[lace] Fair entry categories - whys and wherefores
On Aug 17, 2004, at 15:27, Alice Howell wrote: What are the classes/divisions/etc you have to deal with in your local fairs? I worked for several years to get the classes revised in our local county fair. [...] The philosophy was that an edging could be on anything, or entered without being attached to anything. Hanky, pillowcase, picture frame, whatever. Classes 3 and 4 could be anything that wasn't an edging or a bookmark. Collars, gloves, hats, purses and so forth would be a dress accessory. Then if you come up with something really different, there's always "OTHER". Our State Fair organizers are *very* responsive, so it doesn't take long for suggestions to "take root". I never got my last year's booklet (having had to decline the invitation to judge), so I don't know whether the new classes/whatever had been implemented last year or not (I sent the - long, as usual - missive after the Fair of '02. At their request ). But they are in place now and, to my mind (nobody I asked for help was willing to make suggestions), are much simpler than they used to be, and more uniform (we used to have some of the same, but some different, ones for the "novices"); I'm not overfond of "other" as a category... :) What we now have is 5 judged classes in each of the two Sections (one for novices and one for more advanced lacemakers), on top of non-competition (for show only, allowing judges and teachers to show their work) one: 1) BL - continuous (with suggestions of techniques) 2) BL - non continuous (with suggestions of techniques) 3) NL (needle-made lace) 4) TL (tatted, lace) 5) KL&CL (knitted and crocheted lace) I felt it would simplify things, if we classed the lace by technique/tool used, rather than by "product" (yes, we used to have apples and oranges all in the same bag, with a few pears thrown in for good measure ). It's easier to judge, especially if you're not an expert on all of them. I have only a smattering of 3-5; my deeper knowledge is in the 1-2 area. Still, if I have to compare 2 tatted pieces, I *can* do it, and with greater certitude than if I had to compare two bookmarks, one of which was tatted, and one Binche BL... It also allows me to "stand back" a bit, if one of the other judges happens to be an expert on one of the other techniques (we judge as a group, and go around discussing our observations among us, then giving a single - agreed on - opinion). Always assuming there *are* other judges present, of course... :) It's easier - I think - for the entrant to detrmine which category to enter. But, more than anything else, I felt it was *unfair* to compare two totally disparate techniques... I had entered, once, a BL Christmas ornament (the Partridge in a Pear Tree) in our local county fair. It had won first, and, while my DH was ecstatic, I was ashamed of myself; how can one, possibly, compare a BL piece, made in sewing cotton, to something of the same size, crocheted in 30? It's like kicking a person who's down already... Never again. I don't have enough knowledge of tatting to tell shuttle from needle version, so I didn't include the distinction. I didn't consider the final usage of a piece; what someone puts on a T-shirt, someone else might frame, to hang on a wall, and someone else stash in a sample book. One version might show to the best advantage, and I know that a lot of contests *do* take that into account... What can I say? I'm not the sort of person to pay much attention to the wrapping; I'm more interested in the content :) And, since I was the only one willing to discuss the changes in the rules, I measured by my own yardstick... I didn't want to attract attention to the size of the piece, either - some people work faster than others... True, a tablecloth or a shawl is likely to catch my eye quicker - s much work - but, if the overall look (accuracy, tension, cleanliness, crispness of design) is not as good as that of a much smaller piece, it's still "no cigar", as far as I'm concerned... :) We do not have a separate division for original design/technical proficiency, but the entrants are requested to supply the info. Obviously, I'm likely to give extra points to an original design, *but not* if it's not as well made as a piece which used someone else's pattern. That's all I can think of right now on the subject of "what" and "why", as far as my own bailwick is concerned... --- Tamara P Duvall http://lorien.emufarm.org/~tpd Lexington, Virginia, USA (Formerly of Warsaw, Poland) Healthy US through The No-CARB Diet: no C-heney, no A-shcroft, no R-umsfeld, no B-ush. - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Re: lace-digest V2004 #269
Many thanks to all those who helped with the Split Chain instructions. I now know how to work it, thanks to so much help. Gratefully, from Liz in Melbourne, Oz, [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Re: diagrams
