<small id="4o8tm"><delect id="4o8tm"><font id="4o8tm"></font></delect></small>

      <small id="4o8tm"><delect id="4o8tm"></delect></small>

        1. Possibilities [NFCO]

          Entroducing the NFCO. Although this bag is certainly a vehicle to freedom, we shall refer to it as simply the NFCO – this change of names was a natural process not dictated by any one person, but rather one bag, or, one set of materials – together. The NFCO was a rapid response to the skunk with minor changes made to the pattern, and some simplification of constructive tactics. The only item which was made more complicated was the interior pocket. None of these alterations to the skunk‘s pattern into the NFCO’s pattern are obvious, but, if you have thoroughly read the script on the skunk then maybe you will pick up on where and why the NFCO is a little different (outside of any outstanding aesthetic changes, i.e. the label on the bottom).

          What immediately stood out as a “flaw” on the skunk was that the flap was just so-ever-barely-almost-non-existently too short. To be more precise; in our judgement, the flap on the skunk was one inch too short – a very minor amount – which may or may not be a problem. Either way this spearheaded the idea to follow up with another basic black bag, tweak a few things, and see how the next generation would do. As has been mentioned in the skunk‘s post, it’s final dimensions are 17″ wideX13″ tallX9″ deep with the flap hanging over 12″ over the front panel. Considering that the front panel was 13″ tall, it was a strange thing to re-design the flap (making it slightly shorter), in the case of the NFCO the flaps length matches the height of the front panel (13″). So this is one of the changes to the pattern. The next alteration was to add depth to the base: because we knew that the interior pocket would be quite substantial, the depth of the bag would need a bit extra room to be as functional as desired, typically, once you have stuffed the interior pocket, it expands into the main cargo area. This is something to think about with bags that have the billow pockets on the outside, obviously if the pocket are on the outside and can actually billow outwards, then your interior cargo space will never deceivingly be consumed. So, the depth of the bag was increased from 9″ to 9.5″ – while this may sound insignificant it is not. Two re-patterns were made, one with an increase to 9.5″ and one with an increase to 10″, the one that ended up with 10″ was more depth than desired and made the footprint a bit to square for the bags intended use (although one may argue that the extra room could never be a detriment) if/when keeping the base 17″ wide. Needless to say, the extra 1/4″ on both sides was just enough to make up for the extra interior pocketing, and added about 110 of cubic inches capacity, which is very telling. Now because of the extra depth in the pattern, the ration of the wrap around from the back and front panels had to be adjusted. This was also a slight under-sight of the skunk, on the NFCO one of the destined re-designs was to create more coverage side-to-side by the flap. With the skunk‘s pattern allowing for 6″ from the front panel, and 3″ from the rear, the new NFCO pattern would take that extra half inch and parlay it into the back panel’s wrap, making the flap slightly wider in relation to the front panel (about 1″ overall, because there has been an additional half inch on each side, right) than in the case of the skunk. The last re-tailoring of the pattern was to increase the seam allowance; on the skunk this was 1/4″, which was adequate allowance for the seams in technical terms, but was an 1/8″ shy of what the seams actually were. As in, the seams were all made with a specific type of bias tape, which creates a 3/8″ seam, thus it should have been designed with a 3/8″ seam allowance. What this means is that the skunk is slightly smaller than it was intended to be, actually a 1/4″ less in depth, and width (because it was supposed to have 1/4″ seams, but the bias tape ate up an additional 1/8″). If this is making sense, then it should be obvious that with the seam allowance on the NFCO being 3/8″, not only kept the bag to the intended outer dimensions, but from the skunk it was a virtual gain of 3/4″ in the measurement of the depth, and and a 1/2″ of gain in the width (in terms of the width, this is with no re-design of the pattern, but simply allotting for the proper seam allowance). Maybe this is getting tedious, and boring, but it was a small achievement that made a tremendous difference. To re-cap, the NFCO pattern was altered in the following ways (contrasting from the skunk pattern): seam allowance was adjusted from 1/4″ to 3/8″, the depth of the bag was increased from 9″ to 9.5″ – thus the flap is a little wider (more coverage) as a result from the excess material to become the sides of the bag, and lastly the flap’s length (hangover) was increased by one inch, making it 13″ long to match the front panel height*.

