Following up on last Wednesday's post on looped cast-ons, today I'll blunder through the family of knitted-on cast ons. Reference books not detailed below are listed in the original post.

There are dozens and dozens of cast ons. I know I haven't gotten you your particular favorite yet. Eventually I hope to cover as many as I can find. Why bother?? Because it's always nice to have options, to find new ways to do things and in doing so - to find out that some might just be a tad better than others in a specific use case. To someone who only owns a hammer, everything looks like a nail. To someone with a whole toolbox at their disposal, the hammer might not always be exactly what's needed.

I'll keep posting these. For the ones that are well illustrated or easy to describe, I'll forgo illustrations, presenting instead these reference links. When I get to some of the less widely seen (or harder to describe) styles, I'll begin adding my own illustrations. But we're still well within the Known World here, so please forgive the lack of pix.


Simple Knit-On Cast On

This is a very popular cast on, although it's more often taught outside the US. It's often taught to children learning in large class situations. I know several knitters who learned to knit as small children in schools as far flung as Hong Kong, Brasilia, and Bangalore, all of whom report this as the first cast on they were taught.

Knitting on produces a neat, even edge that's less elastic and more robust than that produced by the half-hitch cast-on. It can be worked either as the foundation for an entire piece, or as a method of adding stitches at the end or in the middle of a row. It's not uncommon for example to find a scrap of knitting on (or a sister technique) forming the top edge of a buttonhole.

Advantages:? No need to measure out long tail lengths. Easy to teach absolute beginners. Miller in Heirloom Knitting mentions the utility of this simple cast on for lace (she uses half-hitch and invisible cast ons, too), citing the edge construction as being suitable for going back later and picking up or attaching additional stitches.

Disadvantages:? Not as stretchy as some cast-ons, but stretchy enough for most uses, even lace. The front and back have a different appearance. Some people don't like the look of one or the other, and add a row to their pattern to make sure that the preferred side is visible when the garment is finished.

On line references:
http://www.knittinghelp.com/knitting/basic_techniques/index.php
http://www.wonderful-things.com/newknit1.htm
http://www.mycraftbook.com/Cast_On_Stitch.asp (a little hard to follow)
http://www.learntoknit.com/instructions_kn.php3
http://www.knitting.co.nz/pages/knitting/caston.php

Book references:
DMC Encyclopedia, Fig. 419
Vogue p. 26
Bantam, p. 17
Miller, Heirloom Knitting, p. 33

Cable Cast On

The cable cast on is very closely related to plain old knitting on. The difference is in the formation of the new loops. In knitting on, the needle is inserted in a stitch in the normal fashion, and the new loop is pulled through the old stitch and placed on the end of the left hand needle. In cabling on, the new loop is formed in the space between the last stitch cast on and the one before it. (The first stitch in a cable cast-on is always a plain on knit on stitch because at the outset there aren't two loops on the needle in between which one can pick up that new stitch).

Advantages:? No need to calculate tail lengths. Very firm stitch with a pronounced decorative edge. One of the least stretchy cast-ons. Excellent for cuffs, hems, but less useful for necklines, sock tops and other high-stretch scenarios. Very good choice for cottons or other less-elastic yarns that have a tendency to stretch out (and stay stretched) with wear. Makes excellent, long-wearing buttonholes.

Disadvantages:? Stretch (see above). Like knitting on, this has two very different sides visually. Some people add or subtract a row from their pattern to make sure that the preferred side ends up on the front of the work.

On-line sources:
http://www.knittinghelp.com/knitting/basic_techniques/index.php
http://www.wonderful-things.com/newknit1.htm
http://www.knittingatknoon.com/cable.html
http://www.worldknit.com/howto/howtoknit/beginningtechniques/castingon.html

Book references:
Stanfield, p. 16
Vogue, p. 26
Bantam, p. 17


Alternate Cable Cast On

I've only seen this one detailed in Vogue. It's a variant of the standard cable cast-on, made even firmer by working the cast-on row's stitches through the back, rather than through the front of the piece. I haven't tried it myself, so I can only report the book's assertion that this method creates a firm edge. Also, from the accompanying illustration, it has a much less defined "edge spine" running across the bottom edge. People wishing to avoid that visual edge at the bottom of ribbing may want to experiment with this method.

Book reference:
Vogue, p. 26.

Thank you for all the get-well wishes. I'm still flu-laden, and now joined with two sick kiddies at home, I am at least clear headed enough to sit vertical, type and knit. I don't know where this particular bug came from, but it appears to take 10 days to run its course. An eternity of delight...

For the Love of Knitting

Despite some huge budget problems, my local library is still getting a trickle of new books. Patrolling the new book shelves, I found For the Love of Knitting: A celebration of the Knitter's Art, edited by Kari Cornell (Stillwater,Minnesota: Voyageur Press, 2004).



This one is a knitting coffee table book. Big format, copious, colorful illustrations, lots of "name appeal," but little content. It's a collection of essays by the likes of Zimmerman, , Falick, Swansen, Klass, and other knitting writers. About a third (including the Zimmerman, and Klass pieces) have appeared before in magazines, newspapers, and even in other knitting inspiration books like Knitting Lessons, Knitting Sutra, and KnitLit. I was surprised to see so much material mined from recent sources and reprinted in a book of this type.

While this book is certainly pretty, and the essays are interesting, no one is going to learn anything new from this book. There are no projects. There are no descriptions of techniques. The majority of the pictures are of knitting booklets from before 1960, shots of yarn baskets, archive photos of knitting and knitters, and pictures of knitting in art. Only a couple of the essays have pictures of immediate relevance in them. In terms of garment inspiration, there are a couple of close-ups of some of Solveig Hisdal's stranded work (taken out of context because the whole garment isn't shown); plus several shots of "art knitting" - a couple of wearables, plus various soft and hard installations incorporating knitted fabrics. Very little for a book so large and so copiously illustrated.

I also found the editorial tone of the thing got increasingly irritating. An example the caption on a Russian postcard, found on page 50. "Knitting Companion: In this quaint Russian postcard, a young woman keeps one eye on her knitting and another on her cat, who looks about ready to pounce on the next free stand of yarn." I can see the picture. there's no reason to describe it in the caption. I want to know more about the postcard. Were such things common? When was it made? The style in the picture makes me think it might be from the 1920s. A Russian postcard from the 1920s? There has to be a story there, but there is no further attribution or sourcing for the postcard. Nothing whatsoever beyond showing the picture and then describing it overly cutely.

So if a sample course of essays describing knitting (as opposed to knitting technique), illustrated with patronizingly described eye candy appeals to you, you'll probably enjoy this rather formulaic book. If nothing else, you may find a first taste of someone's writing here that would lead you on to her or his other works.

Final verdict: Save yourself the $30.00 cover price. Borrow this one from the library.

My older daughter is new to knitting. She just began at the Boston Knit Out this past fall. So far she's done several foofy garter scarves for herself and her friends (first lesson in casting on and the knit stitch); a 42-stitch hat (using DPNs to knit in the round, decreases); and a felted bag (more reinforcement of knitting in the round, plus making a larger project, and I-cord, and picking up along an edge).