On Aug 18, 2004, at 18:52, Lorelei Halley wrote: Tamara I have the impression that you are a very creative lacemaker who is constantly inventing new designs. So it makes sense that you are impatient with diagrams. It goes with the territory. Thanks for the tribute, but I'm not as inventive as all that :) Robin has picked the part of my message where I said I agreed with Leonard up to a point. She has omitted what I said immediately below: We do need the diagrams now; none of us is a full-time, professional lacemaker, and we don't have the same arsenal of tricks in our hands and minds that they did. I don't think I could live without diagrams; they're my lifeline when I'm learning a new technique and my safety net against the disintegrating memory. When I'm designing my own patterns, I move between pillow and drawing board constantly to diagram both the sucessfull and the unsuccessful solutions; contrary to what Robin said, I'm not really all that fond of re-inventing the wheel :) And, contrary to the impression I must give here (when't the last time I wrote a message under 5KB? ), I'd much rather draw a diagram than explain things verbally; it's writing the instructions for a pattern that's about to be published, which sometimes pushes me into housecleaning - *anything* is better than writing instructions :) I write them, because not everyone is receptive to "diagrams only" method of explanation and because diagrams can sometimes leave holes which need to be plugged verbally (especially since I'm very bad at drawing thread-by-thread diagrams) I use diagrams for all the reasons stated by Robin, Weronika and Lorelei: to learn how others have solved a problem (might use the same solution elsewhere one day), to keep the repeats at least similiar if not identical, to identify - at a glance - the thread paths for colour work. Even when I think I have the pattern in my fingers, I still like to keep a diagram nearby, to guard against those "short-circuits" of the brain when, suddenly, all the light bulbs seem die at once, and I don't remember how to cross-twist... :) The longer I make lace, the more I learn what to expect of it in certain situations, and how to cope with a new element, sure. And I'm getting better at "reading" photos and using those as my diagrams - the way old lacemakers learnt by looking at lace already made... Yet, without a diagram, I'm lost; if it's not provided, I'm going to try and draw it myself, either before I set a stitch or shortly after. But I still maintain that we should not let diagrams (*or* verbal instructions ) rule our lace-lives; lace isn't rigid, nor should we be. Past a certain point, "use your own judgment" principle ought to be tested. And it seemed to me that, if Julie is at a level where she's been tackling - for several months and unfrustrated - a Chantilly fan, then she must have accumulated plenty of good judgment (lace-wise) in her "tool kit" already. One isn't able to continue with a project of that magnitude, unless one's quite experienced. It was time for her to do as she liked, whatever the diagram said... --- Tamara P Duvall http://lorien.emufarm.org/~tpd Lexington, Virginia, USA (Formerly of Warsaw, Poland) Healthy US through The No-CARB Diet: no C-heney, no A-shcroft, no R-umsfeld, no B-ush. - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] diagrams (was Chantilly babble)
Another thing diagrams are very useful for is when using threads in different colors - I can just go over the diagram with a colored pencil and I know where all of my threads are going, and I can fiddle if I'd prefer them to go somewhere else. Much harder with verbal descriptions... Weronika -- Weronika Patena Caltech, Pasadena, CA, USA http://vole.stanford.edu/weronika - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] diagrams
Robin and Tamara and all I think we've had similar discussions on the usefulness of diagrams before. I think in this matter I'm closer to Robin's view than Tamara's. It may be a function of the kinds of lace we are trying to make. In learning a traditional form of lace which has a recognized set of rules, like Flanders, for instance, one first learns the recognized "authentic" set of rules accepted by the traditional experts in that form. If one then designs new patterns for that form and wants to make them available to others, it is useful to stick to the "accepted authentic" rules for that form, and to construct a diagram on how to make it that follows those rules. The reason for this is that most people who would want to make your design will probably assume, once they've seen you describe it as "a new Flanders design", that it will follow the accepted rules and that they will be able to figure it out from your diagram. My impression is that