          On the other side of things, a few aesthetic/hardware choices were altered too**. These of course are more visibly obvious. One small adjustment was in the use of Velcro along the front panel: on the skunk there were four strips of 1.5″ Velcro that were placed along this span to equally divide themselves across the front (the only exception was that the two outer strips were slightly shorter to follow the contour of the flap. However, on the NFCO, there are effectively only 3 strips of the 1.5″ Velcro, with two smaller 1″ Velcro strips just outside of the main three. These two smaller strips do two things, one – they add a little extra harnessing power (duh), and two – they serve an aesthetic function which serves a sewing function (form actually meets function here). What we mean is that, the Velcro has a lot to do with the stow-away place for the flap straps. Let’s go back for another moment: on the skunk two female side of side-release buckles were stitched in along the top seam of the front panel to keep the straps for the flap tucked away when not in use. Although, there is a major flaw with this feature – it wastes 50% of in-stock side-release buckles (i.e. when all is said and done at the end of the day, you are left with a hole bunch of [mostly] useless side-release buckles, all of which are missing their very necessary other half). With the NFCO, this was not an option (those buckles are too expensive to waste like that). What was devised is quite simple, sew in a small section of webbing to string the buckle from the straps (for the fastening the flap) through – with the remainder of the actual webbing from the strap also through, the half-buckles will never slip through unless aided by hand. So, the two outer strips of 1″ Velcro act as a place to tuck one end of the webbing under, the other end of this webbing being tucked under the 1.5″ Velcro. This little piece of webbing (which is parallel to the top seam of the front panel and has the top-edge of the webbing piece about 2″ down from the top-edge of the front panel) could be sewn on freely too of course, but this use of the Velcro as housing for the two ends just landed in our laps and provided a clean look. Another difference, would be the interior pocket. This was taken very seriously and in the end probably overbuilt – the reason for this being that because the interior pocket was constructed from 200 denier coated Oxford nylon, the pocket system called out to be lined. The lining of course was to protect the coated side of the nylon, which in some cases, after years of use, can begin to break down and peel away. Instead of lining the pocket (and individual pocket sections) with a lightweight nylon or other similar material, a somewhat more unique fabric was chosen. Of course, with all the Dow Weathermate lying around, it would have been economical to go that route, but Dow Weathermate tends to add bulk, and with the interior pocket being so complicated and cavernous, it was clear that keeping the bulk down would be best. So, what is the next best thing for lightweight, thinness, and economy? Obviously Dow Weathermates competitor – Tyvek. Tyvek would be very light, very thin, and perfectly suited for such a task. As construction began on the interior pocket it kept growing and taking on more and more little pocket, a zipper, and multiple Velcro lashing points. The end result was a very segmented and boisterous pocket, their sizes ranging from large enough to hold 11″X17″ flat files, to a specific pocket for a spare tube, and a specific pocket for a mini-pump. Needless to say, it’s an extensive interior pocket, one that is possibly attempting too much at once. But because the NFCO is sans exterior pockets (proper) it made sense to be able to compartmentalize your belongings in as many configurations as you want. Going on, the NFCO shares the same mid-pocket that the skunk has, which is a main player in this “simple” system: it has proven to be quite useful, and especially suited for quick cramming of U-Locks. After that, the last addition, is more of an aesthetic addition. Entroducing the NFCO reflective stamp. This is simply reflective material positioned in the Luggage typeface, it provides visibility at night and is meant to be somewhere between a word and an acronym, it means Needlefeed & Company. The following images, illustrate NFCO’s inception.

          Wrap up. The NFCO is an all around classic bag, no real frills – just a sensible design. The main strap (of course this bag has no “cross” strap as those are not needed) uses the trusty Nexus ITW Eccentric cam buckle, and the dive belt webbing protruding through the buckle is free to flap in the wind (the end of which was just barely tacked back to keep it from slipping unexpectedly through the cam buckle in the opposite direction that one would desire). This system is not only tried and true, but, on the first ride out – very comfortable. Perhaps this comfort comes from the carefully planned size, perhaps not. We’ll never know. Either way – two thumbs up for the NFCO: a basic black, organized bag, suited to the user looking for a vehicle to freedom.

