A practical guide to reviewing fit maps across graded sizes
- Confirm the base-size fit before assessing the grade.
- Pair each size with its intended avatar and simulate it.
- Compare silhouettes and fit maps using a consistent setup.
- Follow any outlier back to its pattern area and grade rule.
CLO makes it possible to review how grading affects fit across a size range by displaying simulated garments and their paired avatars together in Grading Review. Seeing the range at once helps a team spot a size that behaves differently from its neighbors and investigate the change in context.
A useful review answers three questions: Does the base size meet the design intent? Does each graded size preserve the intended shape and ease? Does any size introduce a new fit issue? CLO’s fit maps help show where to look. Pattern measurements, construction details, and the design brief help explain what may need to change.
1. Set the review baseline before opening the size run
Begin with an approved base-size garment and a defined size run. Grading is easier to assess when the base fit is already understood: if a difference appears in another size, the team has a clearer starting point for investigating whether it comes from the grade.
Record the base size, the sizes in scope, intended wearer measurements or avatar choices, and the garment fit points that matter to the design. Include approved ease, key lengths, and shape details that should remain consistent, such as a level hem, balanced waist seam, or intended sleeve angle. That reference helps reviewers decide whether a fit-map signal is expected or needs attention.
Keep body-size intervals and garment grade rules distinct in the review. A body-measurement interval does not necessarily translate into the same garment-measurement interval at every point of measure. Record the intended garment-measurement progression at the points that matter for the design before interpreting size-to-size changes.
An empirical study illustrates why it is worth checking the rule set rather than assuming a size chart provides suitable grading increments. In a 2005 study, Schofield and LaBat examined 40 women’s clothing size charts. They found that only 17% of the measurements assessed were useful for grade-rule formation, and 11 of 38 grade rules corresponded with body measurements. Those findings concern the charts and rules in that study, but the practical lesson is relevant: establish the expected measurement progression for the garment before judging its simulated fit.
A simple review baseline can be captured in a small table:
Comparison table Scroll to view every column ↔
| Review input | What the team records | Why it helps |
|---|---|---|
| Base size | Approved size and fit status | Separates an existing base issue from a change that emerges elsewhere |
| Size run | Every size and any separate size group | Defines which garments need review |
| Grade logic | Key points, measurement increments, and special rule changes | Gives the reviewer a pattern-level path to investigate an outlier |
| Design intent | Intended ease, lengths, balance, and silhouette | Helps interpret the map in the garment’s context |
| Simulation setup | Avatar, fabric properties, pose, and relevant simulation settings | Keeps side-by-side comparisons meaningful |
The simulation setup is a practical team consideration: keep inputs consistent where possible, and note any size-specific differences. If a size uses a different avatar or material setup, that may affect the comparison as well as the graded pattern.
2. Pair every graded size with its intended avatar
Choose a body form that represents the intended wearer for each size under review. CLO’s Pair Avatar for Grading Size instructions explain how to add avatars for graded sizes. CLO applies the avatar currently in the 3D window to all sizes by default, so check the size-to-avatar assignments when one avatar would not represent the full target range.
After creating or editing grading, CLO’s Grading Review instructions direct users to select Pair Avatar and then Update. The Pair Avatar instructions identify Pair 3D Form beside Base Size as the control for adding an avatar or avatar size.
Before simulating, check the avatar-to-size mapping from smallest to largest. Confirm that each entry has the intended avatar or size file. CLO’s Pair Avatar instructions note that assigning an avatar to a non-Base Size entry leaves the 3D-window avatar in place; selecting Base loads the avatar and garment together.
3. Simulate each size, then compare the range
Simulate every graded size included in the review. CLO’s Grading Review instructions explain that the review uses simulated results for each grading size. The workflow updates the Pair Avatar list, changes the avatar for each size as needed, and uses the checkbox beside each size to simulate it.
Once the results are ready, CLO Grading Review displays the graded garment sizes and avatars on one screen. This gives the team a convenient view of the full range, making it easier to identify a silhouette or fit-map outlier without switching between separate size views. Review the complete run, not just the base and one adjacent size; a non-adjacent size can reveal where a gradual change becomes noticeable.
After simulating each size in CLO, select Save 3D State beside it. The saved state appears in Grading Review, where the team can compare size-specific drape and pose side by side instead of relying on memory of an earlier view.
Keep the review view consistent: use comparable camera angles, show the same garment areas, and use the same simulation and material setup where appropriate. Align garments around a shared landmark, such as the waistline or hem, when that makes changes in shape easier to see.
Start with the silhouette, then use a fit map to investigate areas that stand out. Compare overall length, balance, sleeve and leg shape, seam placement, and ease distribution against the design intent. The map helps locate a signal; the pattern, construction, and measurement table help explain it.