most lacemakers in America are strongly traditional in their outlook and approach to bobbin lace. I am not saying that all lacemakers SHOULD be traditional in their approach, but that most are. My impression also is that in Europe this is not the case, that there is more innovative, rules-breaking lacemaking going on there. Those lacemakers who want to authentically reproduce traditional laces in the traditional manner will probably want diagrams that they can follow to make these authentic copies. But lacemakers who are inventing their own laces may very well not care whether they follow rules or diagrams. And there is no reason why they should. In my own practice, I'm sometimes a diagram follower, and sometimes a diagram spurner. If I'm doing Flanders I am absolutely going to follow the diagram and may not even be able to MAKE the lace at all without one. Since I am still learning that form and count myself only at the intermediate level. I want to do it right and I sure as hell can't figure it out on my own, yet. If I'm doing tape lace or torchon, or even geometric point ground, I figure it out as I go, and may decide to improve on what the diagram shows. In Beds I sometimes get exasperated by the diagrams and decide to just do it my way. In my original floral free/part lace designs I mix Honiton and Duchesse techniques and get those threads going where I want them any old way I can. And I don't care whether anyone disapproves. But in the two Withof workshops I took ten years ago, I went home each evening and spent the whole evening making detailed diagrams of every little thing the teacher had explained to me. And wrote verbal notes as well. But those diagrams are my future crib sheet for the next Withof design I try to make. Without those diagrams I wouldn't be able to even start. So why is my attitude about Withof different from my attitude about my own designs? Because Withof experts have a sense of an accepted, authentic body of techniques that they have themselves been developing since the 1980s. It isn't Withof unless it uses their designs and their method, but especially their method. I personally find their method interesting because it introduces a whole new set of ideas about how to solve problems, like that crazy bundle that surrounds each motif and gives relief to lines even within each motif. Once I master their concepts you'll be finding crazy bundles popping up in my own designs (but that is years off yet). Tamara I have the impression that you are a very creative lacemaker who is constantly inventing new designs. So it makes sense that you are impatient with diagrams. It goes with the territory. But a lacemaker who is in love with the traditional forms, and is not yet such a total master of a particular form that she doesn't need guidance, will want to have a detailed diagram to follow (like Robin who learns the design after 2 repeats and then doesn't need the diagram). Now me, with Flanders I still haven't totally mastered why and when each technique is supposed to be used, and until I do understand it, I won't be able to design for it. I will only count myself as a Flanders expert, or advanced Flanders lacemaker, when I CAN design for it. But that is my personal definition of "expert". Lorelei - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] RE: Tess & Prof work on ebay
Regardless this seller seems to think they are doing no wrong because the content of the books is in public domain. But they are violating copyright because they did not make the scans themselves or get permission from Tess & Prof. If they are truely concerned about doing a "public service" by not making a profit (yeah, right), then maybe they should ask for permission. How about offering to give Tess & Professor a royalty for each copy sold? hmmm? Now that would be the proper thing to do, IMHO. Anita _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] diagrams (was Chantilly babble)
I like diagrams a lot too. I agree it's a good idea to try to change things to get the effect you like instead of just following the pattern exactly, but first I'd like to know how whoever made the pattern did it, since they probably have a better idea of what they're doing than I do... And even if I don't like the way they're doing something, I can keep the diagram and maybe use the method in another piece. Diagrams are a really nice way of concisely showing exactly what's going on, so great for notes. When I design my own piece or change one I got from a book, I'll often draw my own diagram, so that all my repeats are the same - otherwise I'd either have to look at the previous repeat very closely to remember what the hell I was doing there, or just try to figure out each one separately to get the rigth effect and end up with a whole lot of slightly different repeats for no good reason (unless I'm actually not sure which method is best, in which case I'll happily make a bunch of slightly different repeats to see how they look). And especially since I'm a beginner, I often just have no idea how to get a particular effect, so I'd have a lot of trouble trying to figure it out on my own... Explanations work (preferably written - I can't keep to many spoken words in my head at once), but diagrams are better, since I'm also a largely visual person. On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 04:22:43PM -0400, Panza, Robin wrote: > I beg to differ. I learn a whole lot from a diagram, about how that > lacemaker solved the problems associated with that pattern and how that > region's lacemakers developed their distinctive style. I use it as a > learning tool, so I can file away the techniques for when they may be needed > again (like, when there isn't a diagram). But I make no promises to follow > the diagram's details. -- Weronika Patena Caltech, Pasadena, CA, USA http://vole.stanford.edu/weronika - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Prof and Tessa's work on ebay
Devon wrote: The CDs are offered on a "Buy it now" fixed price basis. There are at least two sellers offering the archives n CD. Seller kkibbe_golden_net in Canada has sold at least 6 lots of one or 8 cds, seller les_lea in the US has sold at least 7 lots. Go to the Advanced search section in ebay and search for the words weaving cd* - that covers both cd and cds - and search for completed items and in all ebay regions. This gives what they've sold during the current month, in this case August. Jean in Poole - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Tess & Prof work on ebay
I understand that Tess and the Professor might not want anyone to profit from their hard work. It is a wonderful gift that they have given us by scanning and making all this available to us at virtually no cost and certainly no profit to them. It must be galling to think of someone else reaping a profit from it when they do not. But, thinking outside the box, Tess and the Professor's real purpose is to make this info available to as many people as possible. Actually, no one appears to have bid on it. This suggests that everyone who would want such a thing probably knows it is available for free. I am doubtful that the bidding could go too high, since most of the people who would want such a thing know it is available on the site. But if someone did bid on it that someone would have to be unaware that Tess and the Professor are trying to make the material available free of charge. By advertising on ebay the seller may reach someone who has not been reached by efforts to distribute it for free. One could consider it an alternative distribution plan with someone else doing the marketing and the legwork of copying and mailing thus saving Tess the problem of mailing it. In fact, if there is a buyer, his or her life will be enriched by having the information. Devon - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [lace] RE: lace-digest V2004 #269
>>>From: purple lacer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If this seller wants to acquire the books and then scan them and then sell the CD, that would be perfectly fine. Using your scans is NOT!!! Tess, if I were you or the professor I think I would contact the seller and ask them to stop. State that your scanned images are your copyright and the seller has no legal right to redistribute them.<<< Or contact ebay. They try to do right, in terms of legality of what's sold, but they can't stay on top of everything that's posted. When someone contacts them to point out a problem with an item for sale, they make the seller remove it. Robin P. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA http://www.pittsburghlace.8m.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] RE: lace-digest V2004 #269
FWIW, the seller has the following near the end of her listing: "To the best of my knowledge, all data in this CD was gathered from public domain sources. No charge is being made for the contents of this cd only materials and for my time to collect, organize and distribute." Actually, the seller has no legal right to take *your* scanned images and distribute them to anyone else. The contents of the books may now be in public domain, but *your* scans are now *your* copyright! It's no different than if I took a professional photograph of the Mona Lisa, the photo is *my* copyright so you have no legal right to distirbute my photo if I put it on my website. If this seller wants to acquire the books and then scan them and then sell the CD, that would be perfectly fine. Using your scans is NOT!!! And frankly, it doesn't "cost" that much to copy files from the internet and burn a CD. If that were the truth then the prices would be *much* lower. Tess, if I were you or the professor I think I would contact the seller and ask them to stop. State that your scanned images are your copyright and the seller has no legal right to redistribute them. Anita I'm not a copyright lawyer nor do I play one on TV _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] diagrams (was Chantilly babble)
