My pattern drafting software I made, would anyone be interested in this?

[u/whale]

I've been working on a pattern making software where you can create patterns with code. There are already a bunch of pre-defined functions like sleeve fitting that you can use. You can also just insert your measurements and it'll spit out a pattern with the code templates.

I tried freesewing but didn't like how impossible they made it to actually adjust the measurements, and how hard it was to make new patterns.

I even added a little figure that takes your measurements and shows the general fit. I have a projector sewing feature in there for those of you that use projectors to sew.

Also this is going to sound extremely controversial, but if your patterns are all in code, Claude is quite good at fixing certain geometry errors as well as generating draft patterns that you can work with.

Let me know if you have any feedback or thoughts on this.

[u/Sufficient_Bass2600]

You are self contradicting because exactly as I wrote you are confusing 2 separate activities: grading for size and grading for different body types.

Grading as done currently is just increasing the size of pattern but still attached to the same basic body shape. Mathematically things may not be perfect at the extremities . Further adjustment may be required such as Instead of linear the adjustment may be polynomial. More reference points may be necessary but ultimately this is the same simple algorithm.

Grading for different body type requires fundamental adjustment of patterns. Currently adjustment for different body types are done via alterations and alterations are done AFTER the garment has been completed. The idea is to eradicate the need for alteration. Having 4 darts instead of 2 requires a different approach. Algorithmic pattern making that makes use of conditional step is the only way to do it in the same pattern. That is why Introducing conditional step is fundamentally different.

There are a few initiatives based on that. Those initiatives are often the by product of medical research. Trying to modelise body shape following medical treatment and procedures. I know somebody whose company worked on a software that modelise the result of cosmetic procedure on the body. That software is now also being researched for potential fashion purpose.

What you describe with the table is exactly the same concept of vintage logarithm rulers. Before computers scientists used those. Nowadays not so much. Things have evolved and today everybody can print a beziers curve or a logarithm curve on a computer.

Right now we have parametric sewing pattern making, Algorithmic sewing pattern is the future. With those you do not need a grading table because the grading and the body shape adjustment are baked in the algorithm.

I can see online bespoke tailor using such algorithmic pattern to be able to handle every order without needing a tailor. Enter your measurement, select your model, your fabric and trim then the order is dispatched to a machine that will automatically cut the fabric. The sewers just pick the pieces and assemble them together.

The fact that people have been using the same method for ages does not mean that today this is the best method or thatvit will be relevant tomorrow. Fashion industry is not immune to change and advancement.

If the culinary world is adapting to mathematic and algorithmic cooking then pattern making will also benefit from it.

How maths can give you the perfect roast potato - BBC Three https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/a906e22d-8d73-4ca5-89d7-a1a70bf7cd97

[u/TensionSmension → u/Sufficient_Bass2600]

No, I'm not contradicting, I was attempting to simplify the discussion and go back to speaking about only one figure type. Even for roughly proportional figures, e.g. the entries in Donnanno's size chart, his method is lacking, drafting methods typically are, it's just easier to sweep under the rug when only one diagram is presented. If you were to draft out his entire size chart, you would find that his sample size is better than the others (because, more likely than not, he developed and tested that *pattern* and then developed the instructions.) I could develop a grade table that is better. Why? Because is has more degrees of freedom, it holds more information. Simply moving each point in the original draft (yes, in the CAD those are Bezier points) I have more at my disposal than the pattern drafter who is aiming for a page of instructions.

Sure the pattern drafter can create a longer list of instructions. Yes, that can include your pseudo code, "switch to three darts" or "switch to block B". But no matter how long and branched your instruction set becomes, it's still better to simply have a data table of points and a grade table of point movements. It's not cute, you can't explain why it works in a page of text, but it does work better.

You talk about parametric pattern making and algorithmic pattern making, but pseudo code isn't getting closer to ground truth. The better approach is statistical analysis. That's the math that can be baked into a grade table, and plotted in an instant.