You'll notice that all of her finished items were all-knit/big yarn projects. She wanted to "graduate" from all-knit and learn purling. She also wanted to use smaller needles. So we talked it over, and she suggested doing a pair of ribbed fingerless mitts. In fingering weight yarn. On US #0s. Without a pattern.

Now, did I tell her that many adults break out in prickly heat at the thought of using DPNs, let alone size #0s? Or that a 56-stitch around wristlet can contain as many stitches as an entire big-needle sweater? Or that I've seen grown women cry when someone suggests they knit (gasp) without a pattern?

Naah. What she didn't know couldn't daunt her.

So she cast on and began knitting. And knitting. And knitting. She plugged away at her mitts every evening after homework, while we (as a family) played video games. At first, being new to purling, her stitches were loose and wobbly, with ladders in the corners between the DPNs. But practice soon took care of that:



For everyone who has ever said to me, "I tried DPNs but I couldn't manage them," or "It takes too long to learn something new," I present her learning progression. She worked the bottom one first, then the top one, both using the same yaran, stitch count and needles. You can see how her gauge, stitch accuracy and general neatness improved steadily throughout the project.




Sure, one's bigger than the other, but both are wearable, and she does wear them proudly.

Knitting takes time to learn - there's no getting out of that fact. Some people DO learn faster than others, but everyone who wants to learn IS capable of doing so. The key is practice. Unfortunately practice is a dirty word in today's instant-dissolve, short attention span world.

Not satisfied with how something is turning out? Keep at it. Do something small and inconsequential that uses the same skills. Work out the kinks and bugs on the practice piece rather than the luxe yarn you chose for your "real" project. But keep going. You CAN do it. As the Target Child says "No stinking piece of string was going to defeat me!"

Here's her pattern. (She?thinks her fingerless mitts look like the disc-shooting zapper gauntlets worn by a character in one of her favorite PS2 games).

Zapper Gauntlets

About 150 yards or so of a smooth non-itchy fingering weight sock yarn. This pair was knit in some remnants of On Line Linie 6 Supersocke 100 Cotton, but any sock yarn will do.

5 DPNs, Size US #0 (2mm)

Gauge: Approximately 9 stitches = 1 inch (2.5cm), measured over K2, P2 ribbing.

Cast on 56 stitches (14 stitches per needle). Join to continue working in the round. Knit six rows. Change to K2, P2 rib and work until piece measures approximately 4 inches long (10cm).

At the beginning of the next round, bind off 10 stitches. Continue working around wristlet. You should have one needle with 4 stitches on it, then three needles each with 14 stitches. When you get to the hole created by the bind-off, flip the work over and head back in the other direction. Work five more rows of K2, P2 rib this way - flat, ending at the right side of the growing thumb hole.

On the next row we return to knitting in the round. Start Needle #1 by casting on 10 stitches (all needles should have 14 stitches again). Continue in established K2, P2 ribbing pattern, working in the round until piece measures approximately 1 inch (2.5cm) measured from cast-on row above thumb opening. Bind off loosely in pattern, and darn in all ends.

That's it!

(More in the cast-on series next week, I promise. Looking up all those links is more work than I have time for right now mid-deadline.)

Monday I posted about teaching my sock class, and as part of it - teaching the backwards loop (half-hitch) cast-on for sock tops. I wrote that I thought the half-hitch cast-on was the stretchiest one I knew. I use it often both for sock tops, the bottom edge of lace pattern pieces, and the edge of watch caps - in fact, most things I want to stretch to their maximum potential. Sockbug wrote in to say there were other, stretchier choices.

I've heard people express skepticism on the durability of a simple half-hitch sock top edge, but not its potential for stretch. (For the record, out of around 30 pairs of socks in my own drawer, and easily another 75 knit for other people, I've never experienced nor had feedback that a half-hitch cast on edge has failed). Still, I'm always open to learning new things (there's a nifty one below I'll be trying out soon.)

Just to make sure we're talking about the same thing, here's the half-hitch cast-on:



Now I can't say I've used every other cast-on out there (there are dozens and dozens). I'm always looking for more. Here's a round-up of what I can find on the Web, and in some standard reference books. Today's group is the family of half-hitch/backwards loop cast-ons, including a couple of rarely seen variants.

Reference book key:

Vogue Knitting. I have the old edition, (c) 1989. Page refs are good for that one.

DMC Encyclopedia is also known as Therese de Dillmont's Complete Encyclopedia of Needlework. It exists in dozens of editions. Mine is the Running Press one put out in 1974. Page numbers can vary, but the fig numbers accompanying the text are uniform in all editions. Where possible, I've given the fig numbers as they appear in the knitting section.

Bantam Needlework. The Bantam Step by Step Book of Needlework I've reviewed this one before. It also exists in several editions. Mine is the 1979 issue. To my knowledge, page numbers are constant across editions.

Dictionary of Needlework. The Dictionary of Needlework by S. Caulfield, and B. Saward. This is a big wandering needlework omnibus, first put out in 1882. I have the 1972 Arno Press reproduction.

Stanfield. Encyclopedia of Knitting. This is a newer book, (c) 2000 - and is one of the easiest to grasp, yet unpatronizing or project dependent of the current crop of books for beginning knitters.

Apologies for not citing Mary Thomas. That book is Somewhere. Somewhere being defined as "within the house, but AWOL."


Half Hitch (Backward Loop; Single) Cast-On

This one is the simplest of all - just a series of loops mounted on the needle. I've seen people work the half-hitches in either the right or left orientation. I like to follow up this particular cast-on with a single row of plain knit before I launch into a ribbing. This seems to firm it up a bit, and avoids the untwisting purl problem that some people experience when working in the round.

Advantages: No need to measure out a long length, then hope you have enough set aside to accomplish all the required stitches. Very stretchy. Easy to teach to absolute beginners. A standard choice for adding stitches at the end of rows, or replacing stitches mid row (as in some buttonholes).

Disadvantages: Purls can untwist the simple loops of the cast-on row. Not the sturdiest, most stable edge. Some people think makes a sloppy, loose looking edge compared to other methods.

On line references:
http://www.dnt-inc.com/barhtmls/knit/sco.html
http://www.socknitters.com/toe-up/tulessonone.htm
http://www.knitnet.com/common/support/caston.htm
http://www.knittinghelp.com/knitting/basic_techniques/index.php
http://www.wonderful-things.com/newknit1a.htm

Book references:
DMC Encyclopedia, Fig 420
Vogue, p. 25
Bantam, p. 16
Stanfield, p. 17

Double Loop Variant of Half-Hitch Cast-On

I haven't tried this one myself, and just ran across it researching this note. The source cites it as being very suitable for lace edges in which multiple increases occur rapidly on the succeeding row. That leads me to believe it's also quite stretchy. It also looks a bit more open than the plain half-hitch cast on.

