Knititude

Dayflower Lace Camisole/Dress

Pattern now available for purchase!

This empire-waisted camisole, almost entirely worked in the round, is easily lengthened to a dress.  It showcases the “Dayflower” lace pattern from Barbara Walker’s 2nd Treasury of Knitting Patterns.  The bust is fitted, with a twisted cord tie accent, and the Dayflower lace straps provide the finishing touch.

MATERIALS
Classic Elite Premiere, 50% cotton/50% Tencel, 108 yds/50 gm skein, color #5220 “frosted blue”, 6 (7, 8, 9, 10, 10) skeins for hip-length camisole.
US size 6/4 mm circular needle, 24-47” depending on selected size.  Adjust needle size to obtain correct gauge.
Stitch holders or waste yarn

DIFFICULTY
Intermediate:  skills used include lace knitting (probably not an ideal first lace project), reading chart, picking up sts, three needle bindoff.

GAUGE
20 sts/28 rows to 4”/10 cm in st st; approx 23 sts/30 rows to 4”/10 cm in patt st.  Check gauge on blocked swatch.

SIZES & MEASUREMENTS

                     S      M      L     1X     2X    3X
Bust              33    37     41     45    49    53 inches
                    84    94     104  114   124   135 cm
Underbust     28     32     36    40     44    48 inches
                    71     81     91    102  112   122 cm
Circ at hem   41.5  47.5  47.5  53   59   59 inches
                    105   121   121   135  150  150 cm
Shown in size S, 24”/61 cm long.

PATTERN NOTES
St st gauge is more important for proper fit than lace st gauge, because fitted portion of top is worked in st st.  The underbust (measured at the bra band) should fit with zero to slight ease (the twisted cord will help hold this area against the body) while the bust should fit with zero to negative ease. 
The underbust band should stretch to 33 (38, 42, 47, 52, 57) inches; ensure that this is sufficient to put the garment on by making a loop corresponding to this measurement for your size, using a nonstretchy cord or measuring tape, and passing it over your head, arms and chest.

Note that empire dec are not the same for each size; because dec are worked into each repeat of the lace pattern st, larger sizes would have had larger decreases in circumference just below the underbust band.  For instance, if the empire dec used in sizes S and M were used for all sizes, in sizes 2X and 3X the hem circumferences would have been 65” and 71”, respectively.  However, if you prefer a fuller “skirt” and more gathered empire waist, for sizes L (1X, 2X, 3X) cast on 306 (340, 374, 408) sts and follow the empire decrease directions for sizes S and M.

 

Click here to purchase!  Included are all written instructions, schematic, and Dayflower Lace charts; after purchase you will be emailed a link to download the pattern in pdf format.

Dayflower Lace is done!

(Cross-posted from the CAL).

Yes, there were many detours along the way, but finally I have a version of Dayflower Lace that I can live with. (In fact, I've worn it in public a couple of times already.) The question of how to decrease the stitches that I had added for bust shaping was finally most easily resolved by simultaneously decreasing and binding off straight across the top, and then (not being particularly fond of strapless garments) I picked up stitches for shoulder straps. Once I had that idea, making the straps from the Dayflower Lace seemed to follow naturally. I'm quite pleased with the way the shoulder straps cover my bra straps, and in general, the lace is not see-through enough to require any underlayer.

Finally, I did re-knit the underbust area incorporating more decreases, with the result that this section sits close enough to the body without the tie-- but I still like the look of the tie (plus, what would I do with all of those eyelet holes without it?).  In addition, I think tying the tie fairly snugly has the effect of supporting some of the weight of the top, keeping it from stretching the lace straps too much.

I hope to have the pattern written up in a wide range of sizes and available for purchase within the next couple of weeks. I could even imagine lengthening the lace portion and turning this into an empire-waisted dress....

Back in the U.S., um, A.

Apologies to any Beatles fans out there.  Anyway, we are Stateside for the summer; I can already see that this entire Italy experience will be fraught with mixed feelings--glad to be back/sorry to be leaving, glad to see old friends & family/sorry to leave new friends behind, glad to be rattling away in my native English, sorry to be losing my hard-won gains in Italian a little more each day.  And sorry to have left behind what must be one of the best photo-shoot locations ever; do you think I can Photoshop myself into these rooms modeling my future knit projects?!

At least my item (is that vague enough?) for the winter IK is done and I can blog easy:  work in some loose ends, write up some long-promised patterns.  I'd also love to knit Lutea for myself this summer, but  I'm having a helluva time finding any Classic Elite Sundance.  (Anyone know where I can score some of that stuff?)  I may have to substitute a similar yarn, or--more entertainingly--a completely different weight yarn.  Whee!  (I know, I probably need a margarita or a mojito or some new shoes--my fun meter appears to be in desperate need of recalibration.)

