Good Wear RW vs Original

[Anonymous]

the fact that the original 27752 has off centered pockets, something like what Dubow would do, I am beginning to lose faith in this "accurate" reproduction concept, since if the original RW doesn't even comply with what we say they do, it seems anything goes, in other words, maybe the lost worlds Dubow is actually an accurate repro of a certain peculiar Dubow in the past?

I own a RW with perfectly centered pockets.

 

[kiltie]

I've read every word, and it seems a bit of a stretch to say your repro MUST be a copy of some orig. RW. Seen quite a few RW 27752's
plenty around, non close to that. That being said your jacket is beautiful

Thanks!

The pockets on the Good Wear are 6 1/2" x 5 3/4", give or take an eighth or sixteenth for either dimension. The pockets of Bill Kelso Mfg's Rough Wear 27752 are very near the same dimensions. Assuming that BK and GW were working from different jackets, I'd say that's the fair beginnings of a random sampling. Anyone have Eastman pockets they'd like to add to the list?
Crescent collar, tapered epaulettes, squarish body... BK did appear to interpret a leaner jacket.
Coupling that with what's been discussed - my poor photography skills, angles... the disparity in shell sizes vs consistent pocket sizes... and so on ( my main point was to showcase a lighter color )...
If you say it's not a copy, then you're calling out the maker; calling them, in essence, a liar. And that's fine, really. I'm not prepared to make that assertion. It simply seems more likely that Good Wear copied a jacket of this contract ( or elements from more than one jacket - an average ), rather than basing the company around a lie. Anyway, I'm under the impression it's supposed to be representative of the contract...? I mean, surely John Chapman didn't own and tear down a 27752 in every size from 36 to 48. I think this is probably what a 48 in this contract looked like.
But none of that really matters at the end of the day: I'm just doing some lunchtime internetting here. I think what I think, you think what you think ( and I, again, appreciate the compliment )... These jackets are more about the idea of what they represent to me, rather than the stitch for stitch business. It just happens that the stitch for stitch thing - if you believe it - is an added bonus. I'll probably keep arguing or whatever, since I guess that's what the internet is for...
Incidentally, I don't think I've ever seen a Rough Wear in person. My experience with originals is limited to the WWII museum in NOLA and the Pacific War Museum up the road, along with internet pics and discussion. Based on that, I'll express my doubt or say, "Hey, this is what I see..." But I'm not, for the most part, in any position to make any kind of positive claim ( only to maybe act like it sometimes - winky smiley emoticon here ).

 

[Roughwear]

John has used several original RW 27752s on which he bases his reproductions. This one, which is now in my collection, was used by him as a pattern a couple of year ago.

Rough Wear W535ac27752 (1942) size 44

 

[Dr H]

Jason's marvellous Perry Sportswear 16175-P has mismatched pockets, but this idiosyncratic feature isn't representative of that contract.
More likely this Roughwear is an oddity with an error on the pockets (as I said, a 'Friday afternoon' jacket made with more of an eye on the weekend and less in QC).

 

[kiltie]

John has used several original RW 27752s on which he bases his reproductions. This one, which is now in my collection, was used by him as a pattern a couple of year ago. ....{ PICS }

Holy Smokes, that's nice!

 

[Clyde from Carolina]

John has used several original RW 27752s on which he bases his reproductions. This one, which is now in my collection, was used by him as a pattern a couple of year ago. ....{ PICS }

Holy Smokes, that's nice!

Yep, that one is extra nice.

 

[TOMG1401]

Kiltie by your logic you would make every repo maker a liar !! Taking us back 12 yrs ago to the beginning. Once a maker repro's a specific contract all they can hope for is a resembance or interpratation. As discussed by someone 10 or 12 years ago a true repro would be following the original A.A.C. specs to the letter, like a ELC house jacket or G&B for instance, once the words "clone" "1942 in a box" " indistinguishable from an original" etc. have been used your opening Pandora's Box, but this point of view has been beaten to death.

 

[Anonymous]

BK has used an original RW 27752 purchased from our very own Silver Surfer.
I will try to show photos later.

 

[kiltie]

Kiltie by your logic you would make every repo maker a liar !! Taking us back 12 yrs ago to the beginning. Once a maker repro's a specific contract all they can hope for is a resembance or interpratation. As discussed by someone 10 or 12 years ago a true repro would be following the original A.A.C. specs to the letter, like a ELC house jacket or G&B for instance, once the words "clone" "1942 in a box" " indistinguishable from an original" etc. have been used your opening Pandora's Box, but this point of view has been beaten to death.

I Think I understand what you're saying in the first sentence, but I think, too, that both of our points are being lost to absolutes. So never mind that. The second point is the more interesting to me, anyway. At the very least, it's an economically healthy way of looking at the repro market - ha!
I can get behind the sense of what you're saying, though, without losing an appreciation for the way the top end guys have set to copying patterns ( or - to meet you half way - Interpreting patterns ).

PLATON - pictures of that jacket would be fantastic!

 

[TOMG1401]

You've got it. When reproducing a specific contract which may have had a run of 50,000 jackets, the repro company may have one jacket to use as a template, does that one jacket represent the majority or is it one of a few anomalies? What does the repro maker do, copy exactly the jacket he has on hand or try to incorporate the general consistencies of the entire original contract? No, if it is going to be a true reproduction he has to copy the jacket has as a template stitch for stitch otherwise its just an Homage to the original