The best way I can describe it is to form a standard half-hitch loop, but before pulling it snug up against the previously formed stitches, to take it and give it a half twist, then place the loop formed by the half twist on the end of the needle - in effect making two stitches from every half-hitch loop.

Book reference:
DMC Encyclopedia of Needlework: Figure 421

Double Cast-On or Thumb Cast On

I learned this one only recently. It's a useful addition to my bag of ticks, but I haven't settled on a best use case scenario for it yet, although I could probably substitute it for other places in which I'd do a standard long tail cast-on.

I'm grouping this one with the half-hitch family because the ultimate row formed at the bottom of the work is secured by half-hitches, although it could be argued that it more properly belongs in the long-tail family. It's a simpler version of the long tail method, and starts by leaving an ample tail (about 3x the width of the thing to be cast-on); and making a slip knot. The knitter forms a half-hitch using the long tail, but holds it open with the thumb. Into this loop around the thumb he or she then knits a stitch using the working strand of yarn (NOT the long tail).

Advantages: Firmer than half-hitch. Slightly easier to teach than some other long-tail methods.

Disadvantages: Has a tendency to become too tight. I correct this by casting on over two needles held together. Needs a guesstimate on how long the tail needs to be to accommodate the required number of stitches (I sometimes cheat by knotting together two strands for the first row, cutting one at the end of the cast-on and accepting the fact that I'll have an extra end to darn in later). Because the bottom end is half-hitch, it isn't as firm as some other cast-ons. Some think it may be as prone to wear as the half-hitch.

On-Line references:
http://www.wonderful-things.com/newknit1a.htm
http://www.knittinghelp.com/knitting/basic_techniques/index.php (last link under long tail)
http://www.mycraftbook.com/Cast_On_Stitch.asp

and an interesting variant - doing this in pattern for ribbing to create an edge with no visual ridge along it. I'd not seen this one before today either. I'm going to have to try this one out myself!

http://morcatknits.typepad.com/cast_on_workshop/

Book reference:
Bantam, p. 16
Vogue, p. 25 (long tail thumb method)
Dictionary of Needlework, p. 281
Stanfield, p. 17

A couple of people have asked me why I thought a Dutch heel was easier than other forms of heel-flap sock heels; and how they fit.

First, there are lots of other treatises on Dutch heels elsewhere on the Web. Judy Gibson has a nice write-up on this heel variant. It's part of the Socknitters Cybersocks on-line sock tutorial. Regina Williams has done a work-up on the math needed to construct Dutch style heels on toe-ups.

In terms of history Dutch heels date back to at least the 1880s. I found one mention of them on the Web in a transcription of an 1883 edition of The Girl's Own Paper, a typical young women's interest magazine of the time. They may in fact be older, but sources on sock heels before 1883 at my fingertips as I type this aren't very copious.

In terms of fit, Dutch heels have the ample instep (upper foot/ankle) of other shaped heels. That means they're deeper in the ankle than are short-rowed sock heels. They are also a bit more snug side to side than other forms of round or square heels. People with average to narrow width feet and especially people with narrow heels will find them quite comfortable. While my own feet are in the walrus flipper range of size, my heels are narrower than one would expect given my paddle-like toes. I am still experimenting with Dutch heels, knit both cuff down and toe up. I'll report back on comfort and fit as compared to short-rowed heels once I get a few more pairs into my wash/wear cycle.

I think the Dutch heel I've learned is easier than a standard round heel because the heel cup area maintains the same stitch shaping repeat throughout. the short-row segment that forms the heel has parallel sides. You don't need to keep as close track of where you are in the shaping's progression as you complete that stage of the work.

Here's an example of a hypothetical Dutch heel, worked on 7.5 stitches per inch/10.5 rows per inch (the standard label gauge of Schoeller/Stahl Fortissima/Socka - a textbook classic sock yarn). I've calculated this for a average sized cuff-down sock, one that would probably fit someone wearing a US Women's 7-8 medium shoe size. This works out to a very average sock of 60 stitches around. To simplify things, I'll suppose a plain stockinette heel flap.

I'd work the ankle as desired. When it was completed, I'd work my heel on 30 stitches (half the available circumference). Because I normally use a set of 5 DPNs, that means I'd be doing my heel across two of them. People using two circs would work this across one of their needles. Magic Loop folks would work this across the stitches on one side of their needle's loop.



I'd knit the heel flap in plain stockinette, slipping the first stitch of each row to make nice easy to pick up in chain selvedges. I'd probably make it about 30 rows deep, ending after completing a wrong-side row.

To turn the heel, starting on a knit side row, I'd knit 18, work a ssk, then turn my work over. Heading back in the other direction, I'd slip the first stitch, then purl 6. Then I'd do a purl two together, and flip my work over again. Back on the knit side row, I'd slip the first stitch (that's the one I purled two together on during the previous row), then knit 6 and work another ssk. I'd repeat the slip 1, purl 6, p2tog, turn row; followed by the slip one knit 6, ssk, turn row until I had consumed ALL the stitches available on my heel needles, and my total on-needle(s) stitch count was 8, after the completion of a purl side row.

To make the gusset, I'd knit across the top of the heel to put myself in position to start the gusset pick-ups. Looking down the left side of the heel flap, I'd pick up 15 stitches in the chain stitch selvedge loops. At the bottom of the heel flap I'd do the anti-hole cheat by picking up an additional stitch at the base of the flap, for a total of 16 new stitches. Then I'd pick up my dormant instep needle and work across the top-of-foot stitches. If I were using the circ methods, I'd switch back to my heel-bearing circ or circ segment after the foot-top stitches were done. Now At the base of the heel flap on the other side of the foot-top stitches, I'd first pick up that anti-hole cheat stitch, then 15 in the chain stitch selvedge loops heading back up the right side of the heel flap.

I now have all the stitches I need to create my gusset. I'd knit across the heel flap and down the left hand edge until only three stitches remained, then I'd do a K2tog, and knit the last stitch on the needle. Changing to my top of foot needle(s) I'd work those stitches, then switch back to my heel needle(s), working a K1, ssk, and then knitting back up the side of the gusset and across the top of my heel. I'd knit the next round plain (no K2tog or ssk decrease at the corners of the gusset). After the plain row, I'd do another decrease row, alternating decrease rows and plain rows until I was back to having 60 stitches total again, the same number I had before the heel began.

so we see that the only real difference between a Dutch heel and the other standard heel flap and gusset heels is in the formation of the heel turn (heel cup). In the Dutch heel there are only two rows to remember - s1, knit (x), ssk; and s1, purl (x), p2tog. That to me at least makes it easier to calculate and to teach. Also to work in fits and starts, as my briefcase sock per force should be a project in which the need to keep track of where I am is minimal.

Not much knitting progress to report on Rogue. Other priorities intrude this week. I have however gotten a fair bit done on my "briefcase sock."? That's the pair of socks in progress that live in my work backpack. I like to keep one going that's done while waiting for appointments, in line at the post office, and in those other bits of time that would otherwise be frittered away.



