Anybody an Oscar de la Renta expert???

Better Dresses Vintage

Better Dresses Vintage

Alumni
Hi,

Just found a deep plum velvet maxi/evening skirt. slight A-line shape, covered with matching sequins in an all-over paisley pattern (creates wonderful texture).

Quite splendid, indeed.
Tag says only "Oscar de la Renta," plus addtl size (12), care (DC only), and a '74-95 ILGWU tag. Organza lining says "Neiman-Marcus."

The cut is timeless (nothing extreme or era-specific about it, for an evening skirt), but the richness says 80s, while the paisleys say 70s. But then I recall some sort of Bohemian trend even later than that?

Have not had a chance to photograph it yet.

Does this design sound familiar to anyone? And does anyone know of an online resource that shows the various designer lines from different years? Even a few photos of the general idea would be helpful.

Thanks!

Liza
 
The label most closely matches the one from Lizzie's early 90s dress, but it's hard to tell because in the label resource, the labels are cropped in very close (don't know why that's done), so it's often hard to see how they are attached to the garment (sewn all the way around, sewn at the top only, etc., which often changes over time). A bit of fabric around the edges of the label would be helpful. I wonder if anyone else has noticed the same.
 
It varies, depending on who took the picture! Mostly I would think people are trying to crop closely as it gives the highest definition to label wording itself.
 
Lizajane3 feel free to submit some labels the way they should be done and I will happily add them to the resource.
 
OK... LOL. Here are photos (clearly, not the ones I will use to list the thing).

But first, I was merely providing feedback from an avid label resource user. I'm guessing VFG admins are interested in the experience everyday users have with the various resources offered here, and would like to make those resources as meaningful and user-friendly as possible. I did not mean to imply that I had the answers or knew how things "should" be done.

Back to the skirt --

The measurements are: w: 31", h: 50", length: 45", hem swp: 70" (so more straight than A-line, really)

I've shown in the photos how much is "clipped" to the miniscule-but-Amazonian Lola, so you can get an idea of the actual cut of the thing.

p.s. One night in the near future I will go ahead and submit 200+ labels for the resource.

DSCN4057.JPGDSCN4058.JPGDSCN4059.JPGDSCN4060.JPGDSCN4061.JPGDSCN4063.JPG
 
Anybody notice that the Neiman-Marcus label matches most closely the 1950s label in the resource? Yet, this skirt MUST be from somewhere between July 74 and 1995. They must have reverted to an older label. Maybe in the 90s? Or maybe it was used on certain designers' clothing throughout the decades.
 
Liza,

It's possible your skirt is from the late 1970's or 1980's. Designer clothing was always somewhat shall we say "generous" in size so while a 31" waist is large for a size 12 -maybe not on an expensive garment. That might explain why the NM label looks so "vintage."
 
Oh yes, definitely a '74-95 ILGWU, Linn. I just wasn't sure if the skirt was from the beginning of that 20-year span, or the tail end. Seems timeless. Thus, was hoping an OdlR fanatic might recognize the "collection." My gut reaction when I found it was "70s" -- but then I started wondering if maybe it wasn't much more recent (somehow, early 90s still seems quite recent to me, LOL)...

You know, now that I think about this... another clue that it's earlier, rather than later, is the lack of a mention of fiber content. And there are no shortage of tags, as you see.
 
It should have fiber content - that was mandated in 1960 ( I think) - but as we know not every piece fits the puzzle. I looked in our LR, and the DLR labels don't change "that" much. It's a beautiful skirt. (I edited out my original comment about the Union dates because when I re-read your first post, I saw you had mentioned it.)
 
Hi Linn,

Although the generic name of the fiber (as opposed to some made-up brand-specific trademark or name, such as Lycra or Orlon) was required for the first time in 1960, the information did not have to be permanently attached to the garment. So, it could just be on a paper hangtag, which would be thrown away when the buyer got the garment home. Only much later (exact date escapes me, but I've got it in my notes somewhere) did the requirement change to a permanent tag (and to percentages -- 50% cotton/50% polyester, e.g.).

Here's the document:

http://extension.missouri.edu/p/GH824
 
See the folded thing on the floor next to the skirt -- it's a velvet bodiced/metallic floral skirted gown Made in Hong Kong (BCC) number to die for. Finishing is impeccable. By "Kent Originals, Ltd." and better made than the OdlR skirt ; ).
 
If I had just seen the photos alone I would have said both labels look right for 70's, they used a lot of brown text then, plus the quite swirly style of writing.

When I submitted a velvet cape we also had a conversation about how the dark burgundy / purple colour velvets were very popular in the late 70's.

Big bold paisley patterns like that always say 60's-70's to me. Any other era they tend to be much more subtle.
 
This skirt looks late 70s to me, but how is the zipper sewn in and is it on the side or at the center back? Is it an invisible zipper or a nylon zipper set in with a centered application?
 
I know photos can be deceiving - especially velvet and glitter. Plum was big in the earlier 90s. All the separate tags look very 70s and/or 80s, but the waist size is too big by my estimation for that period.

A 70s Vogue pattern for a skirt shows the body measurement as 26.4". A 31" waist would be too loose. If it is from the 70s, it is possible the size tag is incorrect.
 
I'm getting a more modern feel - this sort of garment came into vogue in the early '90s and I think the labels look too modern for '70s. It is odd that there isn't a fabric content label. I'm not that familiar with US sizes, but isn't a modern (last twenty years) 12 about a 31 inch waist?
 
Coutureallure said:
This skirt looks late 70s to me, but how is the zipper sewn in and is it on the side or at the center back? Is it an invisible zipper or a nylon zipper set in with a centered application?
Click to expand...

Jody, hi. It's a side zip. Nylon. Talon (the sort that's written diagonally). It is set in such a way that it is hidden behind the edge of a pocket, but it's not "invisible," per se. At the top is a tab closure with a flat hk&eye.

Deborah, I don't think that a pattern (Vogue, McCalls, etc.) is a fair/accurate comparison where sizes are concerned. They have always been on a very different size scale than ready-to-wear clothing. My mom (seamstress) explained to me years back that patterns have always had their own weird sizing that had nothing to do with what size you actually wear. If you look through her patterns (which range from the 50s to modern day), the size she needed to create her size (whether a 50s 10 or a 70s 4 -- she didn't change, the numbers did) dress or pants or blouse was always at least a 12, if not larger.
 
jody meant is the zipper the kind with a sewn placket (regular zipper) or the kind that when zipped up looks like it's just two seams sewn together (invisible zipper). invisible zippers have different pulls, too. not elongated rectangles.

taking into consideration the skirt itself, the embroidered size tag (and the style of numbers), the 31 inch waist on a size 12, and the presence of a hyphen in the neiman label, i would put it at early 80s.
 
LOL--even before I read Joan's post, I was thinking "early 80s." (Possibly late 70s, as Linn says, but I'm feeling more early 80s.)

Not surprised your Hong Kong piece is beautifully done. Most everything I've ever had from Hong Kong (the dressier, more high-end stuff) has been wonderfully made!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top