Friday, January 28, 2011

L2 Sleeves

I mentioned earlier that I failed at one of the sleeves on this dress. I wanted to explain that a little further.

Basically I totally misread the pattern for the first sleeve I did. I was supposed to decrease every third round, and once I got to the right amount of stitches I was to continue stockinette for a few more inches until it reached the desired length. As I worked on the sleeve, I noticed it was not getting smaller very quickly. I measured, and I had reached the final length of the sleeve before I had finished decreasing. This was confusing, but whatever. I just finished it as I was supposed to and called it good.

When I got to the second sleeve I read the directions more carefully and realized my previous mistake. I was supposed to decrease TWO stitches every third round, and I had only done one. This not only made the sleeve extra poofy, but the line that showed where I decreased was twisting around the sleeve to the backside and looked really funny. Here are some pics:

This first is to show the comparison of the two sleeves. As you can see, the one on the right is correct, as it gradually decreases in poofiness and comes to kind of a point. The one on the left is poofy all the way to the ribbed cuff, which it's not supposed to be.


Here's a closeup of the good sleeve. You can see the line of decreases, and you can see that it goes smoothly up the bottom of the sleeve to the cuff as a normal sleeve should do.


And here's the backside of the bad sleeve. You can see the line of decreases going diagonally across the back of the sleeve, which shouldn't be happening. It should be along the bottom as with the other. You can also again see the poofiness factor, and that the decreases go all the way to the cuff. On the other sleeve they stop a few inches before.


Needless to say, this was a good learning experience. I have since unpicked the left sleeve and redone it, so now it looks just like the right sleeve. I even painstakingly counted stitches so they are EXACTLY the same.

No comments:

Post a Comment