Briefcase socks are usually not of the most elaborate styling or construction. They have to be able to be picked up and put down without losing one's place in a pattern, and mindless enough to do with only minimal attention. As such, self-patterning yarns are ideal. This pair is in Reynolds Swizzle. It's marked at 7.5 stitches on a US #1 or #2. I'm using 1.25mm needles (US #0000), and getting 10.5 spi. This particular sock is 80 stitches around. As you can see, even at the much smaller gauge, I'm getting accent stripes that are perfectly satisfactory. They're mostly one row wide, with a two row overlap of about 25-29 stitches. This pair is being done in the standard toe-up/short-row heel style that has become my automatic default. I began the sock at the very beginning of a yellow stripe. I've just started the short-row heel section at the blue stripe now just off the needles. I'll probably begin the second sock at the start of either the blue or green accent stripe, just to be playful and have a pair of fraternal rather than identical twins.

Why do I knit my socks at such annoyingly tiny gauges?? I like them better. I find densely knit socks to be more comfortable, with none of that walking on pebbles feeling others report as a reason for not liking hand-knit socks. I have found that densely knit socks wear better and last longer, especially ones that are a bit tight on the foot. Socks that are large enough around to permit shifting can bunch up inside the shoe and either wear themselves thinner over time, or create blisters.

I find that most 4-ply fingering weight sock yarns work just fine for knitting at gauges significantly finer than they are marked. Three ply weight fingering is even thinner. It's tough to find it now that the old Kroy 3-ply is history, but I can get up to 12 stitches per inch out of a good 3-ply. That's fine enough to knit many pre-1900 era sock patterns verbatim. Cast on 96 stitches?? No problem with a 3-ply.

Finally how am I liking the Swizzle compared to other sock yarns?? It's o.k. Not great. I find it a tad harsher than the Regia line and the Fortissima/Socka line. It's also thinner looking un-knit, but denser (less airy) than the other two. The narrow, widely spaced skinny stripe is different, but boring. I may try to liven up the sock ankle a bit by either purling the accent rows, or by playing with a slip stitch or mosaic pattern on them.

Aside:? Welcome to my Japanese visitors!? I have no idea what the referring page says, but you are more than welcome to wander around and rummage through my past entries. Google translation tells me this

???????!

means "Happy knitting!"?? Although automatic translations are usually too literal (and usually produce silly output) I hope it's not too far off.

Here's about 11 inches or so of Rogue. In the continuing cascade of mods made necessary by my shifting to a thinner yarn and smaller gauge, I've worked six of the side cable repeats before branching back to complete the side panel chart. No problem there.



I do note however that as expected - this is going to be a weighty object in cotton. Cotton weighs more per yard than wool. 50 grams of cotton yarn will contain fewer yards than 50 grams of a comparable thickness wool. So far I've used about 300 grams of cotton. That's roughly 2/3 of a pound. My finished piece may end up weighing as much as 2 or 3 pounds!


Useful tools and toys:

I've gotten quite a few notes lately asking for help with metric conversions, needle sizes, fabric care, garment sizes and yarn weights; confusion about how to figure out repeats given a set stitch count; and requests for descriptions of basic knitting techniques. Here's a raft of tools that I find useful for these purposes, plus some other useful or interesting (or amusing) things tossed in.

Knitting needle size equivalencies (FiberGypsy):
http://www.fibergypsy.com/common/needles.shtml

Metric/Imperial unit conversion calculators:
http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/conversions.html
http://www.mcnichols.com/products/productsupportfiles/conv.calc.htm

Factor generators (good for finding possible pattern repeats from a stitch count total)
http://www.markhorrell.com/tools/factors.asp
http://www.counton.org/explorer/primes/primecalc.shtml

Descriptions of the count (X/X) systems of yarn weight and yardage used by machine knitters:
http://www.cara4webshopping.com/cara_free/yarn-wts.htm
http://www.yarns-and.com/yarnto.htm

How-to videos or animations showing basic knitting techiques:
http://www.knittinghelp.com
http://www.dnt-inc.com/barhtmls/knittech.html

Tutorial on reading lace knitting charts (Heirloom Knitting):
http://www.heirloom-knitting.co.uk/pages/beginners_guide2.html

Fabric care label symbols:
http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/5000/5556.html

Heel stitch count chart (dead link retrieved using Wayback Machine)
http://web.archive.org/web/20021016042840/http://www.magma.ca/~vanmac/heels.htm

Garment size charts:
http://www.yarnstandards.com/sizing.html
http://www.fibergypsy.com/Charts_and_Other_Helpful_Resources/Size_and_Measurement_Charts/

Sock size survey results:
http://www.needletrax.com/SockSizeAnalysis.html#

Jaya's round-up of knitting software availble for Palm handhelds:
http://www.palmsource.com/interests/knitting//

Back neck shaping for the Math-Aware:
http://www.hillcrestknitwear.com/knitting%20info/ff%20back%20neck%20formula.html

Toys

Sockman
http://www.renfro.com/consumer/Renfro/funstuff/sockcalculator/

Assorted esoteric Google time-wasters (Google Blogoscoped):
http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2005-01-29-n34.html

I'm split among several different knitting foci right now. First, there's the upcoming class. I've finished the hand-outs I'll be distributing covering both two circ and one giant circ production;? the practice pair of socks; and the sample mini-sock we'll be making during the workshop. I'm as ready as I'll ever be. I've also gotten word of a potential design commission. If and when that occurs and I'm permitted to bruit about the details, I'll report them here. In the mean time, here are my practice socks, dutifully completed one with the one giant circular technique, and the other using the two-circ method:



Nothing special. Just plain old Regia 6-ply Crazy Color stockinette socks, with Dutch heels, and standard toes grafted to finish. On the pair with the turquoise toe I took care to finish out the color repeat such that the line of grafting ended up being a contrasting color, so the class can see where it is.

Having put the class socks to be, I've picked up Rogue again. A couple of people have asked if I'm doing mirror image Make Ones on either side of the verticals that run up the design. The answer is "Yes."? I don't usually stoop to this level of ultra-refinement, but for this project because the two Make Ones are separated by only one stitch, using them does make a visual difference. Here's how I do them:



To get a make one with a top leg that crosses lower right to upper left (S-style), I lift the running bar between two stitches, mounting it such that the leading leg of the bar is in the front of the needle (standard stitch orientation). Then I knit into the
back of that bar.

To produce a make one with a top leg that crosses lower left to upper right (Z-style), I lift the running bar between two stitches, mounting it such that the leading leg of the bar is in the back of the needle (opposite of standard stitch orientation). Then I knit into the FRONT of that bar.

As to which to deploy in what situation - most of the time I doesn't matter. My standard issue default Make One is S-style. If a pattern just calls for one, that's the one I do. In cases where mirrored ones are needed, I'll experiment. Sometimes the final result looks better if the S-style Make One is deployed on the left of a visual unit, with its sister Z-style deployed on the right. Sometimes it's the other way around. On my Little Dragon Skin I'm working the Z-style on the left of the center spine, and the S-unit on the right.

Rogue photos later this week. I promise.

