|
Post by Jim Boylston on Apr 16, 2008 4:47:27 GMT -5
From Gary Foreman: Here is an example of Steve Abolt's work which shows the cut of the clothes. This our 30' x 90' image that will be wrapped on an oil tank near the entrance to San Jacinto. Steve made most of the clothing and Bill Hamilton did the photoshop work.
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Apr 16, 2008 5:06:04 GMT -5
|
|
doc
Full Member
Posts: 88
|
Post by doc on Apr 16, 2008 5:17:40 GMT -5
For the record, both Huff and I expressed concerns concerning the cut of the clothing in the 2004 film. We even tried to have Abolt brought in to work on the costumes of the leads.
We were overuled.
SLH
|
|
|
Post by mustanggray on Apr 16, 2008 13:42:41 GMT -5
List,
The central figure in the image posted is Rodney Nance and if I remember correctly his sister or mother made that frock coat for him. Abolt made my vest and trousers and the rust colored tailcoat but I'm not sure about the other frock and I don't believe that's his work on the '25 pattern roundabout.
While I agree with some of the books listed I would caution against the Cisneros book. My main issue with it is the copy I looked at had no footnotes or documentation for where he came up with the styles he illustrated. Some of them are not bad but others are hideous and unless you already have a good understanding of the clothign in question you'd be at a loss as to which is which.
Look at Mount, Bingham and others for contemporary images. While styles in the 40's are similar to those of the 30's the cuts, patterns and to some degree hairstyles are subtly different, so be careful taking too much from daguerreotypes.
We've been discussing this in depth on another board and have had some interesting opinions in regards. Clothing of the period is almost as hot a topic as whether "Davy" went down swinging or whether the New Orleans Greys wore uniforms or civies!!!
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Apr 16, 2008 20:06:00 GMT -5
The styles of everyday wear did not change radically from the 1830's to the 40's. Such things as shirts, hunting shirts, and work shirts almost did not change at all. Also, broadfall trousers, and pantaloons remained. What seems to be true throughout history, is that earlier styles exist on even though newer styles supplant them. This is especially true in the more remote regions, or lower income areas. So it would not at all be unusual to see men in the garrison wearing styles from 1830, or even earlier. To expect that a feature that came out in 1835 or 36, would necessarily instantly appear in the frontier, while technically possible, is unlikely. So when dating clothing in the Alamo, this "carryover" phenomenon should be kept in mind.
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on Apr 16, 2008 21:54:49 GMT -5
I'd have to disagree about clothing changes between the 1830's and the 1840's. A lot had changed between 1840 and 1850. Tailcoats had almost completed the move to formal wear, sack coats had appeared and taken off (or taken over) and trousers were cut quite differently. Coats had some very notable changes in how they were cut.
I can get on board with the fact that changes happen more slowly on the frontier. For reenacting the Texas Revolution period, I cut my clothing using 1820's tailoring manuals. These patterns are not really outdated by 1836, but neither are they trend setting.
I was also slightly disappointed by the clothing in the recent film. I think there really could have been more hunting shirts and maybe a few more caps. I also didn't like the NOG uniforms. They looked like your average Confederate reenactors to me. It looked like they gave Sam (Bowie's slave) a modern coat. It's not even Civil War era, it's 20th Century at the earliest.
As far as the soldado coats are concerned, they were somewhat acceptable, but does no one know how the tails were put together on those things? It's not rocket science. The inverted "V" shape just isn't right.
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Apr 16, 2008 22:17:48 GMT -5
What I was trying to say was that from 1830 to 1840, common every day wear, or rather working class wear, such as working shirts, and trousers,(not to mention hunting shirts, buckskins, and linsey-woolsey overshirts) did not change appreciably. The articles of somewhat "higher" fashion, such as tail coats, or frock coats, and to some degree waistcoats, did exhibit some minor changes. So I stand by my comments that the changes from 1830 to 1840, even among those items which tend to be more subject to stylistic changes, were not radical. As for 1840 to 1850, I did not address that period at all. During that decade, the changes were more noticeable.
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on Apr 16, 2008 23:39:32 GMT -5
I can't argue with that. I'm sorry, I saw "40s" in that post and thought you meant both decades. As far as not a whole lot changing between 1830 and 1840, you are correct.
|
|
|
Post by glforeman on Apr 17, 2008 12:27:10 GMT -5
I like the collection of announcements of other excellent sources for 1830s period clothing. Let's really encourage more exchanges like this. Also, if you have any examples of clothing recently completed I know many of us would like to see them. Just do it! GLF
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 17, 2008 19:51:45 GMT -5
What I was trying to say was that from 1830 to 1840, common every day wear, or rather working class wear, such as working shirts, and trousers,(not to mention hunting shirts, buckskins, and linsey-woolsey overshirts) did not change appreciably. The articles of somewhat "higher" fashion, such as tail coats, or frock coats, and to some degree waistcoats, did exhibit some minor changes. So I stand by my comments that the changes from 1830 to 1840, even among those items which tend to be more subject to stylistic changes, were not radical. As for 1840 to 1850, I did not address that period at all. During that decade, the changes were more noticeable. I agree also. These were the wild and wooley days of the Texas. Many folks just looked for clothing that was tough and adaptable to their harsh work or enviroment. I can't see brush-poppers riding the chaparrals of Texas in pointy shoes and flax pants. They didn't worry as much about looking good back then.
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on Apr 17, 2008 20:07:10 GMT -5
I like the collection of announcements of other excellent sources for 1830s period clothing. Let's really encourage more exchanges like this. Also, if you have any examples of clothing recently completed I know many of us would like to see them. Just do it! GLF I will have some grubby, low-class duds on at San Jacinto next weekend. Maybe I'll get someone to take a picture of the spectacle.
|
|
|
Post by steves on Apr 23, 2008 8:42:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Apr 26, 2008 9:56:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Apr 26, 2008 11:24:50 GMT -5
IMO, Chartrand's book attempts to cover far too much subject matter in too few pages, and thus comes up short.
Haythornwaite's book is dated and of limited usefulness as far as clothing & uniforms. The color plates look like the artist used various Alamo movies as his main reference material; the depiction of Jim Bowie with a beer gut is particularly funny.
I don't have Marshall's book, but recall reading some scathing critiques of it when it first came out.
Safe to say the definitive work on Mexican uniforms of the 1835-36 campaign is yet to be published.
If you're gonna get one of the four listed books, get Stuart's; it delivers the goods.
|
|
|
Post by billchemerka on Apr 26, 2008 11:54:10 GMT -5
Bruce Marshall's Uniforms of the Texas Revolution and the Men who Wore Them, 1835-1836 was reviewed in the Sept. 2003 (Issue #130) of The Alamo Journal. The book provides a basic overview of the Texas Revolution and features 21 color plates.
The review noted a number of errors in the text and pointed out a few mistakes in some of the illustrations.
|
|