Comments on: Ease over decades

By: j.

j. — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:39:31 +0000

No particular reason, except (a) I only have a few books (Knitter’s Almanac, Handknitting with MS and whatever the hardcover one is by MS with the Phoenix in it), and (b) from what I recall of EPS (from MS books), there really isn’t a discussion about how to allocate ease; once you’ve decided how much to allocate to the chest, which I don’t really remember being discussed in great detail (how to decide how much to add, I mean), everything else, girth-wise, was set in stone, while most of the vertical distances amounted to “as long as you need it to be”. In that way, I find EPS more of a set of rules akin to gynametry: if your finished chest measurement is X, then you must have an armhole depth of Y, although later an exception was carved out to state that for a raglan(?) it would likely not be more than 10 inches. To me, EPS results in a sweater that’s anatomically correct, but not necessarily well-fitting. (It fits well because it’s big enough to cover you, I guess.)

Anyway, because of (b), the teachings of EPS were omitted. The secondary purpose of the survey when I did it, after understanding how the dimensions of each piece were derived from body measurements and why certain amounts of ease were chosen (I never really figured out the “why” except “it was the style at the time”), was to figure out how different designers computed set-in sleeve shaping based on body measurements, and EPS certainly wouldn’t have done for that. (I also omitted Barbara Walker’s Knitting from the Top, because she glosses over fit in favour of construction.)

But that being said, I’m going to double-check to see if my EPS teachings at least mention a range of ease.

By: Ruth Schooley

Ruth Schooley — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 22:56:27 +0000

I’m not going to make recommendations, because I’m impressed with your idea and don’t want to suggest something without research. (it’s just my usual stupidity-aversion)

Having gotten that caveat out of the way, is there a reason you’re omitting Elizabeth Zimmermann/Meg Swansen? Even if the EPS can be directly linked to Duncan, EZ had a much bigger influence by virtue of easier-to-read prose.

By: kbsalazar

kbsalazar — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:21:22 +0000

There’s another book I’d recommend for your fit survey:

Montse Stanley’s Creating and Knitting Your Own Designs for a Perfect Fit

Also out of print, and of early ’80s vintage, but excellently written and presented. The link above is to an in-depth review.

If you’d like to include it but don’t have a copy handy, write to me and tell me what measurements and ease factors you’re documenting, and I’ll be happy to do the look-ups for you.

Kim

By: Cynthia

Cynthia — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:44:46 +0000

Remember when Vogue Knitting used to tell you how much ease there was in a pattern? Now they just tell you what size the model is wearing. What good is that?

By: Carol

Carol — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:43:34 +0000

I am very curious to hear what “average” ease is, and how it’s changed over time. (In another world, that would be a law review article: A Chronological Study of Ease in Handknit Garments Relative To Sociological Ramifications in the Fashion Industry?) I often hear ranges given, say “two to four inches” except I think that there can be a big difference between a sweater with 2 inches of ease and 4 inches, especially at the smaller sizes. I also suspect that there will be a correlation with the popular styles/trends of the time, i.e., in the 80s, ease will be roomier than the forties.

In other words, I wait with bated breath.

Of course, the next generation of knitters will have to factor in the soon-to-be-ubiquitous boob job, so who knows how it will all shake out…

By: orata

orata — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:47:22 +0000

Wow–thanks for posting the link to The Knitting Architect!

I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on Elizabeth Zimmermann’s EPS in the context of ease measurements and proportions found in these other books–does her percentage of a key number correspond well to the measurements the other sources have come up with? If you figure ease into your key number, then take a percentage of this for the sleeve measurements, your sleeves will have proportionately less ease rather than an absolute number. How does this play into it?

By: AuntieAnn

AuntieAnn — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:19:25 +0000

I’m doing more (many more) socks than sweaters these days, and find it amazing that hardly any sock books seem to address negative ease, which I find critical to making socks that fit well. Of the many sock books I own, so far only Cat Bordhi’s newest one uses negative ease.

By: Mary-Lou Quick

Mary-Lou Quick — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:44:57 +0000

This is very interesting, and thanks for the link to the Knitting Architect which I hadn’t seen before. Look forward to seeing your survey. Meanwhile, you make no comment about Ida Riley Duncan, and I would be interested in hearing someone else’s thoughts – I have a copy of Knit to Fit, and whilst I found it interesting, I found myself constantly irritated by the little bits that she appeared to have left out in explaining the design process