In fact, my first project was a shift dress: Butterick 5316.
I have made 2 versions of this pattern, including this jungle-ish print one.
I definitely like it, but the pleats are a little tricky to nail, and the neckline is way too high. Not ideal for these reasons.
McCall's 5845 was another early dress that I tried. It was great for a fun sheath dress because of the low back, but it was not the classic sheath dress that I'm seeking.
These two dresses caused me to realize that I'm seeking certain specifics in the perfect dress: a lower neckline (not high or boatneck), simple darts (no pleats), and a separate bodice and skirt. In sum, a classic, simple sheath. So I was really excited when I saw McCall's 5972 because it met the requirements.
However, I should have read the instructions closer before I cut it out: the dress has a side zipper, but instead of requiring the lining to be finished by hand (which would have taken it out of the running for the perfect dress anyways), the armscye are finished with purchased bias binding. Ugh?! What RTW dress is finished with bias binding?! Yes, I could make my own, but this is surely not the perfect dress. I will finish this UFO at some point, maybe, but for right now, I'm too angry to look at it.
I never noticed McCall's 5753 as a candidate for the perfect dress because of the poufy sleeved, bedazzled brown v-neck cover dress.
But look at the sleeveless dress: a simple sheath, plain darts, a back zipper, no bias binding required.
Stay tuned: my search may be over!
P.S. At the next Simplicity pattern sale, I'm going to grab Simplicity 2648. For some unexplainable reason I prefer darts, but after spending 4 hours yesterday marking and sewing all the darts in the lining and fashion fabric of M5753, I'm going to try princess seams. I really like sewing princess seams, and they are much less time consuming! I'm not getting too excited, though, as it'd be greedy to wish for two perfect dresses.