<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" 
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: 13 Tips for Identifying Vintage Clothing Labels &#038; Tags	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/</link>
	<description>Vintage Jewelry, Weddings, Fashion &#38; Home Décor by Sammy D.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Oct 2024 20:34:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Genn		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-209789</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Genn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Oct 2024 20:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-209789</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[10/26/24: Hi! I just found your site - great information. However, regarding your comment &quot;Odd number sizes were originally created for petite women, not teenagers or pre-teens as they are today,&quot; I beg to differ. I&#039;m a tall woman (approx. 5&#039;10&quot;) and clothing I bought in the 1970s (and late 1960s) when I was a tall teenager, were size 9 or 11 or rarely 13, which was the largest odd number size I remember. I still have a lot of that clothing, some of which my adult daughters now where!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>10/26/24: Hi! I just found your site &#8211; great information. However, regarding your comment &#8220;Odd number sizes were originally created for petite women, not teenagers or pre-teens as they are today,&#8221; I beg to differ. I&#8217;m a tall woman (approx. 5&#8217;10&#8221;) and clothing I bought in the 1970s (and late 1960s) when I was a tall teenager, were size 9 or 11 or rarely 13, which was the largest odd number size I remember. I still have a lot of that clothing, some of which my adult daughters now where!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Karen		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-207496</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Karen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Aug 2024 14:50:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-207496</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[So if there is no information on a garment, but an embordered logo of a crown on a back pocket how do you identify the maker?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So if there is no information on a garment, but an embordered logo of a crown on a back pocket how do you identify the maker?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Niki		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-204558</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Niki]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Mar 2024 22:55:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-204558</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thank you so much for these articles!!! I was struggling before finding these. Wowsas! So I found a wedding dress with only 2 tags attached to the back left inside collar: a red tag “Lot Size 7” and beneath it a longer white tag that says “DRY CLEAN ONLY” with “MADE IN U.S.A.” under the latter. It looks almost exactly like a Gunne Sax version made in 70s/80s (?): all lace with inner lining except for the long sleeves; drop waist; bibbed; shoulder pads; covered back zipper. I’ve inspected the dress till my eyes bled; I’m confident no other tags were attached or cut off. There are no material labels either. Any thoughts on what era this could possibly be from? Many thanks!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you so much for these articles!!! I was struggling before finding these. Wowsas! So I found a wedding dress with only 2 tags attached to the back left inside collar: a red tag “Lot Size 7” and beneath it a longer white tag that says “DRY CLEAN ONLY” with “MADE IN U.S.A.” under the latter. It looks almost exactly like a Gunne Sax version made in 70s/80s (?): all lace with inner lining except for the long sleeves; drop waist; bibbed; shoulder pads; covered back zipper. I’ve inspected the dress till my eyes bled; I’m confident no other tags were attached or cut off. There are no material labels either. Any thoughts on what era this could possibly be from? Many thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Brad Benson		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-204070</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brad Benson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2024 17:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-204070</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I am a not truly vintage clothing reseller. But sometimes I am able to land a vintagy piece. I am currently trying to date a Bill Blass Silk aloha shirt. I think it is 90&#039;s but it&#039;s a little hard to tell. I was wondering if laundry care symbols can be used to get a rough time frame for garments. I have done a little looking, and there doesn&#039;t seem to be a place to compare the garment symbol changes that have occurred since their US adoption in 1993. I keep seeing the revisions mentioned, but can&#039;t find out just what these revisions were. Is there a difference in the US care symbology between 1993 and today, and if so, what are these revisions? For example, when did the US adopt the temperature dot system vs the listing of max temps in Centigrade? My shirt has the tub with a 30 degree and two underlines (gentle hand wash). Would that be also done today?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a not truly vintage clothing reseller. But sometimes I am able to land a vintagy piece. I am currently trying to date a Bill Blass Silk aloha shirt. I think it is 90&#8217;s but it&#8217;s a little hard to tell. I was wondering if laundry care symbols can be used to get a rough time frame for garments. I have done a little looking, and there doesn&#8217;t seem to be a place to compare the garment symbol changes that have occurred since their US adoption in 1993. I keep seeing the revisions mentioned, but can&#8217;t find out just what these revisions were. Is there a difference in the US care symbology between 1993 and today, and if so, what are these revisions? For example, when did the US adopt the temperature dot system vs the listing of max temps in Centigrade? My shirt has the tub with a 30 degree and two underlines (gentle hand wash). Would that be also done today?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Billie		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-202118</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Billie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2023 17:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-202118</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-4560&quot;&gt;Fiona@ clothing tags&lt;/a&gt;.

