David McDowell wrote:
>1. I am attempting to add lacing strips to some doublets and slops,
>mainly commercially made.
>2. Due to lack of time, and consistency with the existing garments, I
>plan to use metal grommets.
>3. The only information I have seen on point spacing are the drawings
>from Janet Arnold's Patterns of Fashion, which seem to indicate a row
>of many (up to 62!) closely spaced holes.
>4. However, from period paintings it appears that a much smaller number
>of points were actually used.
Oh, yeah! The fact is, paintings are not photographs. Even in the
Late Renaissance when they are often quite realistic, the artist does
not generally do an absolute reproduction.
I'll have to find the book, but in one book i have which collects
various scholarly essays, there is one comparing a painting of
Edward, the uh, uh, son of Henry the VIII, as a small child with the
log of his wardrobe.
The scholar matched up the painting with a garment she felt certain
was the one represented. The actual garment was black with grey
trim/piping - rather dull - the painted version was black with dark
red trim - much more visually interesting. The actual garment had
myriad holes for lacing - the painted version had far fewer, after
all, they would have taken way too long to paint properly and would
have interfered with the composition, noting here that a portrait
painter would often have the set of clothes for the portrait to paint
from - without a human occupant. The person portrayed would sit for
limited amounts of time, enough for the painter to sketch their face
- then add that into the painting.
So it's hardly surprising that you find the actual garments have way
more holes than any paintings show.
I will see if i can find the book and give proper bibliographic references...
Urtatim (that's err-tah-TEEM)
the persona formerly known as Anahita