FC IoS Pics

**Barb T** · 31st January 08, 12:28 PM

I'm curious - what is that odd line of machine stitching all the way around the kilt a couple inches below the top? Or am I seeing things??

**ChromeScholar** · 31st January 08, 12:32 PM

That looks a lot better. If that is what it looks like in real life, I might be tempted into buying one.

**Larry124** · 1st February 08, 08:07 AM

Barb,
Sorry I don’t see it.
Do you mean the vertical stitching in from the fringe?
Below is the interior of the waistband and front apron at the straps.

**M. A. C. Newsome** · 1st February 08, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by Barb T.

I'm curious - what is that odd line of machine stitching all the way around the kilt a couple inches below the top? Or am I seeing things??

Barb,

This is actually a common feature I've noticed on a lot of Acrylic kilts I've seen in person. Judging from Larry's recent picture, it seems to be where the inside of the waistband has been extended as a sort of lining, and sewn in at the bottom. What you are seeing is the other side of the machine stiting along the bottom of the waistband showing through to the front of the kilt.

**pipesndrumsnun** · 1st February 08, 06:02 PM

Just wondering, but has anybody else's new kilt (no matter how much or little the price) ever gotten so many rude comments? A number of replies to this thread have just been MEAN in my opinion.

Congrats on the new kilt, Larry...wear it well!!

**ccga3359** · 1st February 08, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by pipesndrumsnun

Just wondering, but has anybody else's new kilt (no matter how much or little the price) ever gotten so many rude comments? A number of replies to this thread have just been MEAN in my opinion.

Congrats on the new kilt, Larry...wear it well!!

I'm sorry but might I say that the IoS brings out the passion in people because it is such a beautiful muted colouring. Perhaps the reaction is akin as seeing a work of art defaced. Yes, Larry's scan does do this FC kilt more justice, more acceptable. I've seen pictures of my beloved Maple Leaf that make me cringe, it sure stirred up reactions in me. Larry has been open with this kilt and has offered it up for others to form their own opinions for themselves. Yet, in spite of what others have said, he will still wear this with pride and so he should. I don't think what others have said is particularly rude, it's general discussion. Some will go ahead with a purchase of this tartan from FC, others will not. And this because of this thread.

Thank you Larry and congratulations on your purchase.

**M. A. C. Newsome** · 1st February 08, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by pipesndrumsnun

Just wondering, but has anybody else's new kilt (no matter how much or little the price) ever gotten so many rude comments? A number of replies to this thread have just been MEAN in my opinion.

Congrats on the new kilt, Larry...wear it well!!

Sorry if any of the replies on this thread have sounded "mean," but the crux of the matter is that the Isle of Skye tartan has been a very successful one because someone took great care in designing it, and has liscenced it to a specific company who spent a lot of time, money, and effort in promoting it.

Now another company has shamelessly taken that same design and had it cheaply reproduced in a different country where UK design registration laws would be difficult to enforce and -- in the opinion of many on the board it seems -- not even done the colors justice in so doing.

It's an injustice, not least of which to those who have so much invested in the design, development, and promotion of this tartan. If people have adverse reactions to this, I'm not surprised.

**Kilted Stuart** · 1st February 08, 09:11 PM

I second that M.A.C Newsome.

I can't endorse a un-registered tartan that is not of the fine standard the IOS was intended to be in color. It just does not represent the colors that people painstakingly produced and perfected. Minor alterations to the sett size aside the colors should be basically the same or it's not really the same tartan.

I don't like the acrylic kilts but that's just me.
I have still yet to see a pic that proves that this kilt is not neon.

I'll save my $50.00 to buy better quality any day.

Kilted Stuart

**Larry124** · 1st February 08, 10:59 PM

Thank you Sister. Points for Charity.

Folks are just having fun I guess. “Rough and tumble” or unsportsmanlike conduct take your pick.

There may not be Kilt Police but there apparently are Tartan Police. Indeed Tartan Judges. Preachers too. But then maybe we all are to a degree. Formus are for sharing opinions after all. There is a lot of leeway here and I think that in general that is a good thing.

Fortunately caring too much about what others may say is not (could not be) an attribute of kilt wearers.

The tartan does in fact photograph badly. It does not look that bad live, but my guess is that it does also not look as good as wool kilt. I say guess because I do not own both. I sometimes wonder who does.

To my eyes the photos elsewhere on this forum of the WOOL IoS are not consistent and may also not be true to the look of the real thing. The frequent advice about fabric swatches is good advice.

I started this as a new thread to separate the pics from the other thread about the legal/ethical issues.
If I were FC I would not offer any explanation to any concern phrased as an accusation or a demand.

We enjoy our kilts. And enjoy fussing a bit too.

**M. A. C. Newsome** · 2nd February 08, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by Kilted Stuart

IMinor alterations to the sett size aside the colors should be basically the same or it's not really the same tartan.

Just as a point of clarification, the above is not exactly true. There has never been any kind of attempt in the tartan industry to regulate specific color shades. Nor could there be, with the dye lots differing from mill to mill, and even within the same mill over time. Imagine in the pre-industrial era when yarns were all dyed in (relatively) small batches by local crofters.

What is important is the color in general, not the specific hue. Thus you can have the MacGregor tartan, which is basically red and green (with a white & black stripe), but what shade of red or green is not prescribed. This is how you can get variations such as modern, ancient, muted, or weathered MacGregor -- all are the same MacGregor tartan just produced in different color schemes. And even the same "color scheme" (such as modern MacGregor) will likely have slightly different shades of red depending on whether it was produced by Lochcarron, or House of Edgar, or Marton Mills, or Strathmore, or your great-aunt Betty on her hobby handloom.

On the other hand, if you changed the red in the MacGregor tartan to blue, you'd have a different tartan entirely.

So, in the present case of the Isle of Skye tartan, it obviously has a different look in acrylic than in wool. But this is characteristic of all the acrylic kilts I've seen produced in Pakistan. The colors tend to be rather more vivid than the same tartan produced in Scottish wool. That may or may not be your cup of tea. My issue is not with the colors, but with the copyright violation, which would still be an issue even if the colors in acrylic were a dead ringer for the woolen tones.