Triumph of Something/Near Fire

Not counting my first Pebbles project, my sixth tied unit weave piece came off the loom last night. (The fifth remains on the sample table loom.) It was a triumph of... something, many things. Recent posts sounding like a litany of loom problems, I was looking forward to a 100% upbeat post, but foolishly declared on FB, "Goddess of Weaving willing, the first piece should come off the loom today. But did I just jinx it? Because this has been a real Murphy's project." Well, yes, indeed, I did.

* * * * *

(Ignore this part; it's for my record. I may have posted this recently, but too lazy to look up.)
To summarise: I made three warps two winters ago; put one on the loom and sampled it once, but the shafts stopped working properly early last winter. After a couple of months of rushing around fixing them, I wanted to make sure the shafts still worked, and one day lifted the shafts on a loom with a big shed without securing every warp end at the front, causing most to come out of the reed, and quite a few, out of the heddles. I was so disgusted with myself I didn't take a pic, but I should have, because it was one glorious bird's nest. I didn't mind because I wasn't crazy about the pattern threading, but I couldn't be bothered rethreading until this winter, and sampling resumed this spring. Considering there was a ten-year gap between sampling and weaving the purple, third piece, this sixth is proceeding at break-neck speed! 

* * * * *

Litany of Issues:

1) Shaft 2 is a jumper/joiner; it likes to lift when it is not required to, but only sporadically. I noticed this when I wanted to weave backwards earlier in the week to fix a weft which had draw in too far. When a shaft lifts when it need not, or more frequently lifts unevenly, (one side much higher than the other,) it usually means cords holding the shafts are tangled, or came off the spool at the top, but I found no such instance. I then created a file lifting just Shafts 1 and 2 and 3 in different order and combination and ran it, and this appeared to have fixed the problem.

It happened again yesterday, when I realized the reason why I couldn't see the weave pattern was not because it was too dark in the room, not because I was using nearly identical dark purples in the tie-down and pattern, but because I was weaving in the wrong order, or using the wrong sizes. When I opened the shed to unpick, even though I had the correct pick, the shed was different from when the weft went in.

Once again I checked the cords and the spools; once again I tried the file. I could not find anything obviously at fault, while Shaft 2 acquired a mind of its own, sticking its tongue at me, lifting as it pleased. While checking the cords, however, I noticed the tension were uneven, so I adjusted them to more or less the same degree of tautness. (Geez, there's got to be a better way to say this?) I noticed cords connected to Shaft 2 were particularly slack, so I tightened them a smidgen more than I needed to. That seemed to have done the trick but I'm not certain if I really fixed the problem.

I unpicked roughly 2.5cm, 48 picks, and found Shaft 2 had lifted three times when not called for. After that, though I didn't check every single pick, I looked up annoyingly often, and Shaft 2 operated as indicated in the files.

This summer I must take out all the shafts, wax the wooden parts so they slide easily against each other, (how long has it been???) and adjust the cords thoroughly. This is good timing as I need to reconsider heddle distribution if I were to weave more of tied unit weaves, so I don't have to move them as I run out while threading. 

2) I am better at placing the shuttles in the correct order when using two pattern wefts. It's with a single pattern weft I'm more casual, weaving with the wrong size; I caught myself twice.

3) The very first pattern pick of the double pattern weft draft I used lifts 1+4. Both times I used this file, something caused unseemly long skips in several places. You might have noticed it in this pic previously, because I debated whether to post it. This is way beyond the Shaft 2 problem, and I have no idea. I didn't even notice until a little too late, and honestly after the first time I thought it was a fluke. I have plenty of other places where I lift only 1+4, this has never occurred elsewhere. And, I mean, you can't miss it. For the next piece, I may lift one more shaft, or not use this file at all.

The first time was worse. It can be seen in the left three quarters of the entire width. 

1+4 lifted.

The top bunch of taupe yarns show the correct distribution. 

4) I have issues with my pattern weft color choices, mostly coming from my penchant for gradation when in doubt. But let me first finish the piece properly, take good pics, and tell you about them, because I realize how it look fresh off the loom different from when it's properly finished. Suffice it to say, the two ends of the piece looking completely different won't be solved in the washing machine.

I started nicely as seen at the top, and managed to keep it going for a while, until I was exhausted, and defaulted to gradation as I often do. Well... gosh, darn.  

