Two Socks, One Week: How Do I Set Up Magic Loop? (Tutorial)*

Let me start by thanking every person who's ever uploaded a video tutorial - whether I liked it or not. This whole "watch me while I show you" thing is a challenging process requiring good technology, the ability to speak clearly and intelligently for minutes at a time, charisma, comfort with the medium and an ability to keep your freakin' hands in the frame.

I cannot say that I have been overly successful on any of these fronts but I do want to share my process with you, if only to show you that "regular people knitting" is an actual thing. Furthermore, my goal is to be your hostess and guide on a learning and creative journey I hope we will undertake together from Dec. 29 - Jan. 5. (That's a plug. Pls. see the sidebar for a the KAL post archive.)

I truly hope this video gives you a meaningful sense of the how of magic loop cuz, if it doesn't, I sure as hell have wasted many hours. Of course, on camera, I forgot to say one of the most relevant things, IMO, about how magic loop suffers: by its name!

Magic loop is actually not about creating one loop (the one we all think of when we talk about dividing the stitches on either side of the cable and pulling that loopy cable out from between them (see video for more).) Magic loop is TWO loops. The second one is entirely necessary and, for people who struggle with the method, potentially overlooked.

You'll observe, as you watch the endless footage of me knitting, that in order to join the flat cast on row into a small-diameter tube, the first thing I have to do is to "pull the back needle out" (moving the stitches, formerly on that needle, onto the cable) so that the back needle, when it joins the front needle to create the first (or next) stitch of the round, produces the second loop.

If it doesn't make sense here, don't worry. You really will see it ad nauseum (but not particularly artfully) in the video.

A couple of other points because I'm vain:

• My house does not look as crappy as it does in the video (even though there's not much of it to see). Lighting video is apparently an art, as all the porn cinematographers will tell you.
• Yeah, my hands really are as huge as they look on the screen. I have huge hands. What can I say except they're not as noticeable when you see the rest of me at the same time. And on that note, I really have to start showering more often and putting on makeup. I've hidden my hideousness because, duh. 

And now, without further ado:

How to Begin A Simple Sock, worked in Magic Loop: The First Three Rounds Set Up

Round 1:

I hope you can laugh @8 minute mark when my hands completely leave the frame - despite the fact that I speak about what they're doing at length. Just go with it...

Round 2: 

Round 3:

Moving to Round 4:

I was all set to trash-talk DPNs compare DPNs to magic loop in the next post :-) but alas, I'm not smart enough yet to have figured out how DPNs work. I guess I'll have to omit that element of the KAL because, if I don't have the knowledge, I don't have the knowledge. So, next up, some detailed discussion about the pattern.

Till then, please leave feedback if these videos make sense - or even more so if they don't! We don't want them out there in the universe if they need improving. And, if they do make sense - and you're new to the method - please do a bit of practice over the next couple of weeks. Then, you'll be old-hat at the cast-on and magic loop set up by the time we start the fun stuff.


*I considered calling this "Magic Loop in 4 Easy Videos of a Total Duration of Approximately 20 Minutes" but, on balance, I don't imagine that that title is an up-sell.

Foxhall Gloves Continued...

Let's talk about hand-knit gloves. I've finished the first of the Foxhall gloves for Scott and I now have some strong feelings about this particular handmade objet:

Look, gloves are really no more difficult than socks. In fact, I think they might be easier (which is to say quicker), but they are way more freakin' fussy. For starters, you can't just make them. You practically have to take a 3D cast of your gift-recipient's hand. Or sit next to him on the couch. Even my 2D (with measurements) map - recommended by the excellent pattern writers of the Foxhall gloves - was kind of useless in the end. Happily I have Scott's actual hand to measure from every 3 minutes (note: not a popular tack. Whatevs, when he has bespoke gloves, who'll be laughing last?)

The one thing that the pattern might have clarified a bit, especially since, IMO, there are scarce online resources on this topic, is how (technically) fourchettes work. I'm no expert, but I can say that the first 2 finished fingers were, um, not exactly profesh. 

