Top ten -- Patternmaking software

Here is a link to an article which lists the top ten patternmaking software packages, and provides a bit of information about how each works. Includes knitting and crochet patternmaking software.

http://www.toptenreviews.com/software/home/best-pattern-making-software/

This helps us identify and discuss the differences between Valentina and other software. If anyone has comments about these packages, and how they differ from Valentina, please post in this thread!

I 100% will not read this article. Why? Because i don’t want repeat others. I know what i need. And if it is not enough users will tell me what they need.

I agree, although Susan initiative is interesting. I think the approach used for Valentina is best. Do not copy and invent a product that meets real needs. It also seems to me that other programs are there to sell pre-cooked.

Just don’t give me wrong. I am not trying reinvent wheel just because someone before me found out solution. No What i am trying to do is to protect myself from just copying without thinking. It’s some kind of self isolation. I don’t feel lack of ideas. Instead right now i have more ideas than i can implement. All other that i don’t know i want to hear from community as a filter.

I understood it that way;-)

Yes I understand your point of view. You don’t need to copy other software.

I on the other hand, need to understand the differences between Valentina and other software. It is part of my job to field questions that users have, especially if they have been using one software package and have a pain point with it, and are looking to Valentina to solve a particular problem. It helps me empathize with their position and describe if we can help them or not.

So this information helps me, it might not help others.

My background is design & development, software and product, at this stage I think the Valentina product is sufficiently different, and innovative, to say that I have confidence that the originator of the software has the right stuff to plow on in their chosen direction as they have been doing.

It’s very important to make sure that you don’t listen to the market too early, I have built enough products in the past and run many startups to say - trust in your individuality and ability to react quickly. Stay nimble and away from mainstream thinking - as it can be very homogenized. The goal is not to fit in with commercialization within the status quo, it’s to shift the thinking to blue waters of deeper potential. If you can walk away from a product development and say - you changed a sector, then you have done well. I see no reason why the Valentina project would not be able to achieve this in the short-term, and be very proud in doing so. It appears to be on track technically.

The Valentina product has enough commercial connectivity and relevance to not get too hung up on what others are doing. Some of the things I like about the Valentina project:

It is born from a real world experience and works to solve a problem - the backstory is delightful. The timing is perfect given that fashion CAD and parametric patterns have been stuck in old world thinking for decades - it’s a refreshing break from ‘others’. Keeping the sizing language central to the parametric tools hints at how CGI and digital avatar use will readily plug into this platform over other CAD packages that carry historic 2D baggage, I see this as potentially game changing. It’s open and the barrier to entry is minimal for those interested groups with a mix of disciplines, ranging from design to drafting to programming to CNC. The potential for 3D outputs tied to 2D is very real, as algorithms might also be tied to mesh objects and world of 3D garment creation. That the thinking is not tied too tightly into historic CAD workflows, and that the current workflow is uniquely building out their own space / beachhead - making ownership of that space, potentially a better investment longer term, certainly more exciting when combined with the potential for direct digital print onto fabrics and real-time garment customization.

:no_mouth:

1 Like

Hey @245oldsalty,

Thanks for the great review of Valentina!

Posting this article was to help everyone understand how Valentina is different, and BETTER, than the others. There is no intention to make Valentina like any other software, ever!

I read one book Steal Like an Artist and change my mind. :slight_smile:

I have gone through the list before and it is like comparing apples, oranges and peaches. Quite useless

One of the biggest difference of Valentina to the others is the freedom.

Most of the other programs give you something ready made and you need to find a way to tweak it to fit in your own needs.

Valentina gives plain canvas and freedom to do what you want. And you can do a lot. This is also the challenge for newbies, because you need to know quite a bit to create something useful.

2 Likes

I never tried to create Valentina for newbies. But if you know patternmaking it should be easy. And if it’s not this is our task to make it better in this case.

Yes, I know and that is reason why I like Valentina.

Ehhhhhhh. From reading your answers here it is obvious that your motives are selfish and most of you lack real world production experience. The reason most patternCAD suites look like they do is because it works. Sure, your ideas might be innovative and I like the tabula rasa approach, which go hand in hand with my method of designing functional garments out of a context. But to be efficiently used in a production environment (rather in a few happy home makers attic studio) Valentina needs to step up it’s game. I’m trying to add things I’d like to change but so far no luck. The obvious problem for a project like this is finding developers with trade experience.

Just one thing, make the default background colour black. Staring into vast fields of white for a day of work is excruciating for the eyes.

