If the chest is to be padded flat, and stitch direction doesn't matter, what's the point in doing it by hand?
I appreciate that uniform rows of zig-zag stitching might encourage folds/ripples, but each machined row could be offset to replicate what is being done by hand. And although I imagine that control of tension within the chest might be an issue, surely increasing the length of the zig-zag stitches would resolve this? And/or messing with the tension of the machine?
Obviously the lapel is a different thing, because shaping of the roll has to be done by hand, but how do you justify doing the chest by hand? I've seen at least one demonstration on youtube showing how to pad it using a zig-zag stitch. And even Savile Row wasn't averse to doing this in the 1980s, from what I gather. So is there something I'm missing? Or should I be burnt at the stake for being a heretic??
Incidentally, I doubt my 1960s domestic would be able to fit all that bulk under its foot, let alone feed it through (such is the weakness of the motor), so this is merely a hypothetical question. 🙂
Great question!
Here are the differences:
By hand:
Low visibility on cloth side due to small bites with a single thread. Great for thin fabrics.
Allows for larger stitch lengths which in turn reduces production time.
Interconnectedness of surfaces; machine stitches create rows of stitching to cover the surface. The space between these rows is trapped and isolated. This divides the canvas into small rows that are not interconnected anymore. It breaks the spring effect of the canvas and neutralises it.
By machine:
Allow for a very firm canvas. Not very desirable. Even for structured garments. The high stitch density of both threads take away the spring of the horsehair.
Shows through on thin fabrics
Great for fast sampling when a firm canvas is required
I have found that machine padding with a normal machine (not a padding machine) always kills the canvas. It turns it into a stiff piece of cardboard that does not bring out an elegant shape.
Machine padding with a padding machine on the other hand gives identical results to hand padding as it maintains that interconnectedness of the surfaces. The spring of the horsehair is preserved.
There is however, nothing wrong with using a zigzag stitch to pad your canvases if you know why you're doing it for. I have used zigzag stitches on many sample canvases where a firm canvas was necessary.
Collars are sometimes difficult to shape when machine stitched using a standard flatbed machine. A padding machine is best for both if any machine stitching is going to be done.
Standard flatbed machines use a lockstitch with threads visible on both sides of the material. Padding stitch machines use a hem stitch which picks a yarn or two and is only visible on one side. Similar to a hand padding stitch.
Reza
International School of Tailoring.
This is actually something I do with my own jackets when I don't have time to pad them! I personally find that padding and zig-zag stitching on a flat canvas is almost undistinguishable on the final product since the shape is made by placing darts into the canvas. Theoretically, you could do it with even rows of straight stitching too but I've not actually tested that method myself though a tailor in Kings Cross I know does just that. Glad to see it's not just me talking about machine padding flat canvases, I'm always asking why can't/shouldn't something be done by machine beyond the semantics of categorizing the definition of bespoke.
You can even experiment with tension and stitch density to find how firm or soft you'd like the canvas.
By the way, I wanted to ask this question too! You beat me to it! :) In any case, I await Reza's reply
Hello, I found a link where the canvas is padded in a similar way as you wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1Z0lzT8APM
the question interests me too!