Errata? or new math?
I like how the Knitter's Review Forum describes their Errata section: "Wondering if you're going crazy or if the designer messed up?"
That's how I'm feeling. I'm trying to divide for the back and fronts on the Flame Cardi and it's just not working. With a total of 203st, you're supposed to work 51st, bind off 3, work 92st, bind off 3, work 49st. Sorry, that's only 198st.
So, let's work it from the other direction:
Right Front:
Shoulder = 20st
Armhole decrease = 7st
Neck decrease = 22st
Total = 49st
Okay, that works.
Left Front:
Shoulder = 20st
Armhole decrease = 10st
Neck decrease = 21st
Total = 51st
That checks out too.
That leaves 97st for the back, right? Not necessarily.
Here's the shaping for the back:
Armhole decreases = 20st total
Shoulders = 20st each = 40st total
Neck st = 40st
But wait a minute, that would mean I'd have to start with 100st.
Now that I've written it all out, I wonder why there are 10st decreased for left armhole and 7st decreased for the right armhole? If I decrease 7st for the left armhole, I'll have 100st for the back.
Okay, it's a plan. Let's hope it doesn't mess me up later.
The divide will be: work 48st (LF), bind off 3, work 100st (back), bind off 3, work 49st (RF).
I'll document this later, just in case it has to change again. Bah.
That's how I'm feeling. I'm trying to divide for the back and fronts on the Flame Cardi and it's just not working. With a total of 203st, you're supposed to work 51st, bind off 3, work 92st, bind off 3, work 49st. Sorry, that's only 198st.
So, let's work it from the other direction:
Right Front:
Shoulder = 20st
Armhole decrease = 7st
Neck decrease = 22st
Total = 49st
Okay, that works.
Left Front:
Shoulder = 20st
Armhole decrease = 10st
Neck decrease = 21st
Total = 51st
That checks out too.
That leaves 97st for the back, right? Not necessarily.
Here's the shaping for the back:
Armhole decreases = 20st total
Shoulders = 20st each = 40st total
Neck st = 40st
But wait a minute, that would mean I'd have to start with 100st.
Now that I've written it all out, I wonder why there are 10st decreased for left armhole and 7st decreased for the right armhole? If I decrease 7st for the left armhole, I'll have 100st for the back.
Okay, it's a plan. Let's hope it doesn't mess me up later.
The divide will be: work 48st (LF), bind off 3, work 100st (back), bind off 3, work 49st (RF).
I'll document this later, just in case it has to change again. Bah.
6 Comments:
Yeesh... this is next up on my list, and you're scaring me a bit.(guilty of being happy that it's you going through the trouble of knitting first, and not me).
Is there any errata posted? It doesn't seem like there is.
By
Anonymous, at 4/12/2005 9:01 PM
Vogue Knitting has a corrections section on their web site--there's a link to it in my previous post. However, there aren't any corrections listed for this pattern. I've been emailing my findings to them. Hopefully they'll post the correction from the designer.
By
Bogie, at 4/12/2005 9:09 PM
Ack! Wouldn't it be nice to buy a published pattern and be able to follow it, more or less?!? Thank goodness you are wise and know how to solve these sorts of problems.
By
goodkarma, at 4/12/2005 10:59 PM
I'm actually swatching fir this now... I'm glad you are going through the same issues I was seeing. This morning, I even typed out the flame pattern stitch in word - they way it was broken up in the magazine was driving me crazy.
I'm going to need to 'upsize' the pattern also - which adds even more complexity!
By
Cece, at 4/13/2005 7:11 AM
Oy.
By
Anonymous, at 4/13/2005 9:43 AM
Any chance the count discrepancy comes from differences in where you are in the pattern? Like.. you end the R front section with some straight knitting but you begin the L front with a K3 together or something like that?
Just trying to come up with reasons..
Good flippin' luck!
By
spinnity, at 4/13/2005 2:59 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home