Short legs ? Long waisted ? How do you know that ?

Frenchie

Hi !

Thanks to this website, I've understood almost everything about being a pear, an hourglass, an inverted triangle, a rectangle or an apple and having a secondary body type BUTI still don't understand the "Body Shape Modifiers".

I tried to find informations to see whether I was long-waisted or not, or how to tell whether yours legs are short or long but no site tell the same thing.

So, how do you know whether you have have a long neck or a short one or if your legs are short and your waist is long ?

I guess my legs are short since I'm almost 5'3" and my inseam is only 27,5inches. But a friend of mine actually thought I had long or average legs.

15 years ago

Body Type

23 replies

Latest reply was from Gigi

Mamapicklejuice

Veteran

Hm, I know because I sew, that I have to add 2" to any bodice - so I know I'm long waisted. I suppose an easy way to know is if rtw (ready to wear) fits you well, or if you always have to have things tailored to fit. If a pair of pants fits you well in the waist, hips, thighs but are always an inch too short, you may have long legs compared to the average woman your pant size (and so on).

If I can find a good measurement chart I'll link it here.

15 years ago

marianna

Veteran

I have no idea, but this is an interesting question. I think I have short legs for my height too. I'm 5'10" but my PPL inseam is only 33.5" inches for flats... I think that's abnormally short for my height?

15 years ago

chewyspaghetti

Veteran

I'm with Mamapickle- I almost always find sleeves and pants legs too long for me, so I know I'm outside the normal range.

15 years ago

rae

(website)

Veteran

I love how Imogen explains it in this post:
http://www.insideoutstyleblog......waist.html

15 years ago

rute

Veteran

I thin it has not to do with measures but with proportion, you can be tall and hace short legs (in comparision to your torso) or be petite and have long legs (once again in comparision).

15 years ago

Tanya

Veteran

Angie has written blog post on long and short torsos:

http://youlookfab.com/2009/06/.....g-waisted/

http://youlookfab.com/2008/05/.....g-waisted/

http://youlookfab.com/2007/07/.....t-waisted/

There are many 'recipes' out there for determining this, but it is not easy, it more comes to your feel, eye ans the way things fir you. I have very long torso and some tops/blouses always lack in length, while I have to hem most of my pants.

15 years ago

shiny

Veteran

Frenchie, I'm 3 inches shorter than you and my inseam is 28 inches (that's in stocking feet - I prefer longer for shoes and of course heels). I consider my legs proportioned for my height - neither short nor long.

The torso part always confused me, as I think people define it differently, or I just never understood the definitions. I think I am average there too (overall torso length proportionate to my height), except that my waist is positioned high (right under my rib cage). I tend to have a little better luck with regular pants (esp jeans) that then need to be hemmed rather than petite pants. I guess that makes me short-waisted?

As for neck, that one is a no-brainer for me: my neck is definitely short. I can't stand wearing turtlenecks because there's always too much fabric. I look far better in a v- or scoop neck than a crew neck. And I can't wear dangly earrings because many of them brush my shoulders!!! Also when I gain weight I start developing extra chins.

15 years ago

shiny

Veteran

I wasn't all that clear about the pants thing: I meant that I sometimes need a little more length from waist to crotch point than petite pants provide. But, I am never sure if this is because I'm long there, or because I have to accommodate for a bit of a belly.

15 years ago

Frenchie

Active Member

I've read the thing with the hands many times but I can't tell for sure if I can fit two hands or more. I'm pretty sure I'm not short waisted. And I surely have a short neck too (and I can't stand turtle neck either, unfortunately they are almost the only thing you can find this winter).
As for ready-to-wear, nothing really fits but I guess that's because I'm short. Trousers are usually too long for my legs (especially with flats), tops are either too long or the right size. We don't have petite clothing in France so I can't try them on to see if it fits.

About legs :

I found that : http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/590299
Well, the average leg length is 45% of the height so at 5'4", the average woman would have 28.8 inch legs.

So I guess my legs are average/short since they're about 44% of my height.

15 years ago

ChristineB

Active Member

I printed off a photo of myself and used Imogen's formula (using the height of my head) to see what my proportions are. I'm slightly long in the torso (although I'm not particularly short waisted) and slightly short in the legs. Practically, this means I need a higher rise in my pants, and pant length in the stores is usually fine for me.

However, I know my shoulders are broad because shoulder fit is something I have to watch for in shirts & blouses. I also know my arms are long because sweaters & long sleeve shirts/blouses, coats, etc are sometimes too short, and I hear of many women who have the opposite problem.

I have no idea about my neck, though. I've often wondered if my neck was considered short or long. I figure since it isn't obvious to me either way it must be average.