>>>From: Tamara P. Duvall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I've just had a private message from Leonard (not yet answered; sorry ), musing on the advantages/disadvantges of diagrams. I agree with him up to a point: diagrams do clip our wings, and limit our imagination/flexibility; they ossify our lace, making us fearful to stray from the path... Where, surely, the old-time lacemakers "thought on the pillow", and did what was needful to get the best effect...<<< I beg to differ. I learn a whole lot from a diagram, about how that lacemaker solved the problems associated with that pattern and how that region's lacemakers developed their distinctive style. I use it as a learning tool, so I can file away the techniques for when they may be needed again (like, when there isn't a diagram). But I make no promises to follow the diagram's details. Since I learn primarily through the visual channel, I get very little out of someone explaining things to me but I get a lot out of seeing a "map". When I take a class where the teacher doesn't believe in diagrams because "they're limiting", I generally get little out of the class. I'm unlikely to even continue the pattern on the pillow, because I don't understand it. If I have diagrams during the class, I come to *understand* how that style of lace is put together. After a couple of repeats, I don't need either diagrams or explanations, and I can take the project home and continue without help (and go on to other patterns of that style). Yes, I can forego both diagrams and explanations, relying on my knowledge and trial-and-error. If I'm well-versed in the lace, that's not bad. However, I like to learn new kinds of lace and they all have different tricks that have been worked out over the centuries. Why should I have to re-invent all the wheels that go with that lace? Unlike Tamara, I strongly dislike re-inventing wheels. Why should I waste time and thread trying to figure out how something is done, discover that won't work, and have to start over again, just because it's a new (to me) style of lace? Give me a diagram and I can learn the conventions of the style, *then* do what I want. And when I solve problems for myself without a diagram, I haven't learned that style of lace. My decisions aren't necessarily appropriate to a particular style. Like the first time I tried a Bucks pattern, I used Torchon techniques. That's right, CTpCT ground, among other things. The lace looks OK, but it's sure not Bucks! Nor is it Torchon (it's a 52 degree grid). It's Pittsburgh lace or Panza lace. For that project, it was fine, but I couldn't say I'd ever done Bucks at that point. Apparently *some* people become overly dependent on diagrams and never transfer the information on them into knowledge about lace. However, don't penalize the rest of us who need to convert words to diagrams in order to understand the words. Robin P. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA http://www.pittsburghlace.8m.com/ - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] IOLI Membership, Meeting and Voting
Hi everyone, Since I'm the new Membership Chair of IOLI and was at the door the night that Carolyn was turned away. (Do you know how hard it is to watch your friends or wonderful people you have recently met bearing membership cards be told they can't attend?) So, I thought I'd better clarify IOLI's position, as I know it. I ran this email by Louise Colgan, the new President if IOLI and the Board is aware of this problem. The bylaws state that you must be a member "by June 1 in order to attend and have voting privileges at the annual meeting for that calendar year." (Article IV, Section 6) I think that this part of the bylaws was not changed from the last set of bylaws. This was to allow lists of members to be made and records be up-to-date at the Annual Meeting. Votes are cast by voice vote, thus people who aren't members aren't allowed to attend. It's not secrecy, it's the rules. The Board actually discussed this issue after the annual meeting. I think there will be changes in the future. I think I can have up-to-date records the night of the annual meeting incorporating people who have paid that day, but I am new in the position and the delay may be for very good reasons that I haven't considered. AND this would require another bylaws change, not to mention, many questions need to be considered. Questions such as, What would we do with people who paid by mail but their membership form didn't arrive before the membership person left for convention Bylaws are a living, ever-changing documents, and it is concerns and desires of members that drive changes. If you would like a change to be made, you only need contact one board member (they are on the webpage, or I'll send you a list of you wish) and she/he will carry your concern to the executive committee and fight for you like a gladiator. Lace in Peace, Laurie J Hughes IOLI Membership Chair PS: I've BCC'd the rest of the Board at Louise's Request so they know what has already been addressed. - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Random lace babble (Chantilly)
