I'm so in love with this dress. I think it might have been hand made. No tags or labels. I bought it because it was only 5 bucks. Crazy. The headpiece is missing the veil. It doesn't fit my dress form. I might be able to fit into it if it's crucial to dating it. It has a side metal zipper. Not sure what the fabric is but it's gorgeous and very silky. It has quite a train. It measures 45" from where the silky fabric starts at the bust down to the hem, and the train is an additional 44" long, or thereabouts. Some of the seams are pulled out. The fabric isn't torn, it's the thread that broke. Holding it up to me, it comes to the top of my foot. Any idea of its age? Thanks for your help!
That is lovely. I agree with 1940s, leaning to the end of the decade, post WWII. The satin looks like what they used to call "slipper satin" (if it has some bit of weight to it) and is more likely to be rayon satin rather than silk satin, as most of these gowns were. It has the look of rayon satin in the photos. That illusion neckline was popular in the later 1940s and early 1950s also. It might be right on the date line, 1948, 1949, to maybe 1951. Wedding gowns can sometimes be a bit of a challenge to determine the exact dating on, unless they have an iconic detailing, unique fabric, etc.
It reminds me of one of the Vintage Vogue reproduction patterns that came out a few years ago - Vogue 2384, if you want to google it. It's not quite that, but similar in style.
I googled it and do see a resemblance to the vogue pattern. There are some differences, the biggest one being that the pattern has the dress closing entirely down the back, where this dress has just 8 buttons at the back and a side metal zipper. It does bring to mind a question I've had lurking in the back of my mind recently, since I started finding so many vintage home made clothes with no labels. How does a person differentiate between a genuine piece of vintage clothing and a well made reproduction? I do think this dress is genuinely vintage, because of the zipper and its location but also because of the veil. The veil is the same fabric and has the same type of weirdly plastic looking flowers on it as another vintage wedding veil that I sold recently. The flowers are deteriorated in places. But I'm just a newb at this still. lol
I find that the 'authentic' vintage materials are also vintage. More so, the older sewing techniques will be used... like the seam finishing, the threads, etc. Contemporary reproductions (is that what you mean not 80s does 40s?) will just be put together differently and the materials different. The 80s does 40s are 1980s. They aren't reproductions in my mind as the era took an older element of design and imposed an 80s style to it. Like... a good example... the shoulders!
The veil was probably silk maline or silk tulle, and they often do not survive well depending on the storage history of the dress. It is too bad it is gone, as those are often more desirable today than the dress itself. The flowers might be wax underneath with a coating of some sort of mid century pearly plastic material. I have seen that technique used in the late 40s bridal flowers. Or they could be blown / nolded plastic flowers with a pearly coating.
I discovered something rather sad. The thread used to sew this dress together is so fragile, the seams come apart very easily. The fabric is just so heavy. Its in beautiful condition otherwise.
Beautiful dress. What a bargain for $5. Yes, those old dresses were sewn with pure cotton thread and it perishes over time. Many of us have re-sewn the seams of entire dresses because of this. It goes with the territory.
Cotton thread. Cotton threads is very fragile when it dries out. Remember it's stronger when wet. If you have garments with cotton thread seams, consider pressing them gently with a steam iron. It might prolong their lives. C