WHAT WENT WRONG
as appropriate to the specific gown and it is acknowledged that those specialising in high end cleaning will have developed their own specific techniques.
Helping the customer with long-term storage by provision of professional acid free packaging will preserve a valuable heirloom. However, acceptance for cleaning of a garment that has not been correctly stored requires even more care if the customer’s expectations are to be met. Experienced cleaners will ask for the wedding date and budget for more work on old, set stains. A great many wedding garment ranges are poorly constructed and poorly labelled and the consequences of this can be catastrophic for cleaners with little or no experience. In drycleaning, the solvent may soften or dissolve plastic beads or the mechanical action could fray an appliqué and a justified claim can then be expected. It is usually necessary to use different techniques for finishing, starting with suspension of the gown, so that folds and different layers can be accessed easily and quickly. Ruching presents extra problems, but there are techniques for handling layers of soft folds to enable this to be re-created, without clumsy hard creases which ruin the appearance and result in a complaint. We look at varying techniques for stain removal and straightforward precautions to avoid cleaning errors such as greying. The importance of detergent charge, pre-drying and the use of distilled solvent cannot be over-emphasised. Top Tips: optical brightening agents (OBAs) produce different shades of white on different fabrics, with much greater effect on cotton, silk and viscose than on polyester or nylon. We therefore strongly recommend avoiding the use of retail whitework detergents on white wedding gowns. These are designed for domestic washing and normally contain OBAs. We also recommend that, unless you are a specialist in wedding gown cleaning, you do not accept, for cleaning in-house, garments with care labels that dictate cleaning by Terrington Burchett, Grantham UK.
Conclusion
Drycleaning wedding gowns is not for the faint-hearted. The tips given will come in handy and recognise some of the disasters described. Good luck.
How to treat hemline soiling Fault: the cleaner did not want to risk pre-treating this expensive cream silk garment and after cleaning in hydrocarbon, the hemline soiling and staining was even more visible. Technical cause: hemline soiling and staining usually contains mud particles with brown tannin (vegetable) staining from ground matter. Hydrocarbon solvent might flush out some of the looser particles, but it will not lift out the embedded particles and it will not decolour the brown tannin staining. Responsibility: the responsibility for getting the soiling and staining onto the dress in the first place lies with the wearer, but the responsibility for failing to get better removal than seen here lies with the cleaner. although some of the embedded particulate soiling will have re-deposited during the first clean (and will therefore be held to the fibre surfaces by strong electrochemical forces). it should still be possible to get some improvement. The brown tannin staining should first be de-coloured with a tannin remover. Then, using bar soap or liquid soap with tepid/warm water and ideally working on a large table, gently tamp the soiled/stained areas with a soft brush. Then suspend over a shower tray (plumbed to drain), so that treated areas can be flushed clean with fresh water and then drip- dry. Care is needed with silk to avoid any risk of abrasion damage, so gentle tamping is essential. When dry, any swealing in the hem area can be gently flushed out with the steam gun or, if necessary, a levelling agent applied and the garment re-cleaned.
DARK OUTCOME: The hemline soiling and staining has darkened in cleaning because it was not pre-treated
Developed stain appears and gets worse in pressing Fault: this wedding dress was virtually unmarked when put into the cleaning machine, but it came out with a brown mark on the sleeve, which darkened further before the presser noticed it. Technical cause: this fault can be caused by caramelisation of sugars from white wine, lemonade or champagne, or it can result from oxidation of the proteins in milk or cream or meat fats. It did not reduce when the cleaner tried water warmed up with a steam gun, so it was not caramelised sugar. It slowly responded to a protein remover, so it may have come from meat juices. Responsibility: the wearer was responsible for staining the item in the first place. If the stain was invisible before cleaning, the cleaner was not responsible for the failure to pre-treat. The responsibility for post-treating the mark correctly should now be taken by the cleaner. after testing, the mark should be treated with protein remover, tamped and left for around 20 minutes to soften (this is very important), before flushing with the water spray. If the mark is improved but not removed then this can be repeated, until there is no more improvement. Finally, bleaching with 9% peroxide may remove any residual stain. Simply re-cleaning is a waste of time, even with detergent pre- brushing. This type of post-treatment of oxidised proteins requires patience and the right reagent and technique.
CUFF MARK: The stain on this cuff was not pre-treated and looked dreadful after cleaning
If you have problems you would like the authors to examine, please send with a good quality, high resolution (300dpi/1MB at least) pic of the item to
kathy.bowry@
laundryandcleaningnews.com
@LCNiMag October 2024 | LCN 21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29