Speaking of working in loose ends, I finally did that with my Dayflower Lace top, and even wore it in public!  Sometime in the next few days I'll post for the Create Along and cross-post here.  (Recognize the earrings?)

   

A series of unfortunate knitting events

(Cross posted from the CAL.)

When last we left "Dayflower Lace," it had just been ripped back to the top of the lace.   My original sketch (see here) had featured a single repeat of the lace up the upper center front, and an interesting cross between a V and a square neck. I had discarded this idea because I wasn't sure how I would finish the edge, wasn't sure how the wavy lace would look in a single repeat with stockinette on each side, etc.

But then I thought, what the heck, I'll give it a shot...but I had already decreased within each lace repeat, so to continue the single lace panel up the front, I didn't see any option but to rip back below the decreases (luckily just a couple of rows) and then redo the decreases, EXCEPT for the one center front panel. I had decided to go back to the eyelet holes and twisted cord belt to create a close underbust fit, but then, as shown above, I thought I would also try some columns of openwork within the underbust band.

Well. I completely forgot about the effect that nearby YOs and decreases have on the accent ridge, and in this case, it's not even a nice regular wave, but a lumpy-bumpy mess. Plus I don't like that additional openwork.

Lest you think I'm the Lemony Snicket of the CAL, I'll leave you with this photo:  yes, there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

No FOs here!

(Cross posted from the CAL.)

Well, I like the lace upper back well enough...but not for this particular top. Even though the upper columns of faggoting do line up with the similar columns in the Dayflower Lace pattern, to my eye they appear totally unrelated, and in fact the upper panel achieves a certain dominance--which I had not intended.  Maybe I can use that lace panel for something else. I actually don't mind the wavy quality of the accent ridge--or wouldn't mind it, if it continued around the circumference of the garment, but it only waves in the area of the upper lace panel.

As shown in this photo, I decided to try two different ideas for the upper bodice: on my right, no decreases to compensate for the underbust  increases, and plain stockinette except for the faggoting around the neck and armholes. On my left, above the bust decreases and extra decoration. I much prefer the plainer side, although I think it looks a little wide, and might benefit from more decreasing at the armhole edge.

Anything else? Looks a little tent-y, you say? I agree; I think the underbust fit needs to be closer.

And then there is the matter of the faggoted edge treatment I tried: although it looks okay from some angles, I had not anticipated that it would have a larger row gauge than the stockinette fabric, meaning that it flares in a rather unflattering way around the armholes, in particular (with the aid of gravity, the neckline seems to lie flat enough).

Ah, well. Blue ramen noodles, anyone? (Don't worry, I only frogged back to the lace.)

Another cross post from the CAL

Isn't the difference in color in these photos wild? The middle photo is WAY too blue and the others are too gray. Anyway, first a little background: I did decide to use increases along the front to shape the bust area, rather than short rows or increases along the sides. But what then to do with the extra stitches above the bust? I could just leave them; the front of the top would then be slightly wider than the back. I could take the extra stitches into account when I decreased to shape the armholes and/or neck edge, especially if the neckline was a deep U or V--but I was concerned this might give those edges an odd line. Or, I could place decreases directly above the bust, giving what I felt to be the most, how to put it, anatomical shaping possible. The first photo shows my initial attempt at this; unfortunately, I didn't like the way the decreases looked--to my mind, as if someone had snagged a stitch and then yanked on it. (I noticed that Hattie mentioned a similar problem, but with increases, in this post. I had luckily realized that the corded edge at the top of the Dayflower Lace--visible in the left lower corner of the above photo--hid my bust-shaping increases pretty nicely.)
Then I thought I would try a different way of decreasing, along several rows instead of one, and also try using some columns of faggoting to hide or camouflage the decreases: see the photo at left. This proved to be difficult to place so that the columns didn't look odd next to the faggoting along the neck and armhole; if I tried to center the decreases over the bust, the faggoting was off center, and the angled neckline made centering the faggoting difficult. In the end, I decided that too much going on in the upper front just detracted from the lace...but I still thought that some vertical openwork columns lined up with the Dayflower repeats might dress up the upper top, so I tried putting them on the back instead. Hmmm...that corded edge is looking a little wavy...do I like it? Or not? (Hint: RIBBIT.)

Decreasing within a stitch pattern

Here you can see how I decided to decrease the Dayflower Lace pattern; the partial flower in the last few rows of lace is divided by a YO at its lower edge, which I felt kept it from looking too blocky. If I decreased further, I could perhaps have made that last flower look more like a mini version of the others--but then the underbust circumference would have been too small.