No Rogue progress. My knitting time is consumed with class-related experimentation. Here's the surviving result:



No surprise. It's a sock knit from leftovers of the same DK-weight Regia 6-Ply Crazy Color yarn I used for The Small One's Crazy Raglan. It's on a single US #3 size 40-inch circ. I'm working these socks at this (for me) giant gauge so I can get in as much experimentation as possible before the actual class.

I've been experimenting with various heels, trying to decide which will be the easiest "classic heel" to use in the workshop for our knit-together project. I'm doing this because I've been told that the majority of people who have signed up have never made socks before. Some have never even knit in the round. I want the class to get through the danger spots of sock construction - cast on, a heel and a toe.

What you see above is a simple Dutch heel. It's not as form-fitting as a round or other more finely shaped heel, but of all the turned heels (as opposed to short-row heels), I think it will be the simplest to both describe and work.

I'm still waffling between showing the heel worked entirely on one side of the sock, with the cable needle looping out done at the left and right of the piece, or re-assorting the stitches after completion of picking up along the sides of the gusset, then working the rest of the sock with the looping out at the center top and bottom of the foot. And as you can see, I've not yet experimented with toes. That's next. Toes may be the kicker on stitch reapportionment. If I'm getting too much laddering with the split on the sides as established, I might re-engineer my thought and move the stitches around either immediately after completion of the final gusset row, just before the toe itself, or back before the gusset decreases are started. And that means that the poor sock you see above will cease to exist in the current form, and be sacrificed to the minor gods of ripping back.

Two items side by side on two circs

An anonymous person asked if I could show or explain how to do two things side by side on two circs.

I have to admit, I cheat somewhat because casting two items on side by side can make for confusion and twisted cast-on rows. I begin each item individually and work the first row before mounting my two items side by side. After I've got a scrap of knitting, i divide the stitches in half. I thread the first half of Item A onto a circ, followed by the first half of item B. Then I take a second circ and thread the other half of item B onto it, followed by the second half of Item A's stitches.



I now have a piece that should look (more or less) like the drawing above. I work across the front side of item A, knitting from it's own ball of yarn. Then I drop that strand, pick up the other and work across the front side of item B. When I finish the last stitch of this side of B, I flip the whole thing over, and using the same B yarn, work back along the reverse of B. Then I drop that strand, pick up the A yarn and work the back side of Item A. At the conclusion of this cycle, I will have completed a full round on both A and B, and have both strands of yarn back in the positions shown in the illustration.

An adorable link, found courtesy of someone who posted it in a LiveJournal knitting community. The thing is in Japanese, but you can enjoy the pictures and objects without reading along.

From what I can gather using the Google language tools, while most of these items are crocheted, the strawberry shortcake (minus the berries) is machine knit. The fruit trifle tart is a box that opens up. The pear purse is trimmed with metallic beads. The chocolates are fridge magnets, and the artist suggests using the cherry topped ice cream bon-bons, the cup of cocoa and the hamburger as pincushions. The moon pie looking thing (two cookies with white filling) hides a tape measure, and the component pieces of the hamburger can be used as coasters - except for the sunny side up egg, which the author notes is too bumpy in the center for stability.

Very clever.

I'm well into my learning sock now, and I have to say that like any method, the one oversize circ technique for knitting in the round (popularized by Bev Galeskas under the name "Magic Loop") has its plusses and minuses. But so do both the two circ method and using traditional DPNs.

Advantages will be mostly felt by newer sock knitters who aren't used to working on DPNs. They include not having all those DPNs in the work, and not having to worry about them falling out in one's knitting bag, or having stitches drop off the ends. Also, because there's a moment where one can pull the yarn of the last stitch on the other side of the needle tight around the circ's cable, it's easier to avoid those corner ladders that can form if tension isn't just right.

Deviating from the Galeskas method a bit, I found standard (round, Dutch, Vee) heels are a bit easier to visualize if?the flap is worked back and forth on one side of the piece, and picking up to form both gusset edge is done so that all heel-forming stitches end up on?one side of the circ. Depending on the depth of the heel and heel style chosen some reapportionment of stitches may be needed just before the heel is started, so that one side of the?circ carries only the stitches needed for the heel flap, and the other carries the rest of them destined to become the top of the foot. After the heel flap is done and the gusset stitches are picked up, the gusset decreases are worked until the foot's stitch count around?has been reached. At that point if there are unequal numbers of stitches on the two sides of the circ they can be re-divided into equal parts so that toe formation is easier. Short-row heel production is pretty close to the same compared to DPNs, except that the heel unit is worked entirely on one circ half as opposed to being done on a unit composed to two DPNs.

For me however, the method presents a couple of disadvantages. First, I'm taking a severe cut in production speed compared to using five DPNs, as after each half-round I have to stop and thread the circ through the stitches on the needle so that the points are correctly placed for the next half. I am not particularly fond of the bit of wrestling needed to move the stitches back and forth over the cable joins at the base of the needles, and I find the first row to be particularly annoying, especially with the stretchy half-hitch cast on I favor for sock tops. Also very short circumference rows are more of a pain than wider circumference rows. I'm going to be sorely tempted to move my knitting to DPNs when I get down to the toe, rather than finishing out the piece entirely on the giant circ.

I can also see that extended use of a circ in this fashion is more stressful on the needle than conventional knitting in the round. I'd be wary of using a needle from a multisize kit in this fashion, were they to come in a suitably long enough length. I also note that most people are using very long circs (36" or 40") to knit relatively small circumference things like socks (although if only one sock was being made at a time, some knitters might be able to get away with one size shorter needle). These are expensive and can be difficult to find. Items wider than say hats would be difficult to do using the one oversized circ method unless a really long needle could be found.



The giant circ method is very close to the two-circ method in terms of execution. Both divide the stitches in half. In the giant loop method, the halves are separated by the teased out cable loop. In the two circ method, each half of the sock is on its own needle. Working methods are the same, except there is no teasing the needle back through the work each half row with two circs. To be fair, there is a moment of drop and hunt as the needle end needed for the next half row must be selected from the three danglers. Heels are worked in the same manner, with the heel unit being contained entirely on one circ. And both methods can be used for side-by-side sock production, in which both socks of the pair can be knit at the same time, each from its own ball of yarn.



To my mind, there's one more clear advantage of the two-circ method over the one-circ method - while you do need to shell out for two needles, they needn't be extra long. Many people may have two circs of sufficient matching diameter already in their collections. The two-circ method can be done even using two circs of unequal length (if the difference in length is very large, stitches may have to be divided in a smaller and larger group rather than evenly). Even using shorter or mis-matched circs there is less limitation on how large in circumference an item can be done than there is using the one-circ method. In fact, if one WERE to use two 40-inch long circs in the two needle method, one could knit a tube of around 75- 80 inches around (or bigger if the yarn/stitches were squishable). Of course, at the lower end of the range, the two-circ method has the same weakness as the one-circ method - smaller circumferences and fewer stitches are more of a pain than larger ones because there is more stop and grab or needle shifting compared to knitting time as a whole.