Fabulous information. So glad to discover you]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-4560">Fiona@ clothing tags</a>.</p>
<p>Fabulous information. So glad to discover you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Michelle D		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-199115</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michelle D]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2023 04:13:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-199115</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[According to the FTC, RN system has been in place since the 1940s: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/1997/12/registered-identification-numbers-rns.
So why does your article state they were first in use in 1952?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to the FTC, RN system has been in place since the 1940s: <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/1997/12/registered-identification-numbers-rns" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/1997/12/registered-identification-numbers-rns</a>.<br />
So why does your article state they were first in use in 1952?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: etcetra		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-198755</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[etcetra]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Mar 2023 21:48:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-198755</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[HOW OLD? Pre-1999, considering the British Colony of Hong Kong gained its independence before the dawn of the new millennium.

Hong Kong did not gain its independence.

Its under the control Communist China, the most murderous regime the world has ever known.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HOW OLD? Pre-1999, considering the British Colony of Hong Kong gained its independence before the dawn of the new millennium.</p>
<p>Hong Kong did not gain its independence.</p>
<p>Its under the control Communist China, the most murderous regime the world has ever known.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Diana Pfeffer		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-195656</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Diana Pfeffer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2023 00:06:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-195656</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Celanese was considered basically rayon, no? It ISN&#039;T rayon, it&#039;s acetate, but both are cellulose-based synthetics. It was popular much earlier than polyester.

(You probably know that, but the organization of the fabric content section implies that Celanese is a marketing name for polyester, and it isn&#039;t.)

Thank you for the great article!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Celanese was considered basically rayon, no? It ISN&#8217;T rayon, it&#8217;s acetate, but both are cellulose-based synthetics. It was popular much earlier than polyester.</p>
<p>(You probably know that, but the organization of the fabric content section implies that Celanese is a marketing name for polyester, and it isn&#8217;t.)</p>
<p>Thank you for the great article!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mary J Wickham		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-184728</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mary J Wickham]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2022 20:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-184728</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-165483&quot;&gt;Beni&lt;/a&gt;.

Tanya might have been harsh but she is correct  Scroll up, see the copyright date of 1982 on the Cassadi dress and also note the lot number tag attached to the dress.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-165483">Beni</a>.</p>
<p>Tanya might have been harsh but she is correct  Scroll up, see the copyright date of 1982 on the Cassadi dress and also note the lot number tag attached to the dress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mary Wickham		</title>
		<link>https://sammydvintage.com/vintage-style/vintage-clothing-label-tags/comment-page-1/#comment-180700</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mary Wickham]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Feb 2022 03:16:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sammydvintage.com/?p=408994223#comment-180700</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Lot numbers did not cease use around 1979, as can be seen by your Casadei label posted on this same page showing clearly a copyright date of 1982 and a lot number tag.  In fact, lot numbers are found for many decades following 1982.  Please correct that information as many readers actually misdate clothing due to that misinformation.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lot numbers did not cease use around 1979, as can be seen by your Casadei label posted on this same page showing clearly a copyright date of 1982 and a lot number tag.  In fact, lot numbers are found for many decades following 1982.  Please correct that information as many readers actually misdate clothing due to that misinformation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
