Curve or Double Curve? What’s the difference?

If you’re familiar with the term “double curve” used to describe romantics and theatrical romantics, then you’re probably familiar with just how absurdly confusing that word is to understand.

You might be thinking “just use hourglass!" We’re all familiar with that term!”

You’d be partially correct.

Then you throw “curve” into the mix and it becomes even more confusing.

So what does it mean? Is double curve just an hourglass shape? How is curve different than double curve?

Let’s break it down.

First, let’s define double curve.

Double curve comes down to how clothing behaves on you. It is the presence of a continuous curved line from the bottom of your armpit to your knee that disrupts fabric at the largest part of your bust and your hip.

Still confused?

Let’s look at some pictures.

This is Elizabeth Taylor – a verified romantic standing at 5’ 2”.

Already visually, there is a rounded quality to her frame.

But you already know I like to make fashion formulaic. So let’s break it down.

If we look at how fabric behaves on her silhouette from bottom of the armpit to her knee, there are two points of disruption – the bust and the hip – in a very continuously curved fashion.

Her bones in her torso have a rounded, curved, delicate quality to them.

Elizabeth Taylor’s curves as a romantic look something like this – a rounded hourglass shape.

This is Emma Samms, another verified Romantic standing at 5’ 4”.

Now, at first glance, her shoulders might look wide, like she might not need curve accommodation because of upper body width. But remember, width depends on where your shoulder would meet your sleeve – not at the endpoint of your shoulder.

Now according to Kibbe, romantics need to accommodate for double curve – because remember, his system is not about what body type you are, but finding what your unique features are to reflect that in your clothing.

In other words, having double curve requires accommodation for it.

So what does double curve accommodation look like?

Well, according to Kibbe, it is choosing lightweight fabrics and silhouettes that drape around your curves, as well as emphasize your waist.

For example, this dress would be considered as double curve accommodation because it is a lightweight material (lace), it drapes around her curves, and emphasizes her waist.

While on the other hand, this dress does not have curve accommodation.

The dress is a lightweight material, but the lack of waist emphasis means her curves are being hidden – AKA no curve accommodation.

The open neckline of the dress means it has width accommodation, but as we established earlier, Elizabeth Taylor is a romantic, meaning she has no width, and therefore has no need for width accommodation.

As a result, this dress is not nearly as stunning on her as some of the others shown above.

Now we know there are types like Soft Naturals or Soft Dramatics that have to accommodate curve but not double curve. What’s the difference? Why would they accommodate curve and not double curve?

Let’s lay some foundation first.

Width is an openness in the upper back area. It requires choosing fabrics and cuts of clothing that proves some space/movement/flow to the shoulder area to minimize a “restricted” look.

But… width also negates upper curve. Why?

Imagine a fabric hanging from your shoulder down to your knees (I guess that’s the definition of a dress, so feel free to image a dress LOL).

If you have enough “openness” or “width” to your shoulders/upper back, it’s very likely that your ribcage is also going to be slightly wider and more angular rather than rounded, right?

By that logic, your bust will likely be contained within the frame of your ribcage. As a result, even with a larger bust, the fabric wouldn’t drape around your bust area – because your shoulder/upper back area would be wide enough to make the fabric sit a little further from your bust. Does that make sense? I suck at explaining over text so I really hope it does!

That’s why if you have width, you can’t also have double curve, because your width would negate the curve in the upper body.

Instead of accommodating for double curve, Soft Naturals accommodate for their lower curve (and width) and Soft Dramatics (which I talk about in the blog linked here) accommodate for their upper curve (and vertical).

Now that we established why width negates upper curve, let’s look at some examples.

This is Kim Kardashian (5’ 4”), widely accepted to be a Soft Natural.

She is not part of the itty bitty titty committee, but if you look where the line of fabric is disrupted, you’ll notice it’s only at the hips (drawn in yellow arrows).

This is because her upper back/rib cage area has “Kibbe width” in my opinion.

As a result, her bust is contained within her frame, and she doesn’t have “upper curve”.

Also, because her bust is contained “within her frame”, her frame (or bone structure) defines her curves more than her flesh does. On the other hand, a romantic’s flesh defines their frame, which results in that “continuously curved line” in their bust/hips that we call double curve.

If we were to picture a Soft Natural’s hourglass figure, it would look something like this – angular rather than continuously curved.

Now at this point you might be thinking: “Kim has had so many surgeries, how can we trust her figure now?”

You’d be correct, but her overall bone structure where her “width” comes from hasn’t changed.

If you look at her in a really old picture like this from the early 2000s, you can see once again, her bust is contained within her frame, and her upper back area still shows the characteristic width.

Not only that, but this is a dress that accommodates double curve, but not width.

The fabric is lightweight, and drapes around her curves, making it perfect for accommodating double curve.

It does not however, accommodate for width.

The shoulder area is quite restricted, and the high collars create a feeling of even more restriction around the upper back/shoulder area.

This dress is such a great example to show how surgeries don’t necessarily affect your Kibbe Image ID and your best clothing lines because they don’t change the underlying bone structure.

On the flip side, let’s look at Kim in a dress that does accommodate lower curve and width.

This dress is made of a lightweight material that drapes around her curves and has a belt for waist definition, giving her the curve accommodation she needs.

The big difference between this one and the white one comes down to the openness in the shoulder line.

Kim has width, not double curve.

As a result, her best outfits result when she accommodates for width and lower curve.

Here is another, maybe clearer example of Kim’s width.

I drew the point where you would think her natural seam would meet her sleeve.

But if you imagine the point at which her seam would actually meet her sleeve in order for a top to not look “restrictive”, it would be be further out, closer to the end point of her shoulder.

That would create that classic “V” shape in her upper back area known as Kibbe width.

That Kibbe width would in turn define her frame rather than her bust, which negates her upper curve.

The width that defines her frame rather than flesh gives her an overall more angular look to her “hourglass” figure when compared to a romantic’s hourglass figure.

However, her hip line would still disrupt the continuous line of fabric which we can see drawn in yellow.

This dress looks flawless on her because she has accommodated for both width in her upper back area and her lower curve.

The strapless neckline gives an unrestricted look to her upper back area, but the dress is still hugging her curves in the lower half/hip area.

Seeing subtle nuances like double curve vs curve can be hard, right?

If you want a comprehensive lookbook of every verified Kibbe celebrity so you can start to visually see what curve, double curve, width, and vertical line look like in real life, check out my product page (linked here) for a comprehensive lookbook of every Kibbe verified celebrity so you can visually see what each Image ID looks like!