> > Why is Chantilly done completely in half-stitch? Does something bad > happen when > you throw in cloth stitch? To add to the discussion about half-stitch - you can fill a space better with only 3 pairs in half-stitch (CT) than in cloth or whole stitch (CTC) - two pairs across a narrow gap will look more pleasing in CT than in CTC. Or even a wide gap - in theory. I also think working half-stitch is faster and easier to tension, and the appearance more consistent, therefore the end result is more pleasing to the customer - seeing as Chantilly had been fashion-industry driven originally. Artistically, the diagonals of half-stitch stimulate a design if in balance with the other elements of the lace whereas too much cloth stitch can make a design look heavy - depends on the taste of the buyer/user. Some lace babble from me Bev in Sooke, BC (west coast of Canada) - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] Random lace babble (Chantilly)
on 8/17/04 10:18 PM, Tamara P. Duvall at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Aug 17, 2004, at 14:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Julie in Baltimore) wrote: > >> That's the important point of the post. Now here's just some random >> lace >> babble: > > Since I don't have the box/book I can't help there. So I'll address > some of the less important points... > >> I've been working on the fan for a few months now. Today I was looking >> at >> what I've done so far and I thought, boy, that gimp sure is thick. Is >> it >> really supposed to be that thick? > > Probably. I have a little booklet of Loehr's on gimps (not for general > distribution, she said, as she can't be bothered to "clean" the English > up to a proper standard). Quote: > > "The thickness of the gimp. > Is not only a matter of taste. It is my opinion that the gimps used > nowadays were often chosen too thin in comparison with old laces" [...] > > Then, under some photos: > > "These photos of old Chantilly show that 99% of the lacemakers used a > little bit thicker, 5 to 7 times folded thread as gimp" [...] > > And, in conclusion, for the Point Ground section: > > Choose a gimp of the thickness about 8 folds of the lace thread. (Fold > your lace thread, which might not be suitable as a gimp 8 times and > compare it with the chosen gimp), i.e.: Silk 4/20 - use as gimp 6 fold > 140" > > So, she advocates the use of *very* think gimp (thicker even than what > she herself says was the old practice ). Which makes it probable, > that your very thick gimp is, indeed, as she intended it to be. OTOH, I > have no idea how the Danish 250/3 unboiled compares, in thickness, to > the Pipers' 4/20 (you're using the gimp recommended for the second, > with the first)... > >> The other thing that bothers me is that I somehow got the idea that all >> the figures were supposed to be done in half-stitch. [...] >> However, the working diagram clearly shows cloth stitch, not >> half-stitch. The passives all go down vertically, as with cloth >> stitch, not slanted, as with half-stitch. > > Yes, Chantilly, like Bayeux, uses -mostly - half stitch in the motifs. > And yes, she draws the half stitch as if it were cloth stitch in her > working diagrams (if you happen to have her "Schwarzarbeit; ein Buch > uber Chantilly" you can compare), for the very reason you state: the > diagrams would be either huge or unreadable otherwise. But, in the > Schwarzarbeit book, she also has single-thread diagrams - much bigger, > if illustrating much smaller points - which leave one in no doubt > as to what stitch ought to be used (even if the photos of the lace > didn't show it clearly). In books where colour is used, the half stitch > in motifs is still drawn the same as cloth stitch, but green is used > instead of purple. > >> Do I actually need to make all the figures in half-stitch? Why can't >> I make some of the figures in half-stitch and some of them in cloth >> stitch? Or for that matter, all the figures in cloth stitch? >> Why is Chantilly done completely in half-stitch? Does something bad >> happen when >> you throw in cloth stitch? Is it more pleasing aesthetically to make >> all >> figures the same way? Is half-stitch