          *Extending the dialogue around the flap, drawing from notes well after the bag was built and well after this post was originally “published” – it seems that there is still trouble with the width-ratio. While this was partly addressed in the post for the skunk, it should be restated here too. The width of the flap is tricky to designate, On the NFCO it is slightly too wide. Not too wide for the bag, but too wide to fit between the sewn anchor-points of the main strap. So while keeping in mind that the aspects of the bag’s overall width determine the width of the bag’s flap, it can only do so with consideration of the distance between the sewn anchor-points of the main strap. If it were chosen to be wider to completely cover the front of the bag, it is going to bunch up between the main straps anchors (which create a barrier the flap will not be able to move past). Perhaps the easiest way to think of this, is, the flap will only sit flat against the front of the bag if it is comfortably more narrow than the distance “X” between the sewn edges of the main strap (which face the front of the bag), of course the flap can be any width, but if you want it to sit flat…

          **Something that remained the same between this bag and the skunk, which was only slightly mentioned in the skunk‘s posting is that it was made with a 1000 denier Cordura exterior and 18 ounce vinyl coated polyester lining. The strength to weight ratio of the 1000 denier was exactly the right fit: even considering that the bottom boot would not be used – this bag was not intended to be overly heavy. The 18 ounce VCP lining was a perfect fit too, although if there ever becomes a 16 ounce VCP, that may be an alteration for the future – this would keep the exterior and interior more closely matched (which is probably only a philosophical thought about cohesion and the bag being more of a singular unit than an amalgamation of materials – although amalgamations of materials is exactly what makes this crazy world interesting)


          Coming after but preceding the messenger bag made of Dow Weathermate. This is the initial over-the-shoulder bag. As you can see the material is a PVC coated nylon which has been printed over with Chicago’s WestTown banner icon. The banner itself was approximately 30″x56″ so it had just enough dimension to make a good size bag out of and even use the left-overs for an outside pocket to span the front. What you cannot see is that this bag was made out of completely scavenged materials aside from the bias tape and thread. the inside liner is made out white tarping, which came as packaging for a bed mattress. The Velcro, black-webbing, and black-plastic buckles were extracted from an existing Timbuk2 bag*. And the strap is a seat-belt which has quick-release-like snapping hooks on each far end of the 2″ webbing, it is almost exactly like what you would see in a commercial aircraft.

          The design for this one was simple, the only objectives were to create something with a couple of outside pockets, primarily thinking about a U-Lock pocket for quick and easy access. Another feature would be a bit of extra durability from the “boot” on the bottom. In this case the “boot” is just the outside pocket extended to the bottom of the bag and then all the way around and up the back (only climbing the back of the bag by about 2.5″). The outside pockets have been tacked at the base of the front so that your various tools or what have you do not slip under the base and become hard to reach (the middle pocket is sewn slightly deeper to go under the “V” cut, which is not visible in these picture. The “V” cut resulted from having to reinforce the banner where a small half moon was cut into it so that wind not blow it around quite as much. Lastly, some of the stitching is less than ideal in terms of aesthetics, this was made pre-presser-foot alterations, and that combined with the unpredictability of how slippery these two materials were ended with some unsightly seams. All in all – it was a good bag, with very large capacity, plenty of ways to separate cargo and resistant to weather as well as you could hope for an old banner and some scavenged tarping material.

          *Unfortunately, that is all they are good for these days – cutting up. Since the production has moved away from the companies home in SanFrancisco, the materials and certain aspects of the craftsmanship have gone below sub-par, by increasing quality control, some quality has been lost, but most significantly, their respect and heart has been lost. Now it would appear that all that is left for the positive is consistency.

          Possibilities [the skunk]

          This project started out as an investigation of classic-ly styled/designed/formed/functioned messenger bags, and the possibility of mixing some of those elder functionalities with newer ones. We wanted to complete a bag which was no frills* – without it being simply a bucket made of nylon and VCP. It started as one bag, and now is already on the dawn of the second. With that in mind, the first bag is truly the skunk, totally blacked out and incognito, with a bit of striping. It’s completely versed in riding and carrying, it’s features are plentiful, yet not over-bearing (it most closely resembles the second image above). The extra time taken to fully examine the pattern certainly paid off. When the second is done, we can only hope that it will be as successful as the first, which maybe will prompt a third, and a fourth, and so on, and so on. Keep your eyes peeled as these bags germinate this post and find themselves out and about, lurking stealth-like under the radar.

