Archive for December, 2005

Negative space

Monday, December 26th, 2005

A few weeks ago, I flirted with folly. I thought about knitting sweatpants. No, not those IK sweatpants, but something in a 4-ply weight cashmere. (With a knitting machine. I’m not crazy.)

I successfully fought off that demon, but the thoughts about pants coincided with a couple of recent magazine articles.

The most challenging part of fitting trousers is getting the crotch right. You don’t want it so deep that the seam intersection feels like it’s suspended around your knees (unless that’s the look you’re going for, I guess) or creates that weird horizontal pouch in front when you’re walking; and you don’t want it too shallow, either, for obvious reasons. If you decide to alter the depth of the crotch, you might wind up adversely affecting the fit around the hips. Of course you can plan for this challenge by adding extra-wide seam allowances for fitting purposes or by making a muslin first, but even so, fitting the crotch was always a hit-or-miss sort of thing for me.*

There’s a good article by Joyce Murphy in the most recent issue of Threads magazine on fitting pants that I wish I’d been able to read years ago.

Usually, pants-fitting advice involved measuring your crotch depth (sit on a hard chair, use a rigid ruler to measure from the chair seat surface to your waist), then slashing and spreading (or overlapping) the upper portion of the pants pattern so that the crotch depth on the pattern matched your measured crotch depth. Murphy’s article describes a method in which the contours of your “negative space” are taken, and transferred to the pattern, altering the side seams to accommodate the changes.

The “negative space” is the cross-sectional area defined by the crotch seam — it’s more or less U-shaped. Imagine you’ve got a pair of trousers in your hands, and you turn them inside out. Then you stuff one leg inside the other so that you’re holding half a pair of trousers. That edge of fabric running from the center front waistband to the center back waistband is the crotch seam, and that empty area is your negative space. Taking a measurement and copying the curvatures of your own negative space is an improvement over the measure-your-crotch-depth technique: while lots of people can have the same crotch depth, the, um, bulges defining their negative space can be different.

At about the same time, the most recent issue of INKnitters came out, with Bonnie Triola’s machine knitting column in which she answers questions sent in by readers. This time around, one reader wanted to make his wife a pair of square crotch pants, but lacked a pattern. Triola supplied the formula: basically, these elastic-waisted, pull-on pants are knitted from the hem to the waist in two pieces (left and right, each piece comprising the front and back leg), and the crotch is shaped by binding off 1 inch at the front, 2 inches at the back, and knitting the remaining stitches until the work measured from the bind-off rows equals the measured crotch depth plus waistband casing.

I’m not certain what I found more alarming: the ultra-short crotch seam in the square crotch pants, the fact that someone was willing to publish the fact that he wanted a loved one to wear a pair of square crotch pants, or the opportunity to start making jokes about box-shaped… never mind.

If you’re having difficulty visualizing what’s so alarming about these square crotch pants, I’ve got an illustration for you.

Do you want to see my negative space?
(more…)

Shout out to the imprint webring

Saturday, December 24th, 2005

Hmm. It seems that within the two weeks after Hurricane Katrina (I’m not saying there’s a connection, I’m just speculating because I haven’t any other explanation) a number of sites that were on the imprint webring were bumped off due to a “no response” error. The details of those sites weren’t lost, they were just moved to a queue, but unfortunately the Ringsurf script didn’t involve notifying anyone involved. Thanks to Brenda (Needle Beetle) for alerting me to this.

I’ve gone through these sites, and fixed up their Ringsurf status. If you think you’re supposed to be in the ring but aren’t, then the reason is that I couldn’t find your ring code on your site (or you didn’t meet the conditions of membership). You can fix up your Ringsurf details yourself by logging on to your Ringsurf account, or if you’ve forgotten how to do that, I can fix it for you. E-mail me with the URL for your imprint ring code.

If you’re wondering what the heck the imprint ring is, it’s a webring for self-publishing knitting designers who also sell their own works using their website, whether in print or PDF. (Shop the ring!). If you’re interested in joining up, the (unformatted) details are here. Coming in January — a nicer-looking page, a better ring logo, improved monitoring(!), blog buttons, and more promo.

Too big, too fast?

Saturday, December 17th, 2005

Did you see this?

If you’re too lazy to click (and by the way, I’m going to make more of a conscientious effort to code all links to open in a new window, although I’m in the habit of using a tabbed browser), No No Kitty is packing it in — no wholesale or retail yarns, just special requests and back to hobby-level production. The explanation: the business grew too large, too quickly.

Now, if an erstwhile hobby takes over your life and ceases to be a joy, that’s a good reason to scale back. But just in case you need this reminder for your own fledgling business: if you think you’re being overwhelmed and there aren’t enough hours in the day, yet you’re not ready to call it quits, hire somebody.

