Hi Shelagh, Yes, I've looked at the bottom and it's as much gibberish as the top. Apparently I'm still having a lot of difficulty with proper division of cards into two packs. If I could get that fully resolved then I think I could get the "which pack moves forward, which pack moves backward" thing figured out as well. Sadly, I'm pretty used to looking at gibberish on "top" of my finished weaving while the flip-side looks gorgeous. :-) As long as I've got one "pretty" side I'm quite happy.
Very much adding to my difficulty with this is that I chose to try this in sewing-thread, which means that it's really difficult for me to tell exactly where I went wrong on each turn. I've not yet entirely given up but I've about decided that I'm going to need to warp up a really small length in size 10 cotton or larger just to "play" with the pattern. Once I know I've got it, I'll return to my thread-warp and make a beyond-gorgeous narrow braid-trim. With Gundrun's excellent help I've determined that I'm at least threaded correctly. I *will* solve this!!(eventually). The pattern is too gorgeous for me to give up! Thanks to all for your help and suggestions! Di <*> On 2/27/08, Shelagh Lewins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sponsored by TWIST - Tablet Weavers International Studies & Techniques > > Just one final thought: have you looked at the underside of the band? > > Shelagh > > Gudrun Polak wrote: > > Sponsored by TWIST - Tablet Weavers International Studies & Techniques > > > > Hi Di, > > > > very good question. I left this open because the answer depends on how > > the cards have been turned. If a card has been turned backwards, the > > thread at the fell (closest to me) will show. If a card has been turned > > forwards, the thread on the warp side (farthest away from me) will > show. > > > > Gudrun > > > > Di wrote: > > > >> Hi Gundrun, > >> > >> Thanks for publishing the pattern, it's *fabulous* and I know that > >> I'll almost certainly weave it a LOT with all sorts of colors and > >> fiber-weights. I may not have tons of experience yet but I'm not a > >> rank-novice, either. And yes, I do have lots of patience and know > >> that learning often comes after many (MANY) mistakes. > >> Your explanation makes sense and I'm anxious to get back home to my > >> loom to try it out! > >> > >> One (possibly very dumb) question, though. When you said, "That row > >> should be on > >> top", I'm not perfectly certain what you mean. To me "top" means two > >> holes on the card. For you, does "on top" mean the color in the top > >> hole closest to me or farthest away from me? > >> > >> Di <*> > >> > > Send private reply to Gudrun Polak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > To stop receiving tabletweaving (not tabletweaving-digest), send email > > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: unsubscribe tabletweaving. > > To stop receiving tabletweaving-digest, see the end of a digest. > > > Send private reply to Shelagh Lewins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ----------------------------------------------------------- > To stop receiving tabletweaving (not tabletweaving-digest), send email > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: unsubscribe tabletweaving. > To stop receiving tabletweaving-digest, see the end of a digest. >
