Knitting Projects
Jun. 11th, 2017 06:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
atherleisure I've done a bit of knitting the last few days. My stockings are finished with time to spare. Interestingly, I had about two yards of yarn left at the end of the second stocking after running out on the first stocking. I don't know if the extra stitches I picked up after the heel on the first stocking pushed me over the edge on needing more yarn or the yardage was just slightly lower in the first two balls than the second two. In the end, I do have just one odd-colored toe.
I started working on the 17th century garters I've talked about before. I gauged them and knit about an inch before I decided they weren't working. I posted about the attempt on LJ (http://atherleisure.livejournal.com/114983.html) because I didn't want to add the picture to Flickr. Something more the texture of the silk embroidery floss I've used for pinballs would probably work better, but the floss itself wouldn't be suitable.
I also started working on the 1919 Slipover Bodice that Wearing History sells. I'm guessing that it comes from the 1919 edition of The Columbia Book of Yarns, but I can't find that one online so it's just a guess. Since I don't know where it comes from, I don't want to add it to the Ravelry database. (She put it in as a personal pattern when she did her project page.) I am hoping this will use up the rest of the leftover yarn from the 1892 petticoat as well as a couple of sport-weight leftovers from other projects. I don't mind having a fabric stash, but I don't really want a yarn stash so I'm always extra happy to use up the leftovers.
Incidentally, there is an error in the slipover bodice pattern - it says to cast on 76 stitches for the back, but the pattern doesn't work out that way. It needs to be 77 stitches. Then you have 61 left after narrowing for the armscyes and cast off 23 for the neck. I'm only just to the neck so I don't know if there will be any more issues. As often happens for me, I had to go down a needle size. I find it interesting that the armscye is quite shallow on the back (and therefore presumably much deeper on the front) like the 1907 sweater and 1912 vest I've made so the shift to sweater seams directly under the arm like modern sweaters must post-date about 1919 but has occurred by about 1937 because my c. 1937 sweater does have the seams under the arms. I may be the only one who finds that interesting, though.
I started working on the 17th century garters I've talked about before. I gauged them and knit about an inch before I decided they weren't working. I posted about the attempt on LJ (http://atherleisure.livejournal.com/114983.html) because I didn't want to add the picture to Flickr. Something more the texture of the silk embroidery floss I've used for pinballs would probably work better, but the floss itself wouldn't be suitable.
I also started working on the 1919 Slipover Bodice that Wearing History sells. I'm guessing that it comes from the 1919 edition of The Columbia Book of Yarns, but I can't find that one online so it's just a guess. Since I don't know where it comes from, I don't want to add it to the Ravelry database. (She put it in as a personal pattern when she did her project page.) I am hoping this will use up the rest of the leftover yarn from the 1892 petticoat as well as a couple of sport-weight leftovers from other projects. I don't mind having a fabric stash, but I don't really want a yarn stash so I'm always extra happy to use up the leftovers.
Incidentally, there is an error in the slipover bodice pattern - it says to cast on 76 stitches for the back, but the pattern doesn't work out that way. It needs to be 77 stitches. Then you have 61 left after narrowing for the armscyes and cast off 23 for the neck. I'm only just to the neck so I don't know if there will be any more issues. As often happens for me, I had to go down a needle size. I find it interesting that the armscye is quite shallow on the back (and therefore presumably much deeper on the front) like the 1907 sweater and 1912 vest I've made so the shift to sweater seams directly under the arm like modern sweaters must post-date about 1919 but has occurred by about 1937 because my c. 1937 sweater does have the seams under the arms. I may be the only one who finds that interesting, though.