My problem wasn't following the directions - and they were quite clear. It wasn't in understanding the why of fourchettes, (they give a bit of extra width at the base of each finger which has implications for depth). My problem was in deciphering the how. As in, how do you construct these things so it doesn't look like a toddler did the knitting. If you've never seen a fourchette being constructed - and everything's a mystery - being instructed to cast on fourchette stitches (and maybe pick up a few extra stitches which you'll then, one row later, decrease - to mitigate mini-holes at the front notch) isn't so meaningful. 

Where you add those extra picked up stitches (and which of the new stitches you decrease) is key. If you decrease at the front-side edge of the finger "crotch" (what I did the first couple of times) you get some nasty looking finger-bases. Hey, I made it through, and I improved fairly quickly, but it's only because I brought other skills to the activity.

Let's just say, I'm only showing these off once they're blocked. And I reserve the right to hide the pinkie side of the left-glove (first knit) under the right.

On an interesting side note, I did not knit one stitch with DPNs. I know, I've failed at skill-gaining. My brain just could not make it happen. What really cinched this path, however, was watching a video of a woman (a serious knitter) making fingers using DPNs. Lord, it was such a mess I could scarcely believe it. Even this knitter said: I know, this kind of looks like a mess. But it's not that bad! 

Yeah, right. It actually offended my sense of order. 

On the plus side, I figured out that it's really quite easy to knit the entirety of a glove using magic loop. With nary a ladder, without needles poking into already finished fingers and getting stuck on the stitches on the holder. If anything, I'm more hooked on magic loop than ever I've been?! Which is good, I guess, since I don't seem to have an alternative (yet). I will say it helps to have excellent joins at the (circular) needle where it meets the cable, and a cable that's quite malleable. And natch, one improves with experience. But it's in no way difficult. Simply fussy and a bit slower than other knitting in the round (or slightly larger small-diameter knitting).

Now, if that's the worst of it, I guess I shouldn't complain. I mean, half my glove is pretty nice! And maybe the whole of the next glove will be too.

What do you say?

PS: OMG, I LOVE this pattern:

Starry Starry Night by Suzanne Bryan

I have no interest in doing all kinds of challenging colourwork (never mind on socks) but these amazing things are so compelling, I have to put them on the list. Never mind when they get made. I clicked on the button to buy the minute a saw it.

Crystalline Potential

OK, here it is 5:30 and this day has been full. What have I done so far? Well, I made the Bolognese sauce (smells awesome!), did yoga, sewed my second Harper jacket and took some photos. Oh, and now I'm writing a post.

Let's just say there's a glass of wine with my name on it. And while we're at it, get yourself one, cuz I have lots to say - with pics!

Look, I like both jackets but I much prefer my second version. Partly this is because I made it using a seriously revised pattern that came from the alterations I determined while sewing the first. Partly, I really just don't love the blue double knit with this garment.

Before I start with all the photos, please keep in mind it's practically the darkest day of the year. My walls, visible in the background, are not beige, peeps, they're yellow. It's impossible to see colour with accuracy (at least not with my gizmos and interest level). So with that in mind, know you're not getting the best view.

I'll also say - which I realize raises the question: Well why don't you model it, Kristin? - that this kind of garment is all about how it looks on a real human being. If I didn't look like a chia pet, if I felt more energetic (posing is all about energy for me), then I would. But seriously, I'm not in a selfie phase.

Harper Jacket 1 (Blue Double Knit):

Keep in mind, my shoulders are narrower than the dress form's. Even though it appears to fit the form, the top is a better fit for me. Also, see how much volume there is at the centre front? It's inches more than required.

I don't love the raw edges everywhere. That's what the pattern calls for but in my second version, I cover stitched a half-inch hem at the waist and sleeves. It still fit just fine because, depending on fabric, this thing is still going on an inch too long by my proportions.  I feel that these might be the right dimensions for a woven version of the jacket.

The left shoulder seam has an eye for the hook on the right centre front.

