Knit Flix

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Compelled to respond

Thanks to Abigail who pointed me to this editorial on KnitNet.com. In it Sharon Airhart writes,
If there has been one shocking surprise for me in six years of editing a knitting magazine it's that a significant percentage of the patterns sold out there are, at best, poorly written and, therefore, unintelligible or, at worst, full of numerical inaccuracies that make it impossible to create the garment as shown.

This is not the case if you're looking at Vogue or Knitters or the Interweave Knits magazines, KnitNet or the patterns published by the major international yarn companies from Rowan to Lion Brand.

Whoa. Stop the presses. Remember the Flame Stitch Cardigan? Click on this link and read the "Related posts". Almost all of them are about pattern errors.

And what about the dress that Cookie knit? She writes about her experience here and here and says
So pretty much everything in this pattern is wrong except the number of stitches to cast on and the rows on which to decrease.

And how many times does a Vogue Knitting pattern show up in the Knitter's Review Forum, "Errata in Knitting Patterns"?

I was compelled to respond to Sharon and let her know that I wholeheartedly disagree with her generalizations. Yes, there are designers who have bad patterns out there. But to hold up Vogue as an example of patterns done right?

Come on.

Get real.

9 Comments:

  • Isn't that charming? It only reinforces my decision not to publish with them.

    By Blogger Alexandra, at 2/08/2006 6:19 PM  

  • Er, them=Knit Net, not Vogue. Not that there's much danger of that happening.

    By Blogger Alexandra, at 2/08/2006 8:08 PM  

  • I agree. That seems to be a misinformed statement at best.

    By Blogger Stephanie, at 2/08/2006 8:22 PM  

  • I was also entertained that she threw her own publication in with the big names. Her publication that I hadn't heard of until yesterday when someone posted about it on a knitting forum I read. Ah well. I'm glad you replied to her. Your experience with the flame stitch cardigan was the first example that came to mind when I read her editorial.

    By Blogger Abigail, at 2/08/2006 9:38 PM  

  • Argh! Yeah, I don't know why KnitNet would use Vogue as an example. I also can't believe KnitNet would try to compare their level of professionalism with IK.

    By Anonymous Cookie, at 2/08/2006 10:49 PM  

  • Vague, oh I mean Vogue is one of the worst offenders of both poor pattern writting and little to no support. After all, as they have said, they are spread to thin to actually support the patterns they sell. Poor them!

    By Anonymous Pamela, at 2/09/2006 5:29 AM  

  • I knit one of the sock patterns that was in the same edition of Knitnet. It had an error in it.

    People in glass houses should think very carefully before throwing stones.

    Celia

    By Anonymous Celia, at 2/09/2006 8:18 AM  

  • I am knitting VK Hol/05, #17. I found a mistake in the stitch glossary and e-mailed them. The asst. patterns editor responded w/a personal e-mail but I've not seen the correction posted. You'd think all knitting mags would have pattern editing as a first priority--isn't that why they exist?

    By Blogger Mary, Mary..., at 2/09/2006 12:22 PM  

  • This isn't the first foaming-at-the-mouth rant she's published. She issued a nasty editorial when KnitNet first went to paid subscriptions, calling free patterns substandard - did she mean HER mag's patterns, too? There was such hue(?) and cry that she pulled the post a few days later. I wrote her an email about it, which resulted in a response filled with vituperation and name-calling. Really creepy. She's not getting a nickle of my $$.

    KnittnLissa

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2/09/2006 8:35 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home