          The skunk‘s pattern was carefully executed to resolve more than a few issues – all of which are interconnected and rotating around the classic bag dilema – what it’s final dimensions will be. Actually, on second tought, the dimensions of the bag are really unimportant, what is important is knowing how to achieve them. The skunk was decided to be a mid to large capacity bag, in relation to baggage and baggage2.0 it would be a little smaller overall (shorter in height, a little less wide, and a little deeper at the base**). The skunk‘s final dimensions would be 17″wideX13″tallX9″deep – with the flap hanging 12″ over the front. With these dimensions in mind the pattern could be formed. This is where some time with sewing comes into play, creating the pattern is simple, but without tacit knowing around the topic of sewing you will undoubtedly end up with a bag that does not match your intended dimensions. To achieve the proper results – you must start at it’s center (at least for a raw pattern, starting from scratch). With that in mind the first geometry to draw is the base of the bag, in this case a 17″X9″ rectangle (bear in mind that the second generation of this Possibilities duo will have slightly different dimensions, which will be addressed later – how and why). This 17″X9″ rectangle is the base of the bag, or the footprint, which will determine many of the other measurements. We know that we want the height of the bag to be 13″ so on one side of the 17″X9″ rectangle, it’s center is located and then perpendicular to that, a line is drawn which is 13″, that measurment constitutes the top of the front panel of the bag(at it’s center). However we still do not know the width of the front panel, which is the first dimension to be based on the 17″X9″ rectangle. Before these notes are tapped/typed into place, it is important to address that this (these) bag(s) are asymmetrically built, the sides do not get stitched into place at the center of the base (as done on the backpacks). Instead the bags are built so that the front panel is a little wider than the rear (which is also the flap / becomes the flap) – this is a classic messenger bag rule, what you end up with is about 2/3 of the side of the bag being from the front panel and about a 1/3 of the side of the bag being from the back panel.

          This asymmetry does a couple things: it keeps the flap from being unbearably wide, moves the placement of the shoulder strap ahead of the side seam, which keeps the pressure off of that stitching because the forces/pull and weight of the bag is mostly being supported by the front panel, and also – because the front panel constitutes more surface area – it provides adequate room for other materials/hardware on the bag such as Velcro and buckles, pockets, etc (these would not be as effecient or necessary on the back of the bag – as it rests on your back of course). So, asymmetry of the bag leads into the width of the front panel, which also leads into seam allowance for the entire bag. Starting with seam allowance: this is how much extra material you need to cut with your pattern to have the end result match your desired measurements – taking the time to think about it, consider that when you stitch a seam, you lose however much material is on the edge-side (exposed edge) of that material – thus, if you design a pocket to be 5″ wide, you should cut the material about 5.5″ – 6″ wide, so that when you stitch up the sides (the stitching is always inboard, it does not exist RIGHT on the edge of your materials) and your stitches end up about a quarter of an inch in on each side – the pocket will be 5″ wide (one of these days these hairy explanations will be followed by diagrams). Seam allowance on this bag will be 1/4 of an inch, which after careful examination is as close to how inboard the stitching is when using the right side of your presser foot as a guide to keep the stitches consistently spaced from the edge of the material***. Okay, alright, (keeping up with the notes here) the width of the bags front panel should then be 1/2 of an inch more than the width of the base, plus however far back the front panel travels on the side of the bag. This would mean the front panel is 13″ high X 17″ wide + (in this case) 12″ (6″ for each side) + 1/2″ (1/4″ on each side): bringing the total span of the front panel, as is necessary for the pattern, to 29 & 1/2″. with this knowledge then the dimension of the back panel (becoming the flap also) is partly determined: because the front panel of the bag is taking up 6″ of the side (notwithstanding seam allowance) that woud mean that the back panel should take up the other 3″ – keeping in mind that the base is 9″ deep. So the back panel comes to a total of 17″ wide + 6″ (3″ for each side) + 1/2″ (1/4″ on each side for seam allowance) – what is not yet determined is the height of this section. This can be a little arbitrary as some people may prefer a longer flap, for more coverage, or a shorter flap for easier access when wearing the bag**** – what is not so arbitrary is considering the ratio between the front panels height, which constitutes the height of the bag, and the back panels height becoming the flap. In other words, the flap needs to first be at least 13″ high (in this case), and then any additional length from there is arguable. Generally speaking, the additional material would make up about 13″ more, that way when the bag is empty, the flap does not hang any lower than the front panel of the bag (which as has been hammered away at here is 13″ tall). For the skunk a 12″ flap was decided on making the total length of the back panel’s longer dimension 25″, and because the top of that section (or the end of the flap depending on how you look at it) is not stitched to anything it will not require our 1/4″ seam allowance. Therefore the last dimension of this bag to be coupled with the other two is 25″X23 1/2″*****.