15 years ago

Frenchie

Active Member

I've just find a way to see how many hands I could fit between my bust and my waist. Two minus a thumb lol. So I guess I'm neither short-waister nor long-waisted.

15 years ago

RoseandJoan

Veteran

Good question Frenchie, I also believe measurements only tell half of the story. I'm 5ft 8" with an inseam of 32", I consider my legs to be of average length for my height, however my legs are slender and create the illusion of being longer than average.

I am definitely short waisted, like Shiny my natural waist is just under my ribcage.

My neck is probably average and yet due to my height I'm able to wear polo necks with relative ease.

I think taking photographs definitely allows you to see your body more objectively.

15 years ago

Maya

Veteran

I find it easier to just eyeball it, but Imogen's method seems to be pretty accurate.

15 years ago

sanane

Member

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=21cie09&s=7

13 years ago

Isabel

Veteran

Yup, Imogene has the right idea ! A few years ago, I had to have an x-ray of my spine. THe x-ray technologist had to "measure" the length of my torso so that she could line of the films and the machine. And she did it by hand width measurements. She told me that I had a very long torso because the area from my diaphram to my belly button was two and half "hands". She said that on average it is one hand.

13 years ago

slythwolf

Active Member

I have just tried the 45% of height formula on myself and if my legs were average by that formula (I assume it means inseam), that would be about 30-31". Since my PPL inseam for flats is 33.5", I guess that means I really do have the long legs my mother always said I had.

13 years ago

Cilleena

Veteran

This is information is an eye opener for me. I'm on the short waisted side. I'm one and a half hands between my bust and natural waist. I always knew my legs were a little longer because I usually need a long in pants, but I'm only 5'6" tall. I just didn't realize my waist was short. That explains why I don't like wide belts and if I wear a belt, I tend to want to wear it low slung on my hips. I do better with low rise jeans too. I'll stop trying to make those empire tops work for me as well. Finally, I understand why my tummy popped out so much when I was pregnant, not as much room in my torso.

13 years ago

Elly

Veteran

Hmm, yeah definitely interesting. I and 5'8" and take a 34-35" inseam in the flatest shoes (30.6" is 45% of my height). From my crotch to my waist is fairly short, because mid-rise pants usually swallow my belly button and low rise are an inch or so below on me. Anything high rise actually has the waistband sitting on my ribs. I have a very small natural waist (an inch maybe between my ribs and hip bones), but it is a pretty narrow area. Then I have less than a hand and a half from my waist to underbust. On the flip side, from my shoulders to where my bust starts is two full hands and seems larger than most peoples. I also have a long neck, but not necessarily giraffe-like. I have incredibly long arms (my brother is 6" tall and has long arms for someone his height and my arms are less than an inch shorter than his). I hated the fingertip skirt or shorts rule when I was younger and in school because that meant my shorts had to have an 11 inch inseam where most girls got away with three to five. I also have broad shoulders.

13 years ago

Diana

Veteran

Wow, this is fascinating. My PPL in bare feet is around 31" and I am 5' 3.5". I didn't realize that this means I have relatively long legs! (Although I guess it makes sense since petite pants are always too short for me). I do have a very short waist (one hand width between underbust and waist) but also have a regular to long-ish rise. I had thought the short waist and long rise would cancel each other out, resulting in regular length legs, but I guess not!

13 years ago

KoopaCooper

Member

Well I'm definitely short legged - coupled with having a very wide waist measurement this means I always have to roll up the legs of any trousers I buy, several times over!

My height is 5'10" (70ins), but my inside leg measurement is a mere 30ins! On top of that, I have a waist that's somewhere between 44-46ins around, and I have to buy trousers that are really long. The assumption is that a person of my waist measurement is "on average" about 6'6" or so, and with proportionally longer legs. This, and my legs being short for my height anyway, means that when I don't roll up trouser legs, they cover my feet completely and flop about on the ground! xD

11 years ago

froggiebecky

Veteran

I also sew, so my knowledge comes from that. But briefly, I am petite from my shoulders to my bustline (shoulders usually have to be shortened), and I have short arms (sleeves are almost always too long). On the other hand, I've got a relatively long rise--I fit regular women's trousers better than petites. But I need the pants to be hemmed, as I'm only 5'3".

11 years ago

Wendi1984

Active Member

I've never heard of any of the formulas before, but I know I am long-waisted because tops are often shorter than I'd like, and sometimes dresses have their waist much higher than mine. I assume my legs are pretty much average; most off-the-rack pants fit fine lengthwise.

11 years ago

Gigi

Veteran

I have never tested a formula for determining this, but I have always had problems with tops being too long and the waist of the top falling almost at my hips. I have also always been able to tell simply from looking in the mirror that I am more leg than torso--I look a little out of proportion. I do think that it is a proportion thing.

11 years ago

Category