I'm always reminded of the terrible posture of my dress form. And it's kind of lopsided, somehow. That's all I can see in this pic. There's still quite a bit of volume in the waist and centre back. I could definitely take an inch or two out over all the seams.

And here's how it is with the clip. I think I was supposed to use 2 clips?! Anyway, I didn't see the need. I always tuck the inside fabric into my bra, discreetly. It's entirely invisible and totally stable. I don't like it closed as much as open...

Harper Jacket 2 (Grey and Blue Striped Jersey):

Showing how it looks in 2 different lights...

I took 1.5 inches off each centre front and it improved things dramatically. Little frames don't need all that volume. I'd totally be able to close it, had I put in the hooks and eyes, but I didn't see the need. I can tuck one corner into the side of the bra at the front shoulder, should I so desire. I swear, it doesn't look weird because the open side falls over that area - but you have to wear an open neck top, natch, nothing higher than a low crewneck.

I also finished the seams (except on the centre front). I came up with a work around for the unfinished seam at the neck (don't want to fold under because that would affect the drape of the centre front and add bulk at an already bulky area. I just decoratively serged that section (the span from shoulder seam to shoulder seam at the neckline) and afterwards, top stitched the lower side of the seam around the back neck over the serged line (on the other/WS side of the fabric). Make sure the serged or raw or turned under edge is lower than pre-stitched neck seam. Then you'll be sure to cover the unsightly neck-meets-shoulder-seams unit. To make it look organic, I also stitched around the same side (back) of the shoulder seam. That adds to the stability of the garment which is especially relevant when made from a fabric having this little structure.

I used a lot of the fusible interfacing strips that Sunni at A Fashionable Stitch sells. That stuff is SO useful for everything and easy to apply. It's not the strongest knit interfacing but it seems to do the trick.

This Harper took me half the time of the other - and I had to seam match (which adds time). I'm starting to feel more comfortable with that process. It's not that hard. Just cut each piece separately from the RS of the fabric, starting with the RS of the pattern facing up. When you cut the second piece, use the first as a template, turned upside down, over a matched part of the fabric. Cut and you have 2 pieces, right side together, one on top of the other.

This fabric was slightly harder to control than the double knit but I found it easier to work with, somehow, perhaps because it's more manipulable. Can I just say how much I love this design with a stripe? Look at how pretty those bias stripes are. It was hard to match up the stripes because the fabric is limp. One side tended, inevitably, to stretch more than the other and, esp. with a serger (even going slowly) it's hard to attain perfection. Also, each piece is apt to be cut with slightly different tension which creates very small differences, all of which eventually add up.

A Final Word on the Pattern:

It's a stylish design, no question, but it's not unique in RTW. I actually think it was a bit clumsily designed. Unaltered, there's too much fabric everywhere. Unless you have a really broad back, I can't imagine you'd need it. Even then, size down. BTW, there's too much sleeve ease (which is stupid on a knit).

This pattern gave me a good starting point but I can tell you, the reason this will look chic on me is because I've made lots of changes and fit it to my body. I can see how someone could end up looking like she's wearing rags with all the extra ease, were she to use the wrong fabric.

I will definitely make it again. Sized for my proportions, it's quite flattering. Because I've got a narrow frame, small shoulders and small-ish arms, I don't look overly busty. I really don't recommend this fashion for women with broad backs or wide shoulders. Then, if you add to those things a large bust and short waist, the look can be boxy and unflattering. It's not for everyone (but then what is?).

So, whatcha think??

So Many Possibilities

OK, today, I've got a ridiculous amount on the agenda - I wonder if it's actually going to happen (or if I'm going to conk out and watch Law and Order reruns for 5 hours).

• Gotta take pics of the new Harper Jacket for posting soon. The prob right now is that the light is SO weak, it's tough to take a picture that shows any detail. This is the worst time of year for that.

• Gonna make another Harper Jacket in this fabric. It does curl, but I have a couple of tricks up my sleeve. Of course, it means I'm going to have to freakin' pattern-match. Can I say how much I'm grateful that there are only 6 separate pieces to seam together.