An interesting problem with this sort of decreasing is that for each stitch decreased within the stitch pattern, you will have the same number of stitches decreased as there are repeats of the pattern; thus, for this top, every time I decrease one stitch within the Dayflower lace panel, I decrease 14 sts per round. The problem arises if/when you try to write a pattern for multiple sizes. I'll use a simple example, a sweater with a lace pattern lower border, in which I want to use decreases within the lace to get from hip to waist circumference. Generally, the amount decreased from hip to waist doesn't vary much from size to size.

But if I want to write the pattern for hip/bust sizes 34 (40, 46, 52), with a gauge of 5 sts per inch, and I have 8 (10, 12, 14) repeats of my lace stitch pattern respectively, then if I decrease 1 st per repeat, I now have decreased 8 (10, 12, 14) sts in one row--or roughly 1 1/2 (2, 2 1/2, 3) inches--a markedly different amount for each size. Not so different with one decrease, maybe, but if I want to decrease 6 inches to shape the waist, then I have to make 4 decreases for size 34, 3 for size 40, probably 3 for size 46 (5 inches--close enough), and 2 for size 52--meaning three different decrease methods. If I tried to decrease the same way for each size, I might end up with (for example) 4 1/2 (6, 7 1/2, 9) inches decreased--which in size 52 is probably too much for any except the best-endowed AND wasp-waisted.

Other options? Compensate by making the hips proportionally larger in the larger sizes, or perhaps leaving a few of the repeats unchanged in the center back/front, or at the sides, in the larger sizes. One solution might work well for a particular garment and stitch pattern, and not for another. But I think you can see why this type of decreasing is not that common, except perhaps in hat patterns.

Oh yes, these pictures also show attempts 1 & 2 at the underbust band, with eyelet holes for a twisted cord tie; I felt that the first one didn't have a clear enough delineation of the band/lace transition, and also that the bust increases (several rows above the eyelet holes) were too visible.

(Cross posted from Create Along.)

Decreasing Dayflower Lace

Okay, let's pretend that two weeks or so have passed since my last post. After a couple of weeks of non-frenzied knitting, the lower portion of my Dayflower Lace top has been completed, and I can't put off deciding how to decrease any longer. Typesetter and I had the same thought, namely that decreasing all at once would create a gathered look, which would have the effect of bunching up the lace, so instead I swatched a single lace repeat and tried various ways of decreasing each repeat from 17 to 11 stitches. (After completing a stockinette swatch to get gauge for the underbust band, I had decided that this would be how much I had to decrease to get the proper underbust circumference.) Pictured at top is just one of the rejects; at the top left of the lace section, the pattern does not maintain the clear faggoting outlines, which I realized were dominant features of the lace.

I swatched a decrease I thought would work, but after working a few rounds, I realized that the "flower" in the center had become boxy and vertical, rather than curving (second photo).

Eventually I decided that the best looking solution was to end the lace pattern on a row near the very top of one of the two "flowers,"  or on Row 6 or 14 of the lace pattern. On the last photo, I've drawn a line across the lace to show approximately where these pattern rows fall. More photos of the final version of the lace decrease in my next post!

And now, a couple of other matters. First of all, I wanted to thank everyone for their suggestions and encouraging comments. I noticed several comments along the vein of "...all of us who have designed have been rejected " (Marnie), "keep working on those designs" (Emily) and "Never give up!" (Edna). It's worth stating that persistence and a high tolerance for rejection are very valuable qualities for a telemarketer...I mean for a knitwear pattern designer! I myself cultivated those traits during a year or two spent writing mediocre short stories and trying (unsuccessfully) to get them published; I've had much better success with knitwear patterns. Still, there can be a sense that you are only as good as your last acceptance, so here are a few helpful things to keep in mind when facing rejection on a regular basis:
1) Even if your design is good and your pattern well written, the magazine (or book or yarn company) may already have three hats (or two top-down raglan pullovers, or six pairs of lace socks) in the running.
2) Your design may be original and beautiful, but may just not fit with the general aesthetic of that particular magazine, etc. etc.
3)  If one entity rejects a design you can always submit it elsewhere, or self-publish it on your blog or website.

On the subject of sketches for submissions, Monica asked in an email, "Did you take a sketch or illustration class? Is there a source for fashion illustration templates?" I did take figure drawing--in high school. And as for templates, I've actually flipped through catalogs or magazines until I found a model dressed in something skimpy or form-fitting (Victoria's Secret works!) so I could see the outlines of the body, then traced it, to get a natural-looking pose for a sketch. If you don't feel your sketches are very good, it's better to keep them minimalistic--faces and hairstyles and hands are usually not required! Clean, simple lines can then be a design style, not a lack of drawing ability.

(Cross posted from Create Along.)