4. Read each fit map as a specific signal
CLO’s Garment Fit Maps guide describes four signals: garment tightness, stretch rate, fabric stress, and pressure exerted on the avatar. Compare sizes using the same map, and interpret its locations and values in light of approved ease and construction.
Comparison table Scroll to view every column ↔
| Map | What it represents | How to use it in a size review |
|---|---|---|
| CLO Fit Map | Garment tightness. Red marks “Can’t Wear,” orange marks “Very Tight,” and yellow marks “Tight” or slightly tight. | Compare mapped locations across sizes, then check flagged regions against the intended ease and construction. |
| CLO Strain Map | Garment stretch rate due to external force, shown as a percentage. Blue marks 100% (no stretch), and red marks 120%. | Compare the percentage zones across sizes where fabric stretch affects the intended fit. |
| CLO Stress Map | Force along the fabric grain per unit area that causes garment deformation. Blue marks 0.00 kPa, and red marks 100 kPa. | Track stress concentrations along the fabric grain and compare their locations with seams and panels as sizes change. |
| CLO Pressure Map | External pressure exerted by the garment onto the avatar. | Compare the mapped regions across sizes using the same avatar approach and the intended ease. |
Use the same garment landmarks in each side-by-side silhouette, then note whether a map signal repeats, grows gradually, or appears suddenly in one size. For example, a stronger Fit Map signal around the armhole across adjacent sizes gives the reviewer a specific place to check armhole measurements, ease, and relevant grade points. A red CLO Fit Map area near the waist or seat marks a “Can’t Wear” region; compare its local measurements, seam, and avatar pairing with neighboring sizes before changing the grade rule. If the map and silhouette change together, record both observations and retest the affected sizes after an edit. Keep avatar mapping, fabric, pose, and simulation settings comparable so the review stays focused on size-related changes.
CLO Fit Map labels point reviewers toward areas for closer attention, while intended ease, fabric behavior, garment construction, and the design specification determine whether a signal is appropriate for the product. Use a mapped area to guide a concrete check, such as measuring a waist seam, checking armhole ease, or reviewing where a sleeve meets the bodice.
5. Trace an outlier to the base pattern or grading rule
When one size looks different, first identify the size and body area. Compare it with the base and neighboring sizes, then trace the relevant pattern piece, grade point, and corresponding seam lengths. Pay particular attention to notches and corner points, including waistbands, and check that corresponding body-pattern segment lengths match across sizes. These details can help prevent sewing and simulation issues.
Use the pattern comparison to form a likely explanation, then check it against the rule and garment measurements. If the same distortion appears in the base and throughout the range, review the base pattern, design balance, or fabric setup first. If the base still meets its approved fit and a mismatch appears or grows at one grade interval, inspect the relevant grade point, segment lengths, seam relationship, and any rule change at that interval.
A designer’s worked examples show why an outlier can involve proportion, not just circumference. In Alison Hoenes’s dress-block example, grading up from a medium left the waist and bicep snug relative to bust and hip ease; in 5X, the front hem hikes up and the bust darts sit too high. Her pant comparison shows longer legs in the pattern graded up from medium, along with worsening crotch fit and an incorrect leg angle and inseam-to-outseam ratio.
Record the result in a short issue log so any correction can be tested rather than guessed:
- Size and location: identify the size, pattern piece, seam, and avatar area.
- Observed change: describe the silhouette or fit-map signal and how it differs from the base and neighboring sizes.
- Likely source: note whether the base, grade point, segment length, material setup, or avatar assignment needs checking.
- Next test: state the proposed pattern or rule change, then resimulate the affected size and any neighboring sizes that share that rule.
If a wider size range needs different proportions, consider whether one continuous grade still serves the design intent or whether the range needs separate base patterns. Hoenes’s examples show how separate patterns can preserve proportions in the specific garment blocks she examines.
FAQ
Can I use the same avatar for every graded size?
Yes. CLO applies the 3D-window avatar to all sizes by default. Assign size-specific avatars when each simulation needs to represent a different intended wearer.
Does a red map area automatically mean the size fails?
No. A map color describes the signal being displayed; the garment’s design intent and approved fit criteria determine the decision. Use the signal to identify an area for measurement and pattern review.
Do I need to simulate every size before using CLO Grading Review?
Yes. CLO’s Grading Review uses simulated results for each grading size, so simulate the full set of sizes you want to compare.
What should I do after changing a grade rule?
Resimulate the changed size and neighboring sizes affected by the same rule, then compare their silhouettes and fit maps again. Save per-size 3D states in CLO Grading Review when you want to preserve the results for comparison.