• I haven't forgotten about Scott's gloves (I wrote a post on them but haven't put it up yet). While my body is tired (not the best time for knitting), I'm continuing to work on this project slowly. Maybe today I'll do an hour or so. Good news, this is compatible with Law and Order.

• This is the craziest thing. I'm going to try to video myself showing and talking about magic loop for the upcoming KAL. I have no idea if this is going to be illuminating or disastrous, so don't get your hopes up. Fortunately, between what I can write about my experience, and what I can link you to online, this is a "nice to have".

• Oh, and Scott and M want spaghetti Bolognese for dinner. So theoretically, I'm going to spend an hour or two making that.

• Yoga - that must be prioritized today as I've not practiced since Thursday and my body is feeling it.

When I look at this list, I'm struck by how it involves so many of the things I love to do: photography, sewing, knitting, cooking, yoga. If only I didn't have to weekend-warrior it. (Of course, I'm incredibly grateful for my career, it's just taking up a lot of mental energy right now, particularly through the work week.)

So, let's take bets. What will I accomplish today? All of it, some of it, none of it? And what's on your agenda for the day? Let's talk!

The Harper Jacket: More

OK, per Debbie's comment yesterday, here's what the technical drawing makes of the front piece:

And here's the end result of my alteration:

Ignore the bit of paper taped to the upper left (nr the armsyce). I altered the armscye and sleeve. When I do this, I keep the bits of paper I cut off until I'm sure I won't need them again...

To me those pieces look almost identical, and though I appreciate Debbie's thoughtful advice, I opted to start making the jacket using my diagonal alteration vs her suggested, straight-of-grain one. Seriously, I was up half the night debating the differences between our proposed methods. I really don't know if the impact is that great one way or another. Maybe this is one of those times that different alterations will work.

I'm happy with my choice re: drape, but I could have cut 2 inches off the centre front width of the front piece. There's more than enough fabric. A bit too much, IMO.

So, next time, I make that alteration.

And yeah, there will be a next time cuz I spent half the day altering every one of the pieces for the second time. The size 10 sleeve height is way to deep. The shoulder too wide. There's too much ease in the torso. Happily, I could work around these things it for the version I made today but the pattern pieces have to reflect my slice-and-dice. Honestly, I could have bought the 8 and it would still have been too long and wide everywhere except in the sleeve circumference. And every change I made was a little bit complex in the way my body is. See, grading between sizes wouldn't have worked. My issues are about depth, not width. I've only tried this one Style Arc pattern, but if it's anything to go by, the designs are for tall, long-waisted people. I'm very happy I've been putting in the time to learn how to fit because my clothing is SO much better for it. I can live with the current imperfections, given my inexperience. And, now, I have the chance to make a garment work for my proportions. Damn straight I'm making it again.

I am reminded - as with every time I take a break from sewing - that I am not fast. The top took 8 hours from start to finish. People, it's a 3-pattern-piece knit. Next time it will go twice as fast, I realize, but this time, I had to determine how to finish the seams and alter the fit. If you finish the seams the way the pattern instructs, it looks sloppy and homemade. I largely serged, but the back neck unit - while very easy to work - isn't neat. I ripped out a bunch of seams. I made alterations. I took my time. A a result, I like how it looks inside and out (more or less), though the neck is still a bit meh on the wrong side. (I''ll post pics tomorrow of both sides.) The instructions aren't fantastic. I mean, they're totally accurate, but they don't hold your hand. This designer assumes you're not an idiot.

I think I'd prefer the Harper made in a less structured fabric than the double knit. It's the thickest fabric I'd want to use on a garment like this. Effectively, I think of the pattern as a wrap-like sweater, not a jacket.

I'm trying to decide between a couple of other knit fabrics I have in the cupboard. One is a stripe-pattern fabric and the other textured. My concern is to ensure that they won't roll at the (raw) edges because many of the Harper edges are raw, and I don't want fabric that flips to expose the wrong side.

