(Via:Here.)
The heavy, rich materials which suit a tall figure, look awkward upon a small person, and while all dark colors impart an appearance of slender proportions, light ones will certainly render conspicuous any tendency to corpulence.
It must not be supposed from the title of this article—that I am going to inflict upon the reader a long account—of silks, satins, velvets, and the thousand and one materials—which have been invented to furnish the infinite array in—ladies' dresses. I refer to the subject chiefly to indicate the
necessity that exists—in applying the laws of color, for considering the substance, surface, and texture of which the dress is composed.
Materials which are rough in surface, or absorbent in texture—are very differently affected by the rays of light from those which are smooth and lustrous, and the colors they exhibit are different in themselves—and produce a different effect
upon the eye. A piece, of crimson satin, for example—would differ in color and in effect from a piece of crimson silk, although of like intensity, of tone, and, in fact, dyed with it in the same vat; each, again, would differ still more from a
piece of velvet, merino, or tarletan, although all were as similar as the art of the dyer could make them.
In some colors the difference of value according to the material would be very marked and decisive. .A yellow satin might be superb, where the same yellow in cloth would be simply detestable. And not only does the character of the color depend on the absorbent or reflective condition of the surface, but also very much of the accidental effects produced
by play of light and shade, contact with other colors, and the like.
Thus, in a strong light—while the parts of a rich satin dress, which catch the brightest light, are glittering and almost colorless, the folds exhibit almost every possible difference of tone, from the shadows being broken by the reciprocal reflections of the opposite parts.
The same thing will be noticed in a less degree with silks; differently with velvets—yet producing the most beautiful effects, as any one may see
who will condescend to study such details. In merino or cashmere the effect is very different again, the broken lights and reflections being almost lost in the absorbent character of the material.
Further, texture may be considered with reference to contrast as well as to color. Thus—almost intuitively, the milliner and dressmaker prefer to trim the glossy satins and silks with an absorbent velvet; the dull merino or cashmere with
the richer velvet, or glossy silk or satin.
Again, the rough crapes and laces are placed in contact with the skin, and never with so much advantage as when the skin is smooth, polished, and pearly; never with so little as when the pearliness is produced by powder.
The effect of the material, in respect to color, is further modified by the circumstance of its having a plain or a figured surface. If the pattern be merely raised, it chiefly affects the quality of the texture, its smoothness, or otherwise. If it be a colored design, it necessarily influences the general harmony, and must be taken into account in considering the
trimmings, and other details of the dress.
Patterns, if well designed, may add greatly to the richness and elegance of the dress, but, unfortunately, they are not often well designed,
and much as the superiority of the French designer is vaunted, and in some matters very justly, it is undeniable that many of the most outrageous patterns are of French designing.
The reader may remember the rapture with which
Ruskin, in his "Stones of Venice," speaks of the patterns on the dresses introduced in Venetian pictures, and particularly in those by Tintoretto.
There can be little doubt that they were copies from actual silks worn by Venetian ladies, but they must have been designed by true artists, with a genuine feeling for what is required in drapery, and the material was probably richer and more substantial than that of the present day.
Our designers, like the French, seem to imagine
that the whole pattern is to be exhibited distended, like a piece of tambour-work upon a frame, instead of being broken up and half-concealed in the natural folds of the drapery. To a certain extent.they were justified during the supremacy of crinoline, but we are happily escaping from that thralldom,
and now, perhaps, our textile artists will come to understand that patterns in a dress are not pictures, and design them with regard chiefly to their effect in producing a pleasing play of line in the drapery, and a harmonious arrangement of
color.
Materials and patterns require to be selected with reference to the figure of the wearer. What would assume an air of distinction upon a tall and stately person, would not be becoming to a brisk, mercurial little maiden, the living embodiment of perpetual motion, nor to the figure of a short, stout
matron.
So again, the dress to to be beautiful and graceful
when falling in long, free , accommodating themselves to the natural motions of the form, would be utterly ruined by straining over crinoline, or being cut into flounces, puffs, or ruffing.
It should also be remembered, in adapting colors and materials to the figure, that they have as much effect there as upon the complexion or hair. The heavy, rich materials which suit a tall figure, look awkward upon a small person, and while all dark colors impart an appearance of slender proportions, light ones will certainly render conspicuous any tendency to corpulence. Full, light drapery should be worn only by those of slender figure, while those who are too short must be content with dark colors, and tightly-fitting garments.