Finally, any sock pattern knit in the round - toe up or cuff down - can be used with both methods. Patterns written for five DPNs (four in the work, one to knit with) translate the easiest, as each side of the sock is equivalent to one of the circs in two-circ; or half of the stitches placed on one side of the giant circ in the one-circ method. Patterns written for three needles just need a tiny bit of tinkering to divide the available stitches between two needles. For sanity, I'd suggest dividing the stitch groups at the point between the ones that will form the top of the foot (the instep stitches that are not worked during heel production); and all others. In some cases this should be evenly in half, in others, there may be one needle at the sock's outset that carries a few more than the other.

I'll continue and finish out this pair of socks using the one-circ method. I'll probably do another using two-circ just to keep parity. But being DPN-handy, I won't be switching over to use either method for routine sock production. However both methods ARE handy tools to keep in one's knitting toolbox. I DO use two-circ now quite often for knitting sweater bodies in the round, and find it a godsend for working two in-the-round sleeves side by side (no more "is the second sleeve long enough yet?" guesswork). I might use the giant circ method for hats or leg-warmers, but for something as narrow as a sock, mitten, or wristlet, it's just too much needle manipulation for me.

To sum up - both methods are nice additions to one's knitting tool set. Both have advantages and limitations. While both are useful (especially for the DPN-shy), neither is an absolute substitute for DPN skill for everybody, nor for every instance in which DPNs are commonly used. I encourage everyone to expand their skill sets. You never know when a left-handed wratchet-ended sawtooth crimper is required, and it's nice to have one available when faced with that need.

If you want to learn more about these techniques I'd suggest Galeskas' The Magic Loop: working Around on One Needle (Fiber Trends, 2002) for the one-circ method; and Cat Bordi's Socks Soar on Two Circular Needles (Passing Paws Press, 2001) for the two needle method. Both books present these methods in well-explained detail, accompanied by patterns and sample projects. Both are widely available through general merchandise and needlework/knitting specialty booksellers.

Answer to a quick question:

Can the Fleur de Lys motif shown yesterday be used for knitting?

Sure. Like anything graphed, the fleur can be knit, but with a caveat. In cross stitch, the individual units that build a motif are square. They have a 1:1 aspect ratio, as wide as they are tall. Likewise, needlepoint units are (mostly) square. They're worked on a square grid, but if they're in tent stitch the stitches themselves are a diagonal spanning that square. Therefore the edges of color areas don't always appear as neat and trim as in cross stitch. This graph is composed of square units, and is intended mostly (but not exclusively) for stitchers.

Knitting presents a different challenge. It's rare for a knitting stitch to have a 1:1 aspect ratio. Knitting stitches are usually wider than they are tall. It's not uncommon to have a stitch gauge of 22 stitches = 4 inches, but a row gauge of 30 rows = 4 inches (that's the standard for a classic DK weight yarn). That works out to an aspect ratio of 22:30 or 5.5/7.5 if you simplify the representation. That's NOT square. If you knit up a graph that's been drawn out on a square ratio grid in this aspect ratio, you'll end up with a motif that's somewhat squished looking north/south direction.

There are several ways around this. First is to choose designs that have a bit of north/south spread in them to begin with. They'll look different when compressed, but if they're elongated enough to begin with, they'll end up with a reasonable set of visual proportions. My lion graph, shared eons ago for people who wanted to do lion sweaters as described in the Harry Potter books is this kind of design. It's got enough "natural" height so that it looks o.k. if worked verbatim in a somewhat squashed aspect ratio.

The second is to graph out your design on a grid that has an aspect ratio that matches your knitted gauge. If you want to do this, the English language Japanese website ABCs of Knitting features a very nice graph paper generator. It's listed among the tools on the page's lower right.

A third way to get around this problem is to blow up the design. Very simple motifs can sometimes be made quite dramatic by reading a unit of two knit stitches by three rows for every square on the grid. Not practical for larger gauge knits, as even a small motif could outgrow the area intended for display, but occasionally useful none the less.

A fourth fix is more of a fudge. Depending on the complexity of the motif you want to knit, you can take a plain old square unit graph and by repeating every third or fourth row (depending on your gauge), you can stretch it out to compensate for aspect ratio squish. Obviously, this works best for simple motifs rather than complex ones, and at finer gauges. I've done it in sport weight yarn or finer, and it has worked well enough, with the duplication fading into the overall look and not being evident. This method can be problematic though for things like graphed letters adopted from cross stitch samplers, and for ultra-small geometrics whose motifs are built on single square units. For the latter, I might be tempted to use the third method, above.

Of course one can always ignore the problem all together, placing the borrowed motif so that the stretched dimension becomes a design feature and not a bug. This is what I did with last year's crocheted dragon curtain. I worked across the narrow dimension of the curtain rather than starting along the bottom edge, in part because the non-square nature of my filet crochet blocks would distort the motif too much if worked in the latter direction. You can see the original proportions of the graph, and the finished piece.





If you look the knight, you'll see that in my crochet he's taller and a bit squashed east/west compared to the original. But if I hadn't called out the difference, I'd bet you'd not have noticed.

Rogue

Rogue progresses. I'm another two inches or so into the body. Not much more to show beyond yet another blurry photo of a slightly larger blue object, so I'll hold off until I can post pix with more content. I can say that in spite of competing demands on my time reducing the total amount I can spend on the thing, now that I'm past the pockets and my multiple mistakes, it is fairly flying along. I am looking ahead to the next set of complications - alterations to the armhole area and beginning of the hood's frame that might be necessary due to my gauge re-computation.

Sock Class

I'm beginning my prep for my upcoming sock knitting class, reading up on and trying out the Magic Loop technique. It may be heresy to admit, especially for someone who is going to be teaching a workshop on this method, but I find it to be fiddly and (for me) much slower than using DPNs. But I realize that there is a legion of DPN-haters out there who view this method as being their ticket to finally making socks. So I'll persevere for their sake.

The plan is for a three-hour workshop, during which I'll hand out an original pattern for a very abbreviated small cuff-down sock - roughly baby size, but with sadly truncated ankle and foot parts to save time. The idea is to walk the class through that ENTIRE sock in the given time, from the cast on, through the heel, and finally down to the toe. A normal size sock would be too time-consuming to get far enough for a meaningful experience, especially around the heel, so I'll cut back on the plain old stockinette areas, leaving in just enough to get familiar with the manipulations of the needle(s). I'll also hand out an original pattern for a normal size sock that the class can take home and use for practice.

One further complication - I prefer to teach on socks knit at DK or worsted gauge - again, fewer yet larger and easier to see stitches. But the extra-long circs for the Magic Loop method are in short supply, and are quite expensive. Likewise for the two circs needed for that method. I don't think it's fair to ask the class to come equipped with needles in a size that they (probably) won't be using for their regular sock knitting, so I'm going to do the thing using standard issue sock weight yarn.