I like that you are straightforward. Most people never say me this. Probably you are right about all, but this mean nothing for me.

Look, you are definitely speak like guy from common patternCAD suites world. I heard this many times. And for such people i say only this “Go to your world, this project is not for you”. All you think based on your experience. This is good. But you can’t build plane if all you know is how to build a boat.

Same environment doesn’t mean only one approach to be able to leave there. See what nature is saying about this.

Funny, i don’t see nothing innovating in my way. Aged way that all ignore. Why, i have some thoughts, but of course who am i to have my opinion?

Is this all you see? It’s really sad. Because we are building tool that allow users make patterns from a scratch. The same approach as many other tools: LibreOffice, programming language and so on. But this doesn’t mean you can’t use templates, tweak patterns. Pattern base blocks database is matter of time.

?

I wish you luck.

I wouldn’t worry about this. We have such a person.:wink:

Again ehhh. As I’ve said I am a trained tailors cutter. If you think you will in some way get a better fit from using drafts from outdated book you are wrong on so many levels it’s sad. For a good fit (i.e. better than from trade sizes) measurements are an infinitesemal part. Using a draft gives you nothing more than a proportional draft. And the proportions suggested in a draft are reflection of the authours idea of fit that might have given him/her a decent ball park block at the time. Proportions of the ideal body have changed over the decades, so has culture. The whole concept of bespoke drafting cutting and fitting is based on experience. Most cutters go thru coatmaker apprenticeship and after a few years working as a coat maker you can do cutting apprenticeship, and that takes a few years. I’ve done it. Just putting measurements into a draft gets you nothing closer to a good fit. The only thing you are going to get are users who are dissapointed. And measurements aren’t that intresting. Think of a guy with a 44 inch chest. He might have a normal chest, he might have a huge chest and small back, he might have a big hunch back and no chest. Just a simple example. The idea of using tried old method would have been sound if you actually knew them. But you don’t. It’s pretty naive to reduce a craft that years of learning, cultivating an eye for posture, figure etc.

What should be easily done in a cadprogram should be *digitising (for most people it’s easier to learn to draft a good run of a seam with chalk or pencil) *grading *marker making

  • a good way to organise a data base of patterns

Maybe you should go and find you program some where or you can fork Valentina and make all your dreams come true. The world is open.

2 Likes

In the Internet you can be whatever you want.:slight_smile: I don’t care who you are. You have your opinions, i have my. Nothing will change here. So give up trying to prove something here. It pointless.

I think people should be able to use formulas, not just draw lines. Here is what all of this about. You did not understand what this project about.

What? Ideal body? All know that no such thing as idea body.

Speaking like a real CAD guy. :slight_smile: I will repeat myself. This project is not for you.

You can stay with most people where you are, i’ll go to place where i want to be. This is not a game, people should know patternmaking to be able make patterns. I don’t think that CAD system you like so much made for all judging by price they want. A lot people stay in 19th century, because people like you. They draw on paper or on screen with vector editors.

You mean dead drawings?

Ahhh. Look buddy, you fucking retard. You are the reason the open source community will never reach beyond the realm of the neck beards. You have no fucking clue about drafting or cutting or fitting. I tried to help this project somehow. But alas mr fucking know-nothing thinks he can make a revolution in the fashion world with an idiotic approach and with the stubborness of a 4 year old you refuse to learn something. Good luck with your formulas pal. Good fitting is in a fucking formula, yeah right.

You know what, I’ll fucking gladly pay up for prop. software instead of fucking about with this shit. If there’s anybody else in the development team who has any sense you are welcome to discuss. For now I will leave this shit as it is.

I love you man, you are super.:slight_smile:

Look buddy, you fucking retard. with the stubborness of a 4 year old

I see the same in you. I told you to leave kindly and you are still here trying to prove something.

:smiley:

People that really help do something useful.

You so afraid of this? Don’t worry it will not kill you. I am promise.

I don’t get it. Do you still want eat “this shit” or not?

Please, do us a favor. Buy.

[quote=“Stindue, post:10, topic:495”] I have gone through the list before and it is like comparing apples, oranges and peaches. Quite useless [/quote]. Agreed. The list helps to understand this very point.

People ask questions about Valentina with the assumption that their current system or their software is based on some “best practice” or “standard industry” way of doing things. This assumption makes it difficult to answer their questions, because it requires first conveying the information that there are many methods of patternmaking and that the method you use is determined by the measurement set you use, and that each patternmaking software has been built to implement a distinct way of patternmaking (resulting in apples v. oranges), then afterwards the information about Valentina makes more sense.