more sturdy or something than >> cloth stitch? > > No, half stitch is not more sturdy than cloth stich, just the reverse; > it's more airy, it snags more easily. Its airy-ness does, of course, > add to the appeal of the lace, so you might say it *is* more > aesthetically pleasing. Nothing *really* bad happens, if you throw in > some cloth stitch, and Chantilly isn't always done completely in half > stitch... :) > > Going by my own experience and a lecture of Loehr's on Chantilly, which > I attended some years ago in Ithaca... > > My own experience first, since it's slimmer: half stitch fills out a > motif better than cloth stitch: > Given the same distance (width) to cover, sometimes, you'd need to add > extra pairs if you used cloth; you wouldn't have to, if you used half > stitch. Half stitch spreads, where cloth stitch doesn't. For me, it's > as simple as that (apart from adding a different dimension to the > whole, of course). > > Case in point: look at my website, the "non-series designs 2000-2003"; > 3rd picture, "Fragrance". The stopper of the perfume bottle is made in > half stitch, because there weren't enough pairs feeding into it from > the ground to fill it out nicely, and I hate adding and cutting out > every 30 seconds. As I was already carrying a pair-in-reserve with the > gimp (needed for the body of the bottle), and as it was not a practice > I'm used to, and as I didn't want to make the gimp any thicker in that > spot... I decided to use half stitch. Which served the purpose nicely, > IMO :) > > What I remember from the lecture: > Chantilly, at its best and most complex, likes the light-and-shadow > effect; it uses shading a lot. You will, therefore, see the usual net > (CTTT), and kat stitch, and honecomb stitch, used both as ground
Re: [lace] fair entry categories
I think the annual Royal Highland Show is probably the nearest Scottish equivalent to state fairs.This usually has three lace classes in the Handcrafts section - two for bobbin lace and one for tatting (needle lace often fits in one of the embroidery classes). In most cases a particular item is specified e.g handkerchief but this is changed each year. I reckon this has several advantages - entrants know what to make, pieces to be judged are similar, and the display at the show will probably look better. Jean - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [lace] IOLI Convention/Meeting
Here in the UK visitors are allowed to come to the annual general meeting of The Lace Guild so I was surprised that visitors were not allowed at the IOLI meeting (my friend was turned away too). Perhaps it's a country difference in the rules governing such organizations? There haven't beem any problems with visitors at Lace Guild AGMs - visitors are reminded at the start of the meeting that they do not have a vote, and anyone wishing to speak has to give their name and membership number (Comvention attendees have their membership no. printed on their badges). Jean - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Re: Tatting: Nichols' split chain
At 04:43 PM 8/17/04 +1000, Elizabeth Ligeti wrote: >Can anyone please explain how to work a Split Chain in tatting. >It is a way of passing from one round to another, without cutting off, and >starting again on the next round. >I believe you work part way along the chain, then make a long link to the >start of the round, and somehow work back along the chain, and up to the >next level. Elgiva Nichols (_Tatting Technique and History_) calls the split-ring/split chain technique "false tatting"[1], and uses it to produce dead ends and odd vertices. She didn't see fit to index "false tatting": it's discussed on page 38 of the Dover edition, in the chapter _The Search for a New Form_. It is instructive to compare the slow and painful discovery of joins and chains to the explosive development that mailing lists brought to tatting. Nichols mentions the many possibilities of false chains, but gives no instructions beyond "overcast the running thread", and does not explore the conditions under which one can use a normal shuttle, rather than the netting needle in use when the false chain was first used -- at first, joining[2] was accomplished by using a netting needle instead of a shuttle, and passing the whole needle through a picot. Instructions for a menorah produced by false tatting are on page 101, and a photograph of it is opposite page 112. -- [1] because it is done by tying knots directly, rather than by the more-efficient method of tying a knot in the shuttle thread, then pulling the shuttle thread straight to transfer the knot into the ring or ball thread [2] Tatting's "join" was developed entirely independent of the bobbin-lace "sewing" -- was bobbin lace at such a low estate in 1850 that absolutely nobody knew how to make a sewing? -- Joy Beeson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~joybeeson/ http://www.timeswrsw.com/craig/cam/ (local weather) west of Fort Wayne, Indiana, U.S.A. where we had a summer storm last night. (We're supposed to get these in the afternoon, but I'm not complaining. :-) - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [lace] ebay lace books collection
