On Jan 22, 2006, at 8:03, Brenda Paternoster wrote:
On 22 Jan 2006, at 05:31, Tamara P Duvall wrote:
But it's impossible (so far as I can tell) to use a twisted gimp in a
gimp-loop (a very useful trick)...
Why not? It should be possible to work out in advance how many twists
the gimp pair will require and apply them.
Why not? Because I'm very wobbly at using the gimp loop, even singly,
that's why :) Every time it comes up (not often, since I don't do much
PG), I have to pull out Ulrike Loehr's (as she then was)
Schwartzarbeit, open it to p 11 ("passing through"), and keep the
diagrams for it in front of me while working. Where she says: "Once you
know how to do it, you'll never understand the problems you had"?
Well, that's the most blatant lie I've heard, and I've heard many! <g>
For me, the "loop-de-loop" is like those clover-leaf road crossings...
I'll never fully understand them; the best I can do is hold my breath
and follow instructions :)
Then when you get to the position where you need to pass the basic
pairs through just separate the gimps in the right place and voila!
Might be a bit difficult to tension though.
Or impossible, depending on how many stitches have to be done within
the loop. With more than 4 done outside the two gimp-outlined shapes,
tensioning can become tricky even with a single gimp; while the gimp is
pretty much tensioned on the "starting" side, you have to pull the
entire loop (needs to be large enough to pass the bobbins through back
and forth) up through the pairs of the "other bit" until it's built up
enough that the gimp can resume its ordinary course. For every stitch,
you have 2 passes (one out, one in) of pairs. In "twinned/twisted"
gimp, you have a twist for each of those passes... If a smooth gimp is
hard to pull through (remember that all the twists on the "basic" pairs
have to be kept as usual), I'd think pulling a twisted one through,
keeping the twists in correct place, etc would be more than just "a bit
difficult" :)
And then there's the problem of figuring the exact number of twists: 16
for a 4-pin concoction (pairs coming in and out from both gimp-enclosed
shapes)... If you miscalculate, you're out of luck, because undoing the
work within the loop is much harder than your plain vanilla
"retro-lacing". And then there's the passing itself, opening just the
right twist, determining which one is up-thread and which one
down-thread, depending on direction... For me, it would be easier to
introduce that extra pair of gimps for the parallel shape, or pass up
on the pattern... :)
But that's _me_ and my problems with "geometric imagination"; I have to
pin the loop in two places (not just at the bottom) to have it resemble
the shape shown in the Loehr's diagram, so that I can follow the
diagram (and woe is me, when I have to mirror the situation upside
down)... I have to loosen/tighten the loop with every pass simply not
to lose track of it... And so on, and so forth. People who are not
similiarly afflicted might consider the experiment.
BTW - I'm not volunteering to try it out!
Chicken :)
--
Tamara P Duvall http://t-n-lace.net/
Lexington, Virginia, USA (Formerly of Warsaw, Poland)
-
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