Create Along sort-of cross-post

Well, I'm still waiting for the Premiere yarn I ordered, but there's been a change of plan: the pictured project, which I was hoping to complete in time to submit to Knitty--by today!-- has given me no end of headaches. It is far from being completed, as ripping is unfortunately required. And what do you know, it's in Premiere, color #5248. In short, the perfect project to post about here. (And hey, if this CAL does indeed go to September, I should have time to do another one--if my other yarn ever arrives.) I hope y'all don't mind that the first few posts about this sleeveless top won't be real-time; I started the actual knitting about the time the CAL started up, in mid-February.

However, the original idea germinated awhile ago, almost a year, in fact.  I loved the Dayflower Lace stitch pattern in Barbara Walker's 2nd Treasury, and when I decided to design something using it, the first thing I did was Google to see if there were any other patterns out there--first, to see how others might have utilized it, and second, to avoid duplicating someone else's work. I found a scarf, a skirt, and a sweater, and I was interested to note that the latter, a V-neck cardigan with dropped shoulders, avoided any shaping, and thus kept the lace motifs intact (as did the scarf and skirt patterns).

It has been my experience with other curvy lace stitch patterns that mixing them with different stitch patterns must be done judiciously: part of their beauty comes from the undulations caused by the pull of the increase and decreases, and these are affected by adjacent stitches--or by trying to add shaping. So last spring, when I submitted a pattern idea for an empire waist top incorporating Dayflower Lace to Interweave Knits, I limited the lace mostly to the "skirt" portion of the top, thinking to tie the bodice thematically into the skirt by using faggoting--like that within the lace pattern-- to trim the neckline and armholes.

Needless to say, the pattern was not accepted, but I still wanted to pursue the idea, so a little over a month ago, I got out the sketch I had submitted, and started to think about how I might actually execute what I had drawn. By the way, this was one of my earlier sketches using Adobe Illustrator, and while my skills are still fairly rudimentary, one thing this program makes very easy is copying and pasting design motifs--such as if you want to communicate how a lace pattern stitch might appear across an entire garment.

So.  Some of the considerations with this top were:
1. How to create the empire waist shaping. Decreases on several rows, like waist shaping but more drastic? Or decreases all at once, creating a gathered effect?
2. What to do for the band under the bust. Simple stockinette or other pattern stitch? Bind off( or not) and attach to band, perhaps knitted horizontally to decrease stretch? I wanted this part of the top to have zero to slightly negative ease, to avoid that tent look! Use a ribbon or twisted cord to make sure the top fits closely here? And if so, incorporate eyelet holes into the band, for threading the ribbon or cord?
3. Bust shaping. If the underbust band was to have no ease, then there would have to be quite sudden increases for the bust, either along the sides, or using short rows, or using increases only in the front, to form a subtle gathered effect (which is pictured in the sketch).
4. Neckline. I wanted to use some sort of self-finishing for the armhole and neck edges, but what then to do about the center neck, which is drawn showing a single lace panel which is bound off horizontally? I didn't think the plain bound-off edge would look finished enough, but if I was going to add an edge finishing, I figured I would probably have to do it to the whole neck edge, and maybe the armhole edges, for design cohesion. Applied I-cord? Crochet? The Dayflower Lace pattern has no purl stitches on the right side, so I was reluctant to introduce ribbing or garter or seed stitch as an edge treatment.

Gah! What to do when faced with so many decisions?! START KNITTING! Luckily the lower part of this top is simply rounds of lace. I made a gauge swatch, calculated 14 repeats for a lower circumference of 40-ish inches, and I was off.

Edited to add:  Apparently Blogger and Typepad do not allow easy cross-posting, but I copied/pasted and that worked just fine.  Click here for the original post (from March 15th) and to see more of the Create Along.

First-Ever-Along

I have to admit that I'm not normally much of a joiner, and lately I've had little time to knit anything that isn't of my own design-- but then the Create Along came along.  First I noted the great idea of each participant designing her (or his) own project, and then I noted that of the five yarn choices, I've worked extensively with one (Cotton Classic), am currently working with another (Classic Elite Premiere) and have been wanting to try two others (Rowan Calmer and Denim).  So, I'm in!  If I can figure out how to do it, I'll cross post to both the Create Along site and to here, but if not, I'll link to my posts over there.  Because between tax time, family visits, and completing a pattern and sample for the Interweave Holiday Gifts 2007 issue by May 1st*, I can honestly only handle one blog over the next few weeks.  And the weather here has been killer, besides (that's Moltrasio across the lake, with the roofs of Blevio in the foreground).

*Hooray!  This makes me even happier than when they accepted my pattern for this summer's issue.  Because (a) it means that one wasn't just a fluke, and (b) it means that when they received my finished pattern and sample, they didn't write a memo to all of their editors, warning them to never accept anything from me ever again.