Is This Burnout Velvet? UPDATE.

  • Thread starter Thread starter vintageclothes-line
  • Start date Start date
V

vintageclothes-line

Guest
I am thinking this dress is 60s, no metal zipper. It is double lined in a nude color fabric. The velvet has spots that are sheer black so you can see the nude lining through it. Only tags are paper ones in the seam that have been cut.

<center><IMG SRC="http://www.ssb4.net/users/11057/000blackvelvetflockedcollage4b.jpg" BORDER=0 ></center>

The dress is a little longer in the back and fuller at the hem.

<center><IMG SRC="http://www.ssb4.net/users/11057/000blackvelvetflocked6.jpg" BORDER=0 ><br><br></center>

It has a slit in front.

<center><IMG SRC="http://www.ssb4.net/users/11057/000blackvelvetflocked2.jpg" BORDER=0 ><br><br></center>

It has a double lining. The hem looks like could have been hand done. Do you think it possibly could have been shortened?

<center><IMG SRC="http://www.ssb4.net/users/11057/000blackvelvetflocked9.jpg" BORDER=0 ><br><br></center>

TIA.
 
It is burn out or devore velvet. But I don't think its 60s - I don't remember this fabric being popular then. I remember it coming in and being very glamourous more in the 80s.

Now if my memory is going, don't tell me. Just let me drift on.

Hollis
 
Thanks, Hollis. This dress seems older to me...just the feel of it Maybe I will have to try to do some research.

Here is a pic (somewhat blurry) of where the paper labels were cut off.

<IMG SRC="http://www.ssb4.net/users/11057/000blackvelvetflocked10.jpg" BORDER=0 ><br><br>
 
What's the zipper like? This fabric was very popular in the 90's, but I would expect a dress from that era to have an invisible zipper.
 
It does not have an invisible zipper. It is a lap over or concealed kind. Here are some more pics. This dress really has me stumped.

<IMG SRC="http://www.ssb4.net/users/11057/000blackvelvetflocked13.jpg" BORDER=0 >

Inside construction. Don't know if you could tell in other pictures that this dress has a waistline.

<IMG SRC="http://www.ssb4.net/users/11057/000blackvelvetflocked14.jpg" BORDER=0 >

Also, just found a 1950s burnout velvet dress. If she is correct on her dating, which I think she is but maybe 60s, looks like they did use it back then.



http://pages.tias.com/cgi-bin/googl...cjoseph&catId=dresses-1950s&itemNo=6000-14042

Help!!
 
From the pic you posted, it does look to have been shorten. The hem line looks too unclean to have been the original sewing. But that is just me.
 
Jamie, I am glad you mentioned that because I looked again and it has not been shortened. All stitches are the same and uniform. Go figure.
 
A stumper..... Were it not for that old paper tag remnant, I'd have thought newer as well. To me the length for the style looks, at least on your mannequin, just right; I can't imagine it would have been originally designed to be longer in front unless for a very tall woman. I think you're probably right with the 60s, with the tight "Emma Peel" look around then. The fabric does look more modern, though I know exactly what you mean about the piece "feeling" older. Sometimes you get that impression, even if other things seem to contradict it! It's a lovely dress!
 
Thanks, Anne. I sure didn't need to spend almost a whole day researching a dress here at Christmas. However, it is a lovely dress and I hope it finds a good home. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top