* * * * *

Having whined at great length, I definitely have upbeat bits.

Standing and looking down at the cloth as I weave has definitely improved my technique. Selvedges look OK, I felt comfortable with them and didn't have to do any of my tricks, even though the proof is in the wet-finish. 

My body got used to weaving this way markedly after day 3; I wasn't sore or exhausted in the evenings, just tired evenly. The only thing I must remember is to walk the pedal, which was difficult when I was concentrating on other aspects. When I didn't walk, my ankle on which I stood too long hurt the next morning. But if I try to change feet, say, every four or even eight picks, at least both legs got tired to the same degree. Now I'm wondering if raising my footstool by 2 or 3cm would improve the comfort even more.

And here is the best bit. In many ways, it was an exhilarating piece to weave. Which is probably why I could stay calm in spite of mechanical problems. Many things were decided on the spot and I never knew how things would look until I wove. I can't recall a project where I was allowed to indulge in my whim so often, so thoroughly, all the way to the end. So the colors aren't spectacular, but the whole process was strangely so satisfying. 

* * * * *

We had Indian takeaway; I'll finish the piece on the weekend, then get started on the next piece.

* * * * *

I forgot to tell you about the most tragicomic part of the day. With Shaft 2 tamed and 30 or so picks to go, I suddenly smelled something burning. I turned off all conceivable switches, opened the door to the garage, the stairs, and the exterior window, wondering if someone was BBQing outside. Nope. I turned on the bathroom fan, and went upstairs and went outside to checked again, but it was definitely coming from the basement. I turned on the house vent system, and asked Ben, who was working from home, to come have a look. He opened up the computer but found no smoke or heat coming from anywhere. We were completely flummoxed because the smell was as strong as ever.

And then it dawned on me, and I turned around.

We have two of these in the house, and the top is open, with no lids. Occasionally suicidal bugs jump in to self-immolate. This lamp sits in the middle of the room to give the whole room a soft, even light. I tipped it, and sure enough, Ben says, "You have one customer."

I can't remember how long it took to weave the last 30 or so picks. I was exhausted, exasperated, and ex-whatever-ed. What. A. Day.

The End.

Is It Really That Compllicated??

I really wanted to keep weaving with two pattern wefts, but a few days and half a dozen drafts later, nothing flowed from the one I used. I wanted to keep weaving, so I went back to one pattern shaft. Never mind.

It's not as if I don't have interesting drafts; I like the two at far left. The one I wove is center bottom, but just one repeat which ends at the horizontal line. You see my dilemma; that one doesn't look like the others. I might weave it again, although I'm going try making another that has the similar bold look. 

I've been using these four drafts for the single pattern weft part. I had in mind making/weaving many more, but I decided the colors are so different every time it didn't matter if I used just these few. It might even be better for visual cohesion. You can also see why I used the bottom center draft of the double pattern weft draft; it has the same vibe.  (Note: these drafts are only representative since I have no record of how the pattern shafts were threaded.)

I'm still stuck on the idea of reversing these files and weaving backward, again. Shouldn't I be able to insert/delete a few picks and weave, which would be so simple.

Tie-down shaft order is 1-2-3-2-. Structurally, these lines are sandwiched between picks that lift 1+2+3 or 4+5+6+7+8+9. The red weft is the last pick of the original draft, so if I mirror-repeat the order, the treadling looks like above. Also notice lifting 2 (blue wefts) always follows lifting 4+5+6+7+8+9.

If I inserted four picks so the tie down order is restored to 1-2-3-2-, (purple wefts,) I have 4+5+6+7+8+9, followed by 2, and another 4+5+6+7+8+9, followed by 3, even though 3 always follow 1+2+3. Similar things happen when I delete lines.

So, I'm probably wrong; I'm probably not missing anything in this case. But I do wish I were, because it would make life easier.

5000 Days Project

I'm typing this on Saturday evening. I had a kiddie-size roller-coaster of a week, and I want to tell you about it. There is a weaving bit towards the end; scroll down to the pictures. 

* * * * *

Last week I wove on Thursday and Friday, about which I wrote in the previous post. I didn't weave on the weekend as we were busy doing stuff around the house, but I briefly saw Stella. She guessed I had been weaving, from my posture/attitude/what-not, which was nice.