I've taught knitting classes before, mostly on toe-up socks, basic crochet, and on beginning knitting. I've been told I pack too much detail into the time alloted. In this case I will have to agree. Ideally I'd do either single oversized circ or two circ socks, not both. I do intend the choice to be either-or, as the methods are largely compatible. Learners will get their choice of working one or the other, and except for needle manipulation the basic sock-making steps should be the same for both. Obviously more thought on this is in order. If any blinding insights of clarity and nuance suggest themselves to me, I'll post them here. Otherwise, it's just more socks.

Well, I did make some progress on Rogue over the past several days. I've finally gotten past the grief of the pocket (my fault); finished the equivalent depth of the body behind the pocket, and fused the two together.



Here you see the area adjacent to the nifty pretzel-terminated side panel, showing off the contrast between that knotwork design and the Little Dragon Skin patterning.



The pocket fusing step went off without a hitch. I remembered to bind off four stitches of the body at either side of the pocket fusing row, again to leave a notch inside which the zipper will be installed. Here's a process shot, with the pocket stitches held on the pink needle, and the body on the silver circ. Because my right-side rows have so much shaping, I made sure to do the fusing on a wrong-side row - all purls in the patterned part.



Progress however has been somewhat less than it might have been because I've gotten two new needlework assignments since Thursday.

First, my mother has asked me to design a needlepoint pillow top for her that incorporates multiple Fleur de Lys motifs in wine, an off white background, and some sort of framing mechanism. She's looking to make a piece on 16-count canvas. This is pretty much a "bring me a rock" assignment (one of those in which your efforts are greeted by the response "Wrong rock. Try again.") Here's my first attempt at just a single motif:



The second was a last-minute request from Wild & Woolly in Lexington, MA to cover a class in sock making. They has a workshop scheduled for March 20th that covers cuff-down socks on two circs and one oversized circ (aka "Magic Loop"), and the original instructor has had a last-minute conflict. I'm the designated hitter for this one. Which means that because my own favored method for socks is toe-up on DPNs, I have to do a bit of brushing up before I can demo and explain those methods to others. If you've signed up for this class, please don't worry. I guarantee that in two weeks I'll be fully confident in the material to be covered.

Since writing about The Complete Book of Progressive Knitting last summer, I've found out a tiny bit more about Ida Riley Duncan.

First, she was a VERY big name in knitting in the 1950s. Not only did she write Progressive Knitting, she also wrote at least three works, including a book on sewing and dressmaking/tailoring, a comprehensive overview of needlework in general, and today's subject: Knit to Fit, New York: Liveright, 1963. (My local public library's edition is the reissue from 1966; another expanded edition was put out in 1970). Ms. Duncan was a professor of home economics at Wayne State University in Michigan. She also ran a knitting design school in Detroit that offered both on-site and home study courses. Her school was a perennial advertiser in knitting magazines of the 1950s including Vogue Knitting.

Knit to Fit is pretty impressive. This book contains the entire home-study text component of Duncan's "Progressive School of Knitting Design" course. It's framed as a study course, with chapters that have challenges at the end of each one, and an answer section in the back that provides the solution to each challenge.

It's aimed at both machine and hand knitters, and goes far deeper into the transformation of body dimensions into garment patterns than any other vintage book I've looked through so far. She's especially strong on skirts and tailored tops of all types. Her treatment of garment proportions in addition to plain old fit should be required reading for all too many of the people designing for contemporary knitting mags.

Among the proportion and fit problems she addresses in specific are saggy, overwide necklines, bunching under the arms; bubble-butt distortion on knit skirts (albeit it under a far more genteel label); armhole gap-itis in sleeveless garments and vests; the mistake of addressing front bust measurement and back chest measurements as one circumference; badly mated full fashioned sleeve caps and armscyes; the mystery of dart shaping and placement; collars and lapels that won't stay folded down; fitted waists that aren't; and and pigeon-busted raglans. In fact, she appears to be one of the first to write up the percentage system for raglan design.

Other bits that are covered include knitting with ribbon, and how to tame a ribbon knit piece with extreme blocking; and how to run a knit shop and what to charge (or what one would have charged in 1963). She also provides typical measurements of various US women's sizes circa 1963 - very valuable info for those who are looking to knit from patterns of that era. For example, a size 18 in 1963 was predicated on a bust measurement of 36 inches, while a size 12 had a 25 inch waist. Ease was then added to those figures. It's interesting to note that from childrens' size measurements she provides that they haven't changed as much over the years. One obvious lack here - there is no guidance provided specific to men's measurements or sweaters, although some man-tailored details like points at the bottom of buttoned weskit style vests are discussed.

Yes, this isn't a modern knitting book with photos and shelf appeal. It's black and white mostly text, with lots of line drawings and schematics. No, there aren't patterns in this book. Instead it's a comprehensive course on drafting out your own. Even though the styles it details are not current, enough of a designer's treasure to rate "seek me out" status. I will be looking to add both it and Duncan's Progressive Knitting to my own reference shelf, where both books will take their place next to Mary Thomas'.

Katherine asks what subtitled movie I was watching the other day that had me so engrossed I fell into multiple errors on my Rogue. It was Red Beard, the Kurosawa movie starring Toshiro Mifune.

Since Rogue is going so slowly, here's another side trip. This time into the past.

The dress itself is Melton wool, and weighs a ton. Overall it's a rather poor example of SCA costuming, but the underskirt is something I've enjoyed for a long time. It's a blackwork panel I stitched a good [mumblefratz] years ago. It was inspired by a piece from the Art Institute of Chicago pictured in Embroidery Masterworks (Virginia Churchill Bath, 1972). That book was a birthday present from my then and present pal and needlework buddy, Kathryn -?she of the motto "Too many centuries, too little time."



This didn't start out as being an underskirt. When I began the piece, I intended it to be a tablecloth. I was uncertain whether or not I'd just edge around the outside of the rectangle with the motifs, or I'd cover the whole surface with them. As a result, the stitched area is larger than the skirt's opening shows. Some motifs were done as partials to eke out the space.There's a truncated pomegranate at the lower left. The total stitched area is about 20% larger? than what you can see and is hidden by the edges of the dress. I never trimmed the back of the piece, it's still a large white linen rectangle. My assumption was that I'd eventually go back and finish out the stitching as a wall panel. As you note I haven't done that yet.

Instead this?panel has gone on to inhabit four SCA costumes, and was one of the very few pieces I kept during the 13 years I was totally absent from that organization. (When you've got something like this, you can't toss it or let it languish in a drawer when you have need of a nifty outfit). It's the piece I intend to complement with my Forever Coif.

For needlework enthusiasts, this?panel is about 33 inches from point to hem, about 25 inches wide at its widest visible point, and about 28 inches wide at its widest stitched point, counting the motif parts you can't see. The stitching is rather big, especially compared to my coif. The ground is a linen blend tablecloth, with a weave of about 24 threads per inch, and the stitches are worked over 2x2 threads (about 12 stitches per inch). The threads used are perle cotton for the chain stitched outlines, and cotton embroidery floss for the infillings and solid padded satin stitch bud details. The detail shot is rather large. Click on the thumbnail if you want to take the time to download a larger image.

