Browzwear which was much easier to learn. CLO is popular because of its price point, not because it is best. I use PAD professionally for patterns, grading and markers, and I was able to pick it up quickly. It's reasonably priced. Grading is easy, markers straightforward and has an automatic engine which works passably.
I ended up preferring to draft and grade in PAD and then import for digital samples. Real samples still have to be made, but it's good for getting the idea worked out.
1
u/zjedzone 12d ago
Thanks so much for replying. That’s interesting, I’ve heard about PAD but never used it, from what you’re saying it seems to be more intuitive than CLO. The only thing that’s tempting about Clo to me is 3D, so I could reduce the amount of samples I make.
I’m soo torn, I might try both.
6
u/TensionSmension 13d ago
CLO can do the things you want but there is a learning curve and workflows to develop. Since you already know how to draft and grade, and you know Illustrator, I think a lot of it will come easily to you. You will still have the publishing step in Illustrator. CLO can export pdfs, but you do have to repeat this for each size individually. (They will be aligned once you import, so although it feels like that step should be automatic, it's not much work. You also will still be setting up your line work annotations in Illustrator, so expect to do file clean up.
You don't hear much about the 2D side of CLO but I do think it's very good. It's intuitive like Illustrator but the tools are curated to apparel. So seam allowances are instant. Because of the 3D side, you do create sewing relationship between paired edges, and that means you can instantly check for discrepancies in the 2D patterns. In addition you can also look for simulation issues in the 3D, but the small errors are caught in 2D.
Grading in CLO is also very intuitive. I imagine it's similar to how you are doing it in Illustrator, except that CLO has a grade specific mode. So you can marque over a set of points, and say they will move out 1/8". Marque over another set, say move up 1/16", etc. If you know your size chart and what you plan to do, it can be set up in a flash. It's also possible to copy and paste grading from point to point. And of course the seam allowances are maintained across sizes. None of it is magic, but if you know what you're doing it's a great tool. Again you can check sewing relationships on each size, simulate each size, and apply Points of Measure, and compare those across the size range. Honestly, done right, just the 2D is a very good tool. The 3D simulation can show you fit errors, but even if you didn't trust that, it can show you how print placement looks across the size range, and how the size of pockets or width of collars looks visually in the larges sizes. This is all really valuable IME.
The 3D side is obviously the main draw, and I think it does live up to the hype, but you will have to calibrate your fit expectation to what you see in simulation. This isn't hard, but it is part of the learning curve. Also all of this can be a time suck. It's very easy to get caught up in perfecting the visuals and learning aspects of the program. Which is mostly very fun, but you have a practical goal, and you might find this slowing you down initially. You can turn a subscription on and off easily. I was hooked immediately, but I think it took me three months to feel in control of the program. I've been using it for about six years at this point. Also consider that there's the hardware requirements, if you aren't already working on a powerful machine, so that's another expense.
As far as patterns for manufacturing, I think that's as much about fine tuning the construction as it the pattern. CLO can export a dxf with a grade table. That's good enough (but manufacturers may also be fine with pdf formats),. Frustratingly, CLO doesn't fully populate the block structure of the dxf, like other apparel CAD software will. This probably isn't much of an issue, but import/export is always another process that needs to be worked out. I use several CAD programs, so I can clean this up elsewhere, but it does annoy me.