Search results

Not exactly a 1916 beaded silk dress, is it? ; ) Of course I immediately thought early 70s, because, well, look at it! But I need confirmation because beyond the manuf. label (interestingly bilingual, from Montreal), I could find no info on the company. A Google search turned up an article, and...

Barbara (and friends), thanks so very much for all this helpful advice. I appreciate it! Liza

Also -- how do I label this era effectively in my title? WWI? Teens? 1910s? Does it have a proper, widely recognized name I'm not familiar with? Too late for Edwardian, of course. Advice appreciated.

Here are the promised photos. There is no indication that the sash was attached at a higher point. I've included shots of the sash exterior, interior, "ruffly end bit," stretched gently to show how much "excess" there is, a view of where it attaches to both the outer and inner bodice (and has...

Barbara, Yes, I agree. I understood what you meant, and of course it's a distinct possibility that there was an overdress/skirt/etc. that was not attached, but simply "went with." Like I said, as soon as possible I'm going to give it a much closer inspection and send you additional photos. Just...

Hi all -- I will take photos of the areas you describe, to allow you to better judge whether something is missing (I suspect not), and see just how way the "girdle" is constructed and attached to the dress. I will also take a proper shot of the label (the one above I took in a rush at the...

Hi Barbara, The sash cannot be moved up or down from where you see it in the photos, as it is attached (stitched) on one point of one end (it's a gathered rectangle) to the dress at the side waist. The way the sash is constructed (it's got seams on what is clearly the interior side) indicates...

Wow. I'm sort of afraid to touch it. Definitely am NOT cleaning it, as it's perfectly clean already and smells nice. I let it air out on the line for a day. Good enough. How would the sash work? See how much bigger it is in circumference than the waist itself? Not sure how to show it for a listing.

Also, that bit of black lace at the bodice -- definitely think that was added for some reason later on, and I simply hid it away for the photos.

Hello, I got this dress (and 37 more) from a local theater. It is silk (I'm sure). It closes with an incredibly complex array of hooks&eyes and snaps (only). Covered buttons on sleeves are decorative. In pretty good shape, overall. No noticeable flaws unless you look closely (tear at shoulder...

Just followed a dry-cleaner's advice, against my own better judgment, and hand-washed (cold water, of course, drip dry after rolling in towel) a 50s dress in perfect condition but for some dustiness. Dress came out perfect, but skirt lining (only part that was lined) shrank up to nothing...

Holy cow!

Susan, you can get Murphy's Oil Soap at any grocery, hardware, or big box store. It's as easy to find as Ajax!

Thats how i listed it. Dont know if anyone is actually interested in wearing something like this, so priced it lowish despite pergect condition. We ll see what happens. Id say its more practical ad separates than an actual suit. The details are nice. Thanks ladies! Forgive my phone typong...

Hi everyone. Here's a suit that looks totally 70s. But there's no fiber content info anywhere (burns as wool). Still, it looks awfully 70s to me, does it not? It's well made. Lots of nice details and beautifully cut. But what about those shoulders? Pretty 40s/80s! But the skirt, no way. And...

Rita, that article was simply stupendous. Wonderful sentiments, beautifully written. Really loved it.

Sharing a tip: I have found that stubborn spots that refuse to budge with laundering (even Vintage Textile Soak, which is a miracle worker) and dry-cleaning (which seems to set more spots than it removes) can often be completely removed with -- Murphy's Oil Soap. Yes, the thick, yellow stuff you...

Interesting! PPV - buttonholes on cuffs (and collar thingy) appear to be the same on both sides. Wouldn't matter, really, as once you turn back the cuffs (or button on the collar), the buttonholes aren't visible. Thanks everyone for all the info. I'll mention the scarf theory in my listing...

Oh wow! just saw the Lilla Ann jacket, Linn. Amazing. I like the shoulder pads in mine. They are set on lengths of twill tape, and can snap in and out.

That sounds like a possibility, too. They were clearly used. Perhaps a lace or other contrasting collar? Quite the mystery!

Check out the detachable cuffs. Could be worn with either dots or velvet showing.

4.25 inches from buttonholes to center of buttons, on a diagonal. For the button to reach the hole (or vice versa), the whole jacket would be hiked up and the armholes are up around your ears. It was a brilliant thought, but I don't think it's the answer.

OK... I have tried rolling the attached collar down and getting the hidden buttonholes to reach the detachable-collar buttons, but there is no way to to so. They are just too far away and risk tearing the fabric. Plus, that would be a VERY open collar indeed. Am I doing it wrong? Wish you were...

Let me know if you'd like to see any other views. Skirt is a side metal zip w/ plain button at waist.

original belt is missing, but here's how it looks (spiffy, no?) with a random belt of the correct size (based on size of loops)

Front and back views, then a shot of what's under the attached collar, and one of the tag. That "buttoned on velvet collar" is reversible. Here's a shot with it reversed to the print (and in back, it reverses to the black velvet).

Thanks, Pinkcoke. I'm going to muck with the photos later. Morning's been nutty and now the sitter's on the way out the door...

Yep, that's what I figured out, and why I gave up (for now) ; ). Your avatar photo sends me into a swoon every time I see it!

What size do you recommend?