Anyway, more to come... 

In Which I Take Something Super Easy and Make It Slightly Less So

I suppose it could be worse. And the thing in question is the Harper Jacket pattern, so I'm likely to relate a couple of sewing stories over the next few days. (Those of you who can't bear to hear another thing about my knitting - score!)

OK, here's the pattern:

Style Arc Harper Jacket

It's one of those jackets-meets-sweater things that are incredibly useful in Canada. There's not a lot written about it, I have to say. I've only found one post (a very helpful one), but its writer is a woman who couldn't be more differently shaped than me. She seems quite tall and long in her proportions.

One of the fundamental differences between our efforts is that she actually lengthened the jacket. I, on the other hand (and being incapable of sewing anything out of the envelope, apparently), had to shorten each piece by 2 inches.

I made the size 10, which I was worried might be to small, but seriously, I think going up a size would have made the shoulder-width and arm circumference too large. This is not fitted below the high bust, so I qualify as a true "small" for the purposes of this pattern. I mean, I had to shorten everything even given it's a size 10?!

Note that I have no idea if I shortened the front piece (that weird looking one on the left) appropriately. Mind you, the shape of the finished piece is the same as the original was and I lined up the armsyces in order to ensure I made the same adjustment on the front as on the back piece. Here's hoping my "special sewing sense" is working. In order to true the front piece, once I messed with the length, I actually added 5/8" below the shorten line. You can see it on the right lower half. I had the option to true by removing fabric at the upper part of the piece, but given my full bust measurement, I felt I needed to add width below the shorten line rather than subtract width above it. A tape measure seems to corroborate this.

I could have taken more off the length of all of these pieces (like another inch) but I was afraid to go overboard. And besides, it's not like every first garment isn't a muslin. Don't kid yourself. It is. Hopefully, however, this one will be wearable in the end.

One of the ways in which I hope this pattern will work on my behalf - in the way it might NOT for a tall person who doesn't want to add bust volume - is that the length of the front piece dictates the amount of volume in the ruffles at the centre front. Wow, awkward sentence. Sorry.

What I mean is, when I shortened the piece, given the construction of the centre front, I removed some of the ruffleability (I believe) by removing inches of length. It remains to be seen if the result would be more pronounced (while still fitting my frame) if I'd removed width above the shorten line (see 2 paragraphs up). I guess this is where the muslin premise comes in.

Those armscyes look kind of long to me, but I measured them against another, well-fitting, similarly constructed RTW sweater and it seems its armsyces are almost the exact same depth. Hopefully I'm mistaken in my concern.

I really like the one-size pattern, gotta say. It's very clean. I don't love cutting around a zillion lines and I usually end up making similar adjustments to all of my patterns - none of which are facilitated by zillions of extra lines denoting other sizes. What I mean is, I don't get a lot of value from the multi-sized patterns because I don't really straight-grade from one size to another. Moreover, if I need to do so, I just make it up. I mean, those are linear adjustments that really are pretty straight forward.

Anyway, here's the fabric I'll use for the Harper Jacket:

It's a 2-way stretch double knit from Gorgeous Fabrics and it's got a nice drape and hand. I will say that the colour is in no way what my computer monitor led me to expect. It's lighter and less jewel-toned than I hoped it would be. But, since I'm not head-over-heels (and yet its properties align well with those required for this pattern - dense, firm knit with some heft but not so much that the drape will be inhibited), I feel free to use it and enjoy it for whatever result it yields. Don't misunderstand, it's a very nice fabric and I'm sure many sewists would find many uses for it. It's one of those knits, I suspect, that looks at its best in a finished garment. It would be really great as pants, I imagine.

So, there you go. What do you think? Have you made this jacket? Do my alterations seem like they'll work (those of you who can turn pics of paper into 3D objects in your mind)? Do you like it? Let's talk!

Brief Announcement

I think I may have to sew something this weekend. I'm not making any plans. I'm far too over-worked for that. But who knows if something might get stitched soon.

No doubt, I'll keep you posted.