          Food for thought. While this bag was made, and as the thoughts about the pattern continued to develop it became more and more clear, just how the pattern affects the build of the bag, and the functionality in relation to the user. Here are some further thoughts on the pattern of this bag: What is interesting first is how the base dimensions dictate the rest of the bag – this may be common sense for some aspects of the pattern and/or rather unsubstantial in terms of discovery, but there are a few peculiarities. One is that the width of the flap is quite transparent and quite concrete. As we know by now that measurement is partly due to how much it is offset by the front panel of the bag’s reach around the sides (like we said earlier, this is 3″ + 1/4″ for seam allowance), but something to consider is that the extra 1/2″ that is being used as surface area to sew to the front panel is only being used like this for the bottom 13″ of the back panel – then it becomes a flap – which is 23 1/2″ wide, while the affective width of the back panel is only 23″ wide. Take that as you like. However where the flap’s width becomes more substantial in the build out, is that its width is going to be affected to some extent by placement of the shoulder strap (and the width of the front panel), proving that the measurements of a bag like this all effect each other, it is a symbiotic relationship. If and when the rear panel of this bag grows wider (thus the front panel contracts), it begins to wrap around the bag (when it is in the closed/down position) more. If that factor becomes too great it will cover/interfer with the placement/functionality of the shoulder strap and it’s cam buckle. Of course, this could be accomodated by placing the shoulder strap further back on the side of the bag, or even behind the side-seam, but that may subject the side seam to unecessary stress. Another reason that the placement of the shoulder strap on the front panel accomodates function is that it allows the bag to cradle the back more ergonomically, (also creasing the flap in a way that prevents it from coming up). If, the shoulder strap is positioned rearward users will find that the bag pulls away, as it is filled, from the body more easily (which can be a plus for large loads). This can make it a little harder to control, giving the bag a certain freedom of it’s own to bounce about. Some companies do employ a very rearward harness with great success: one is Pac, and the other is Zugster (if you are a company who uses this strategy, let it be known), not to mention that the Dow Bag also employed this rearward harness design. However, all of these bags which activate this system have a peculiar addition: They use load compression straps, or suspension straps, which work exactly like the suspension straps on a backpacking pack, on the tops of the shoulder straps. In this instance these straps make it possible to cinch the bag closer to the user, separately from the shoulder straps tension on the body. If the bag is completely stuffed, you may leave them wide open to permit easy access, or if the cargo is unruly you may opt to tighten these units down to control the load, or in the most common appliction, these suspension/load adjustment straps keep the bag snug to the body so there is less excess/loose material out of the users control. The last bit of info to keep in mind about the pattern/dimensions of this type of bag is that size matters. Obviously anyone designing such a bag can make it take whatever shape they want: however, if you are scaling your bag up (for more carrying capacity), to only make it wider (and wider), may not be the most affective action. Rather than discuss the subjective qualities of wider bags, versus taller, etc., it is time to consider the user. Perhaps a better way of designing a bag like this is to take into consideration the size of the user – the width of thier torso, and height. If you have an enormous bag that is twice as wide as the user, when it is full, it will easily slide to one side or the other and compete with that persons own physics on the bike. A solution to this, may be to make the bag a little taller and a little deeper, thus achieving the same amount of cargo space with a more stable and manageable bag.

