Cup size is totally related to Band size

[TazManiac]

Well, I'm a Mr., not a Mz., but I came across an interesting article ("now where can I pass along this info..., I know!")

from back in 2012;
https://sophiajenner.wordpress.com/2012 ... le-models/

I'd think the learning opportunity is still relevant today, maybe there might be some 'hands-on' feedback from our female members...

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Speaking from an engineering background, it is fairly obvious that they are related.

Band size has several factors involved, including your chest size sans cleavage (the measurement under the cleavage and around the torso) and length of cleavage (from chest to... er... tip).

Cup size is largely referring to diameter of cleavage.

However, cleavage is... partially malleable. Meaning that if you have a smaller band size, it will compress the cleavage (in potentially uncomfortable ways) into a larger diameter, thus needing a larger cup size to contain the same volume.

The ratio of band to cup size is one that each lady needs to determine for themselves, with assistance from a professional if necessary. However, this is typically going to result in some... atypical sizings that you are NOT going to find at most stores. For example, virtually every DD bra I have ever seen starts off at a 34 band at a minimum, which is going to be really bad for a lady who is lean and stacked. The industry assumption is that if you have... ample assets, let's say... then you must be overweight, or at least 'bigger boned', because of a very incorrect assumption that skinnier ladies who have less overall fat must have smaller boobs because a percentage of the cleavage's volume is, in fact, fatty tissue.

But again, I have a y-chromosome, and as such have no practical experience with wearing such accouterments (although considerable experience in assisting ladies into and out of them), so I may also be somewhat off base here.

[Julie]

The article's right. Band size is linked to cup size. That said, for the average consumer, the best way to think of bra sizes (imo) is to start with band size, and think of it as relatively fixed. Obviously, weight gain and loss changes that number, but it's usually the "starting point" I rely on most since it is linked to the under-boob measurement of the chest (which is a straightforward number not dependent upon boob compression or placement). From there, I tinker with the bra size I need based on how large my breasts are at the time (again, weight gain and loss can impact this, or the girls just being ornery) and the cup/bra design. In the end, the "correct" size is never a set value to adhere to or assign to someone, nor should people really cling too much to the "sister size" concept (where you go up a cup size, down a band size and vice versa). That idea is again, at best, a starting point for sizing. The reality of bra designs (and companies using slightly-off measurements in manufacturing) is far more complex. I find it kind of odd that this individual is trying to assign bra sizes to celebrity photos without seeing them in person, and using differently styled bras as comparative examples of "too big/too small." The size I wear in a demi-cup is different from the size I'd wear in a full cup...or more specifically, a balconette in the size I use for a molded-cup bra would not be comfortable (I know because I found out the hard way...after ordering online from overseas).

In all honesty, it's only important to know what a well-fitting bra looks like on the body (which the article does kind of mention).
1. The underwire is supposed to lay flat against the skin between the breasts (not be pushed out).
2. The band should be horizontal around the body (not riding up or down in the back), and should be a firm fit, but comfortable.
3. The entire breast should fit in the cup...no gaping between boob and bra, but also no spillage over the top (no quad-boobs/muffin-top boobs).

If you see a bra that doesn't match these points, then the person wearing it is wearing the wrong size and isn't doing herself any favors.