?

I started stitching on a Monday in mid-October. That Friday The Resident Male and I plus a carload of other friends drove down from Boston to the Baltimore/Washington D.C. area to enter the East Kingdom's fall Crown Tournament (see Footnote). He was carrying my favor- another blackwork bit. I've got a picture somewhere that shows the two of us at that tourney, him in armor and me carrying the cloth in an embroidery frame, with only the pomegranate at the lower right finished.

After he won the Crown Tourney and we were slated for an April coronation, I decided I had to wear the panel at that event. I finished the piece out enough for that purpose, meeting my deadline and installing it in the first of many dresses. Don't worry. I didn't lavish all my sewing time on me. I made a linen shirt with a black silk?needle lace edging, and an extremely short black velvet?doublet/tunic thing for The Resident Male to wear over it. Very fetching.One amusing aside -? I got a college research paper on embroidery out of the blackwork?piece, and so received academic credits for the time I spent stitching. We were both still in school, and I was taking sophomore-level Renaissance art history. )

It turns out I was one of the first to introduce the blackwork embroidery style to the East's populace at large. I encouraged embroidery (and women fighting) during the reign and after, writing how-to booklets and teaching classes and workshops. Blackwork became quite popular because of the richness of the finished look, coupled with the ease with which beginners' pieces can be done. Soon it was showing up everywhere. About a year later I was recognized by the Order of the Laurel for counted thread embroidery in general, and blackwork in specific.

Footnote: For those of you familiar with the SCA, that was back in the Five Kingdoms era (AS XI-XII), when Atlantia was a brand-new principality, and the East stretched from Maine to North Carolina. A very long time ago, indeed.

For those of you unfamiliar with the SCA, twice a year the East Kingdom selects a (mostly) ceremonial leader by conferring that honor on the winner of a very big sword fighting competition (other weapons are used, too). The winner becomes King or Queen by right of arms, sitting first as Prince or Princess for five months before ascending the throne for the six months after that. That winner is accompanied by a counterpart or consort on the throne - the person in whose name and honor the fighter fought, and whose favor they carried through the tournament (designated beforehand, of course).

When it exists as a flap, to be made into a pocket later.

Here's my admittedly limited progress. While there's not a lot on the needles, what you see here is the third iteration of my larval front pocket(s). Why third?

Because as usual I outsmarted myself.

I was trying to play elegant with the texture pattern, working it in as unperturbed as possible, in spite of the march of the ever-narrowing pocket edge. I was also trying to watch a movie with subtitles. Not a good combo, as I ended up losing track of which decrease/increase pairs had been eliminated, and which still existed. Twice. So after ample ripping back, some extreme driveway shoveling, yet another snow day with kids at home, I present the pocket flaps:



I really like the twisted rib edge as opposed to the garter stitch edge on these.

The problem I had is a common one. Faced with a texture stitch repeat and edge decreases, how does one go about reconciling them? For patterns that depend on increases and decreases to form the texture, this can be especially painful. It's less painful though if you take the time to look and examine the pattern.

Most (but not all) textures maintain stitch count row to row. For those that do, and build their structure with increases and decreases there are usually equal numbers of each in each row. Yes, a minority of patterns (especially older patterns) alternate rows where increases and decreases happen, but for the most part, easy to knit texture patterns conform to this rule. If yours does, subtracting along an edge for a sloped pocket or armhole isn't too tricky.

First, identify the pairs of increases and decreases. They should be near each other, although there is no requirement that they are adjacent. My chosen texture pattern is a 20 stitch bounce repeat, mirrored around the center column (stitch 11, and the first/last stitch). Each side of the symmetrical piece incorporates two increase/decrease pairs.

It's relatively easy (or so I say now) to pare this down by five-stitch units. As my edge decreases infringe into my pattern repeat space, I eliminate the increase/decrease pair in the affected five-stitch unit, replacing any pattern shaping in it with plain old stockinette. I do need to keep track of where my repeats begin and end, then count back from the last full repeat to determine what needs to be happening on any partial slices between that full repeat and my rapidly encroaching pocket edge.

This sounds much harder than it actually is. Let's say I was working in Little Dragon Skin and my garment pattern called for me to eliminate the stitches shown in yellow:



Instead of working the texture design's increases and decreases as usual, I'd substitute plain old knits for the ones shown in blue. I'd eliminate the base pair on Row 2 because I know I'll be trimming above it, and the directional distortion in starts will soon be lost. Then I'd kill the ssk decreases on rows #4, 6, 8, and 10 because I was also eliminating the make ones that offset the loss of those stitches.

There are other ways to do this. I tried to get cute, and leave the decreases in on the theory that I could move the stitches eliminated by the slope of the pocket edge over to those points by working them as normal but without their companion increases. What slipped me up is that the rate of decrease does not remain the same over the entire pocket edge. It speeds up a bit part way through, making a graceful curve. Computing in that curve, my texture pattern, drinking a glass of wine, and reading subtitles all at the same time didn't mesh, and resulted in my re-workings and the object lesson here.

I repeat what I can see is becoming my knitting mantra:

"If you go about making life difficult for yourself, things ain't gonna be easy."

Questions, questions...

What's lucet cord?

Making lucet cord is a craft that goes waaay, way back. The most common form is sort of a two-stitch I-cord, formed on a very graceful looking lyre-like gadget:



There are other forms of lucet that use frames with more prongs, and their output is even more similar to standard I-cord, or spool knitting (aka corking, knitting Nancy, horsereins). If you don't have access to a talented and obliging woodworker or to a shop that specializes in obscure tools for historical needlework, you can attempt lucet on your fingers, or over the tines of a plastic fork with all but the two outermost prongs broken off.

The image above was shamelessly stolen from Phiala's String Pages - a site dedicated to various forms of historical braiding and weaving. If you've ever lain awake at night wondering how you could distinguish among pieces produced by sprang, naalbinding, and tablet weaving, Phiala has tried them all and provides pictures. Here's her lucet how-to.

Did you actually finish the pair, or just the one bootie shown?



How long did the pair take?

About as long as it took to watch the third Matrix movie on cable TV. It might have taken less time, but I kept jumping up to photograph my progress.

How much yarn did it take?

It's hard to say. Very little, to be sure. I started with a partial skein of the green, and used less than half of that. I suspect around only 50-60 yards. Perhaps a bit more. I used to be able to get a pair of booties (without ties) out of what remained from two balls of Socka after I'd finished knitting socks for me.

Why is Rogue taking so long?

Because I don't have a lot of time each day to knit. I usually only manage an hour or two at most in the evenings, while policing homework or watching TV. Less if other needs press.

I know some of you are writing to me in frustration because you're trying to follow along with my progress, but there's a reason why I neither participate in nor initiate knit-alongs. I knit on my main project when I can knit. Sometimes I choose to do other things - like reading, cooking, earning a living, accomplishing quick side projects, adding 150 yarns to the wiseNeedle database, or shoveling out the driveway instead.

Rogue progress tomorrow. I promise. Now I've got to go back outside and back to shoveling.