- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
@ejoyb: I really wanted to get the first one but I would have to get it online and that bothered. me. I think the difference is these dresses are made in much simpler styles than most of their dresses. So it would be a great choice for a less expensive reception dress. I know people who have bought them and worn them for both ceremony and reception. It really just depends on the kind of look you are going for. Goodluck.
I don't tihnk there is much of a difference except that they don't have trains. But with a regular dress you can bustle the trian after the ceremony so unless people want to have two dresses or no train at all, I don't see the need for that dress.
Really - I'm with you. I think this is an invention of the wedding industry to make us believe we need two dresses. I'm getting married for the second time, and I can see myself wearing something like this for both ceremony and reception. Overall, I don't get it - that's what bustling is for, IMHO.
Before the whole "reception dress" trend took off (which before then no one anywhere did - Asian brides would do dress changes but not wear white and the dress would not resemble a wedding dress either at all), the wedding dresses without trains were called informals. Also, not everyone likes trains even for a formal wedding (when they have no desire to change into a different dress as the majority of brides in real life never do) so they should have the option without the trendy name that is added nowadays.
To answer your question, there is no difference in the dress structure. There may or may not be a difference in price (which many brides cannot afford or justify the expense of buying a second dress to change into) but beyond that, there is no difference other than the name for marketing purposes. And the wedding industry is all about creative marketing to force women to spend more than they can afford or even want to.
You must log in to post.
| Visit our sister sites | eHarmony Online Dating |
eHarmony Advice Dating Advice |
Project Wedding Wedding Songs |
JustMommies Pregnancy Calendar |
Create the honeymoon of your dreams.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| ellisrobertson | 24 |
| Brielle | 22 |
 vorpalette |
22 |
| lionskitty | 22 |
| fishbone | 22 |
| SouthernGirl | 21 |
| mypinkshoes | 21 |
| caseyleigh10 | 19 |
| kat2014 | 19 |
| les105 | 19 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| turtles73 |
4 |
| stressybride | 4 |
| KristenGotMarried | 3 |
| sienna76 | 3 |
| lorelai | 3 |
| takemyhand | 3 |
| rdownie1 |
3 |
| Weebee1234 | 3 |
| sopranokris | 3 |
| bestbuddies | 2 |
http://www.davidsbridal.com/Browse_Bridal-Gowns-Features-Reception-Gowns__pageSize-all
Can someone please help me understand something? There are some dresses that David's Bridal calls "reception gowns" that look very much like "wedding gown without train." For example this dress:
or this dress:
or if you put a fuller crinoline/petticoat under it, this dress:
Are there some differences between simple wedding dresses and these reception dresses that are not visible to the eye?