Scottish Wildcat Tartan: first look

[Rod Roy]

What a beautiful tartan!
I"m very impressed. Where can I buy it?

Cheers Rod

[Alan H]

Rod, contact Paul Henry, Kiltmakers.

[Rod Roy]

Thank you, Alan!!!

[The Wizard of BC]

Alan,
Am I correct in looking at the two photos in post 10 that this fabric, as woven, is more then a full inch out of square warpwise vs weftwise?

What does the selvedge look like?

[Jock Scot]

Alan,
Am I correct in looking at the two photos in post 10 that this fabric, as woven, is more then a full inch out of square warpwise vs weftwise?

Will that "missing inch" cause a kilt maker much of a a problem Steve?

[Benning Boy]

Is this a case of Dalgliesh strikes again?

[Alan H]

I haven't seen the tartan yet, though it's been delivered to Barb and Trudy (here in California). Paul and Barb are discussing the selvedge on FB even as I write this. Yes, it appears that there's a difference between the warp and weft dimensions, but all I have to go on is Pauls photograph.

[The Wizard of BC]

Jock, and Alan, I really doubt that this difference will have any effect at all on the kilts made from this fabric.

But the thing that jumped out at me was that someone, I assume Paul Henry, noticed that the fabric was not the same warpwise vs weftwise and was concerned enough about it that they took out a tape measure and took photos to document it.

I think this may be a case of a kiltmaker looking at fabric differently than a kilt wearer.

A difference of 2.2cm or 1" is very noticeable to a kiltmaker. Things like this just jump right out at us when we lay out fabric to make a kilt.
Notice that the photos in post 10 are showing just one Sett. Now imagine having the fabric with its full width of 7 or 8 Setts laid out on a table in front of you. That would now be a difference of 7" to 8". And that is very noticeable to a person used to looking at Tartan fabric.

But, as most kilts are 22"-26" long from top to hem I doubt that most people will even be able to see the difference.

Here is a graphic example of what I'm trying to say.

Take a look at this photo. The rulers are laid out with the same measurements as those in post 10. Can you see that this is not a square?
I purposely took the photo at a slight angle as "out of square" is sometimes easier to see canted.



Most people would not be able to see that there is a 1" difference.

Now, here is a photo of a Tartan with a similar Sett size. It is one of my own designs woven by a different weaver.



The difference in the Wildcat Tartan is 2.2cm or slightly less than 1".
The difference in the Victoria, COG Tartan is .2cm or slightly more than 1/16".

But here is where a kiltmaker's eye makes the difference.

I have now laid the rulers out on a square Tartan with the measurements from post 10.



I think everyone will be able to see that the difference jumps right out at you.

[Jock Scot]

Thank you Steve, I think your points are made clearly and demonstrate that an expert eye sees a lot more than a mere mortals. I suppose as mere mortals we----me!--- would probably not notice, particularly with the tartan in kilt form.

Just to be clear, I have nothing to with the arrangements of this enterprise, I have chipped in with a couple of colouring suggestions, I do take a keen interest in progress as a bystander and I do wish the enterprise well. That is all.

[Alan H]

Nice illustration, Steve! But still and all, what I mostly love about the illustration are the weights, 'cause I know what they are.