Lately I’ve been playing around with lace edgings. Here’s a favorite:
Normally, you’d see it charted like so:
The right edge of the chart is straight and the left edge zig-zags, like the edging itself. Yet this chart distorts the “leaf” motif within the edging. And the zig-zag edge is a little exaggerated.
Here’s another charting option:
Tossing in a few “no stitch” symbols lets the other symbols line up vertically just like the stitches will when the edging is knit. It makes the leaf tip more apparent by placing its yarn overs in a V shape. And it makes the zig-zag more realistic. In short, it lets the chart more closely resemble the edging.
Which chart is “better”? It depends on your tolerance for “no stitch” symbols, I guess. My tolerance is quite high. Besides, I have a strong fondness for charts that look like the stitch patterns they represent. So – no surprise here – the second chart turns my crank.
But if the chart were destined for publication? Ah, that’s the real question. Which would cause more confusion for the novice chart reader: a chart that doesn’t much look like its stitch pattern, or a chart that contains “no stitch” symbols?
What do you think?
Tagged: lace, charting, geeky.
I'm with you on preferring the second chart. I love charts that look like the stitch pattern, and I'm happy to use a few "no stitch" symbols to get there. As to which is more likely to cause confusion, I think the "no stitch" symbol is one of the basics that should be encountered early in the chart reading process. The willingness of editors and publishers to shy away from things like "no stitch" symbols for fear of causing confusion is one of the factors that keeps novices at the novice level. Love that you are now blogging - keep up the good work!
» Sandi Rosner
I like the charts to look like the knitting because you do get an idea of what it's supposed to look like (and where you went wrong if you did). However, I do find the 'no stitch' confusing. I've only run into it a few times. If there are written explanations of what to do on the no stitch portions (before getting to the chart) it would be awesome.
Sandi's right about novices staying at novice level. I'm a self taught chart reader and I want to be better at it.
» Wen
Definitely a chart that has no st symbols will cause more confusion for a novice chart reader. But then, a novice chart reader is less likely to be looking at the chart as a whole, and instead will just be reading each box across the row. Sandi makes a good point, that education would help greatly with the "no st" confusion. (And I think education is good!) If you're concerned, I'd put something like "no st (see notes)" in the chart key, then put a good explanation of it in a "notes" section at the start of the pattern.
Is that a slipped st along the right edge? If so, why do you show the V upside down?
Very pretty edging!
» Karen Frisa
Sandi, you’re so right! Molly-codding novices doesn’t do them any favors.
Wen, a “no stitch” symbol is a placeholder, a spot in the chart that doesn’t correspond to a stitch on your needles. When reading a chart, you just skip over “no stitch” symbols without doing anything: you don’t slip, knit, or otherwise manipulate any stitches on your needles. Cast on 15 stitches and try knitting from the second chart above, and you’ll see what I mean.
Karen, yes, that upside-down V is a slipped stitch. Sorry, I can’t give you a good explanation—I don’t remember when or why I started using that symbol.
» JC
Maybe someday you'll turn your sl st symbol right-side up so it will look like the knitting. :)
» Karen Frisa
Oh, crud, Karen. The upside-down V had always looked like a slipped stitch to me because I’d envisioned it on the needles: a loop of yarn being pulled upwards. But something you said made me realize it doesn’t look like a slipped stitch in finished fabric.
Phooey. Now I have to decide if I ought to change all my charts.
» JC
Just found your blog and I love it, I'm adding it to my list right now.
I'm all for the "no stitch" place holders. I tend to read charts as a whole, not just stitch by stitch, esp when considering a pattern before I pick up the needles.
As for the upside down 'V' slip stitch thing, I think a regular 'V' makes more sense for 2 reasons. First, as stated by others it looks like the finished knitting. Second, as is, it looks like it could be a decrease, maybe one where you don't care which way it leans.
» Jayme
JC, I prefer the second chart as well. When it comes to patterning, I read my knitting as I go. The second chart would allow me to quickly scan the next row to see the stitches and their placement within my current fabric. Beautiful pattern, by the way!
» Mona Phaff
JC, I'm so glad to see that you are blogging and that there are books in your future. You are so good at explaining things in classes and in the patterns you design, making you a great addition to the knitting blogosphere! Thanks to Mona and Stephanie at Dye Dreams for their link to you from their Sock Club update email.
As to charts, I remember when I was first encountering charts, I was told that they were excellent because you could "see" your knitting - your second chart accomplishes that more clearly for me, anyway. I always rely on the key (mainly because some use different symbols) and if it includes the "no stitch" definition along with the other symbols, it would seem to be no more difficult to new chart readers.
» Barbara Laidlaw
Okay, so it looks like the symbol I use for slip stitches is going to have to change! :-) I wonder why it never occurred to me until now that the V everyone else uses looks like a slip stitch in finished fabric??
Thanks, everyone, for the vote of confidence for charts that resemble fabric, even if it means having to use a few “no stitch” symbols. This’ll influence the charts I draw in the future, for sure!
» JC
I'll add my vote in favor of charts with the no-stitch symbol. I was an early adopter of charts and even as a novice I found that the charts which looked most like the actual knitting were the least confusing. A grayed-out or blacked-out square for no-stitch is very mnemonic and easy to understand at a glance. I've also seen blocks of no-stitches simply cut out of a chart -- no grid lines or anything. That does eliminate symbol-related confusion, but probably isn't viable for isolated no-stitches or small blocks of them.
» Betty Salpekar