          Apparently this bag was a catalyst to talk about patterns, and the many different fluctuating ratios that these patterns take advantage of. In the next post, the vehicle to freedom, will show how these dimensions were adjusted for yet another configuration. Aside from the pattern – there is of course the material, hardware, and organizational configurations to employ. In this case, keeping with the basic black classic format, the materials were easy to come by: first of all everything must be black, from the inside to the outside, zippers, Velcro, buckles etc. – notwithstanding a little bit of reflective accoutrements on the sides for some kind of sanity and saftey. The exterior of the skunk is 1000 denier Cordura (1000D all the way around, no Ballistic bottom boot here), and the inside liner is 18 ounce VCP (vinyl coated polyester, not to be confused with PVC). All Velcro is 1.5″ wide, with the hook side attached to the front of the bag, and the loop side attached perpendicuarly (the the hook) across the under-side of the flap. The interior pocket is composed of 200 denier coated oxford nylon, and creates 7 separated areas, one with a black zipper for closure, and finally a single pen pocket. As mentioned before, this bag was meant to be something of a classic design with just a few contemporary features that have proven themselves quite useful. The first of these two features are the extra set of female-end side-release buckles (all hardware is ITW Nexus on the skunk attached to the top of the front panel. Those two little buckle ends are really useful to keep your flap-straps out of the way when they are not in use (around here that means most of the time). The second “contemporary” feature is not necessarily used on any other bags that we know of, but it is nonetheless an addition to such a bag and it’s design. This is the middle pocket, it is an always open pocket sandwiched between the exterior 1000D and the interior 18 ounce VCP. The middle pocket is as wide as the front panel of the bag, and on the skunk it is 11″ deep – made with 200D oxford coated nylon. The idea of it is to create a quick access pocket like that of the backpacks, for U-locks and anything else that is not going to run away on a normal run. The thing about this middle pocket pocket is that it was necessary to keep “hidden” in order to maintain the classic look of the bag. Obviously, as was done on the backpacks, someone could simply sew a flat pocket right on top of the front panels exterior, but aesthetically that was not the right direction in this instance, which is why on the skunk it is cleverly(?) tucked in between the exterior and the interior, keeping it out of sight, but also taking full advantage of the bags natural function. So far it is a true winner of convenience – no more cramming your U-lock into your parcels, and then fumbling for it’s location later on. Also to note is the wrap-around Velcro, further stabilizing the flap in strong winds and rain, essentially this is acheived by placing two extra strips of Velcro (one on each side), onto the sides of the bag (PAC uses this idea also). The last (for the moment) feature of discussion is the shoulder strap, which uses your most basic cam buckle, this is probably the oldest, but most well tested, shoulder strap system. These are the reasons why it was implemented: it is classic, it is simple, simple = functionally superior, but mostly – because the cam buckle uses dive belt webbing, it is very secure and easy on the shoulder for heavy loads, you do not get slippage like on the x-straps often used, and in all seriousness, a split strap is pure novelty (interjection anyone?) – when push comes to shove, a single cam buckle with a bit of dive belt webbing is the most secure, durable, and versatile format to use. This elder setup can be looked at as fewer parts = fewer problems, seatbelt webbing is too flimsy for practical everyday use (unless you bolster it with padding, but then you run into problems of bags being made for use over one shoulder only [some companies allow the user to switch this, BaileyWorks being one of them], and also the problem of not being able to tighten up the bag anymore than the padding will allow).

          *Which is partly the reason for going with basic black. It seems that the basic black bag is a thing of the past(?) – as more and more companies move towards the bright and bold designs, and custom options for bag aesthetics. There is one company that still proudly offers the “black bag”, Seagull Bags. Why is this considered important? Well, to put it simply, A) Black goes well with everything, B) The world is full of unnecessary things, and in a time when when people are latching onto more and more trinkets and toys, perhaps it is easier on our being to take a step back and enjoy simplicity, C) Keeping it simple means longevity of function, the best wheels are round for a reason.

          **For all intents and purposes, we will consider the height of the bag, exactly that – if it is sitting on the shelf, with some stuff in it, how high up the front of it stands. The width of the bag, how much the span is left to right, still sitting on the shelf. And the depth, how far back the back of the bag is from the front panel (the front panel being the opposite side of the bag which encounters the users back). This rather strange explanation is because, in terms of depth, that could define two things, either how deep the bag is (it’s height) or how wide the bag is according to it’s base. This is confusing no matter how it’s described – so a diagram to follow soon is in order.

          ***Adjust your seam allowance to suit your needs. Depending on your accuracy, your binding tape or bias tape, your presser feet – with guides or not, your materials (do they fray easily or not at all), your stitching (is it a straight stitch or an overlock stitch, if it is an overlock stitch, your seam allowance will be exactly what the serger cuts the excess material to be, therefore it is a precise measurement), or lastly depending on if you need the excess material on the interior of your item to stitch in other accoutrements.

          ****If you wear the bag snug to your body and up high on your shoulder – a lot of flap can be quite cumbersome to get out of the way when you need to access the interior of the bag. But of course if you live in area with extreme weather shifts, the added coverage has it’s benefits in keeping your belongings dry and safe.

          *****Something to note is that these patterns are drawn out from the center (once the dimensions are factored), this was mentioned before, but what this means is that the center of the base works like an X-axis: once it’s center is drawn in, then the other dimensions follow from there, so instead of drawing 3 rectangles on top of each other, it is like 6 rectangles moving out from a center line. This keeps everything lined up very easily, as opposed to going around the shapes and using 90 degree angles, which in terms of materials that are sewn, never seems to work that well. Example: a center line is drawn and from that line marks are made at equal distance on both sides at precisely 11 1/4″ – this governs the width of the flap, etc., etc..