FWIW, the seller has the following near the end of her listing: "To the best of my knowledge, all data in this CD was gathered from public domain sources. No charge is being made for the contents of this cd only materials and for my time to collect, organize and distribute." H... Debbie At 08:55 AM 8/18/2004 +0200, Avital wrote: Anything that's on the Web and unprotected can be burned onto a CD. If you don't want the files in a public area where anyone could copy them, it would be a good idea to set up a password-protected site. Best wishes, Avital - Original Message - I have told many of you that the CDs you get from me cost only what I have put into my share of the work, supplies, mailing,and so on. The Professor asks nothing. We both agree that any of you who want to copy them are absolutely free to do so, but we hope that no one will try to make a profit from it, as this person is obviously wanting to do. Shame on her! Tess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Washing Carrickmacross lace
I have the Springett video on Carrickmacross with Carol Williamson. She uses polyester net with cotton organdie. She says that once the sewing is completed, remove the net and organdie from the backing tissue and butter paper (or baking parchment), wash it in mild washing powder/liquid without squeezing, rinse without squeezing, because no amount of ironing will flatten organdie once it has been crushed. She then irons it dry face down with a cloth covering the polyester netting so that the heat of the iron doesn't melt it. Then the unneeded organdie is cut away. Jean in Poole - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Washing Carricmacross lace
Linda, I took a course of Carricmacross with Mary Shields and she told us that once you have finished the basic sewing on the sewing pad, and have only the nett and the organdie, you should wash the piece in warm soap suds before cutting the extras off and before making the inner fillings. Miriam Arad, Israel - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] completed favor re Ulriker Lohr's Hausdragon
Thank you Spiders for your overwhelming and prompt reply to my request for copies of two pages from Ulrike Lohr's Hausdragon box of patterns. An important request to me because I am now deep in the middle of making the pattern and I think the pages will be helpful. It turns out that I was wrong to ask for a photocopy; I was not being up-to-date with modern technology. The modern way to do it is to scan the pages into the computer and email the scanned picture. This had completely failed to occur to me. I suspect that the scanned image might not be as clear as a photocopy (because of the quaility of my printer) but the pictures looked quite clear to me and now I have the additional option of looking at them on my computer, which blows them up and lets me see every detail. So it was a really good idea. The pictures turned out to be even more enlightening than I had hoped. It turned out that my missing back page of the pattern booklet contained blow-ups of the completed lace. So it is now clear that the figures in the pattern are in fact half-stitch and that the gimp is very thick. Some Spiders took the time to say a few things in response to my request for people to say things about what Chantilly is like, and I really appreciated that. I forgot to mention in my previous post that the pattern is a lot of fun. I have been having a great time with it. Apparently a good pattern for an intermediate Bucks Pointer interested in fine lace. Julie, Baltimore MD - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[lace] Azaria
From: "Helen Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [lace] RE: lost items Mother, dear, you forget about the body of Azaria Chamberlain which was never found in the Ayers Rock vicinity Oh, but she has been, apparently! There's been big stories about a Victorian hunter and his mates who claims he shot a dingo at that time, and found that the dingo was carrying a baby in its mouth. They didn't want to tell anyone, as hunting is forbidden in a National Park, so he claims one of his mates brought the baby back and buried it somewhere. But then, he refused to say any more, and I don't think his mates have been contacted, so no-one knows if the story if true or not... And you'd better move this to chat if you want to continue discussing it. It's not lace! helene, the froggy from Melbourne Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