Don’t hire someone to take over the creative portion, obviously; but get someone to pitch in with the more mundane tasks, like packing orders and schlepping to the post office, rinsing newly-dyed skeins, stirring pots, stapling, taking pictures, updating websites, managing the books (if you’re not already using an accountant; besides, since you’re making or losing money in self-employment, your taxes got a little more complicated anyway). Hire a family member for minimum wage, and they become a useful business expense (your aforementioned accountant can advise you how to benefit the most from that sort of thing). Hire a local teenager, because practical experience in running a business is good for everyone. And they get to start contributing to their RRSPs (or 401Ks or whatever the heck you call them where you are).

Monthly archives are back

Friday, December 16th, 2005

Over to the right, you’ll see two drop-down selection boxes for month and year. In theory, once you select two values, you’ll be transported to the posts from that period. You won’t be transported anywhere unless two values are selected. If no posts exist for the month you chose, you’ll have to use your back button.

Let there be joy and celebration. Let jubilation reign.

(Yes, I know 2006 hasn’t happened yet. And you’ll find that there’s maybe, like, one post for each of 2001 through 2003. In fact, I can’t remember if there actually is a post in 2003, since I didn’t restore all the old posts after the Great Server Crash of 2004. So have fun.)

Another one.

Thursday, December 15th, 2005

Woolgathered. Again, another online magazine along the very same lines.

I need to finish writing the next instalment about the great online-magazine-no-compensation-for-value toboggan ride.

As expectant Padme waited on Tatooine…

Wednesday, December 14th, 2005

… she decided to get a head start on the booties for Luke and Leia, using her new Jedi knitting needles.

If only the Trade Federation could do something about the outrageous KnitPicks shipping costs to the Outer Rim, she’d be happy.

(How? It’s the old fiber optic trick: internal reflection of light along the length of a carrier substance, but here the carrier is shaped like a knitting needle. You might have seen something similar at the dentist in the guise of a little “flashlight” that bends around corners. You might have also seen those fiber optic lamps that look like little fountains of light, or the novelty pens. As an idea for knitting in the dark, I think it’s nifty, but the potential weight of the battery case at the end gives me pause.)

YKW's hooker sister

Sunday, December 11th, 2005

What Not to Crochet.

The cape in the December 9 entry is the crochet version of the LB Homespun cape that was on the “fake” advertisement cover of Vogue Knitting (the issue that looked like it had a purple thing on the cover, when the real cover was that bulky orange thing).

Beating a dead shrug

Friday, December 9th, 2005

You know what I just realized?

Shrugs are just so 24th century. I mean, look. The Bajoran military was all about shoulder coverings.

Yarn really reincarnated

Tuesday, December 6th, 2005

Amy reported it — Mission Falls yarn is coming back. (Remember, its death knell sounded about three or so months ago.)

The licensee resurrecting the line, CNS Yarns, is based in Montreal. It’s also the manufacturer of Lily Chin’s yarn line. It’s sort of like a balancing out for karmic purposes.

Toys for knitting geeks (now with edits!)

Monday, December 5th, 2005

… of the widget variety. Yeah, I’m no graphic designer, and good heavens, I was surprised to see that I could zip a file with no effort (um, did every version of OS X have that built in? because I wasn’t paying attention).

Anyway. If you slogged through my most recent Knitty article, you might have run out of energy and therefore need assistance with even the most trivial of tasks. So here’s little tool to help you with your number-crunching.

If you have a Mac and you’re running OS X Tiger, you can download the same calculator tool in widget form (scroll down to the bottom of the page). If you install it and think that the format is grotesquely huge (it’s 514 pixels wide), let me know so I can reduce the size for future widgets (oh, there are so many I want to write! such fun! they’ll be listed here, in the stitch & bitch section). I’m running at 1680 x 1050 so most widget fonts look too small for me.

[Note: um. The person whom I currently consider the lowest common denominator of computer users (can you feel the love?) claims that it's confusing that one sets the side to be calculated to zero. This person wants three checkboxes or radio buttons that say "calculate this side" or something like that. If you've got a viewpoint and you can actually knit, I'd like to hear it.]

Pondering sleeves reminded me of this Fassett gem from Rowan 38:

Do you know what’s wrong with this picture? (Other than the fact that it’s a stranded colourwork sweater made from DK-weight yarn — gorgeous, but not for wearing indoors.)

What kind of sleeves does it have?

They’re not raglan, although the colourwork suggests that style line.

They’re not set-in, although the sweater seems to be a close fit on the model.

As with most Kaffe Fassett designs, which are great on artistic composition but not so great on fitting, they’re drop shoulders (or modified drop, can’t recall). If you’ve got the magazine, you can see the seamlines crossing the model’s upper arms. The sweater was clearly pinned to give it a tighter fit. And the model’s odd pose suggests that there’s something odd about the fit — while the body is close-fitting, the sleeves are clearly baggy. Bah. It would be gorgeous, and wearable, too, if it had been knit to fit at a finer gauge.

Edit: Along the same lines, take a look at the Monday offering at YKW. Note the apparently semi-fitted body, with baggy drop-shoulder sleeves. I’d venture a guess that this was pinned at the back as well, although I’ve never seen the schematic for this pattern. (If it turned out to be a set-in sleeve, well, that’s just wrong because nobody’s shoulders are that wide. And if they were, they couldn’t fit into that sweater body.)