Conversation touched on our aging parents; we've long thought many folks see a marked transformation somewhere around age 80; I had just seen a Morgan Freeman interview in which he said the same. Stella exclaimed she's going to make as much jewelry as she can before that, to which I responded, "I only have 13 and a half years!" (From memory, she's a decade minus four days younger than me.)

The thought stayed with me. From last Saturday to my 80th birthday was, according to a handy Internet date calculator, 4900 days; that seemed so very few, not even 5000. OK, let me extend that to, "sometime in my 80th year." 5265 days until the day before my 81st; slightly better.

At this point, it's not as though I have a concrete plan. It's more like when I aimed to use up all misc yarns before... 60, was it? It's more something to keep in mind whenever I have options. And if weeding/veg garden, doodling, or learning non-weaving stuff try to stand before me, I hope to feel less obliged/guilty and stay focused. (Ahahahaha, that's a tall order!)

* * * * *

Came Monday and it would have been a lovely day to make new rows for dwarf beans before the rain Tuesday, but I went downstairs to weave instead. But what fresh hell?? The computer refused to communicate with the monitor, the monitor complained. I did all kinds of rebooting/unplugging/plugging-in and everything else I could think of, but nothing. I messaged Ben at work but there was no quick answer, so he took a look as soon as he came home. He had a couple of ideas, but they required opening up the machine, and possibly looking for a very old part somewhere in his study cupboard, so I had to wait until the weekend.

Ugh, four or five days out of my precious 5000. You'd think I'd make the best of it by getting back to the beans Wed onward, at the very least draw, but no, I doom-scrolled, made a batch of cookies, and reorganized/tidied/culled from my cookbook bookshelf. (Yes, I have one of those, thought not exclusively for cookbooks.) The irony was not lost that it was four years ago during/after the US election, I resurrected a ten-year-old warp and started my second tied-unit piece.

The mechanism controlling the solenoids which lift the shaft require two old parallel cables, which need direct hardware control via DOS, so we need Microsoft Office 98 or older. This is to say, my loom requires very old hard- and software, and why the only thing we've been able upgrade since I bought the loom in 2002 have been the monitors.

Ben's first thought was the CMOS battery died, which he said happened once some years ago. Revision: when the computer is unplugged, this battery retains the memory. Because I turn everything off at the wall every time, this battery has to work extra hard. (You do realize I'm writing all this because I had to be re/taught this information.) Over the next few days, he also tried to prepare me in case it wasn't the battery, but something more serious, while I tried to counter with... "Can't you maybe rewrite the program?" 

Throughout the week, I thought about how to reconfigure/restructure my weaving life, as it were, to keep going in the coming 5000-ish days. I would weave mainly on the table looms, but I would also learn to combine card weaving on the jack loom à la Inge Dam. Table loom pieces would be narrower and possibly shorter; I'm OK with that, but it's lamentable now that I'm finally back on the big loom, enjoying the bigger scale. I also wondered what to do with the big loom; I couldn't sell a loom without a working treadling mechanism, but at the very least it has 1600 texolv heddles that don't fit in my other looms, so I could sell those. There are some metal parts, but not very much. Perhaps Ben could use the larger/longer pieces of wood? And the rest can keep us warm for a night or two. Oh, dear me.  

Came Friday, we wiped down all the dust, opened up the computer, Ben brushed the inside parts, and I sucked the dust and fluff with the vacuum cleaner. He replaced the battery, (which is a rather ordinary one from the supermarket,) and voila, the computer started talking to the monitor. The memory was lost, so the date defaulted to 1997 or some such, but because the computer is loaded with only the most basic files/applications just to operate the loom, it didn't take long to get it working. The air compressor and the black box were turned on, and we had lift off; the shafts lifted in the correct order. We turned everything off, and Ben closed the cover. And the computer power stayed on.

After finishing housework I was in the middle of, I rushed downstairs and turned everything on again, but... What the heck is that noise??? Ben, Ben, Ben!!!

His first words were, if the noise is coming from power source, we have a real problem. I was already picturing us sticking small pieces of the loom into the fire. It wasn't immediately apparent, but the culprit was a tiny processor fan an adjacent to the power source, the fan being secured too tightly to the base (?) it rubbed against something at the bottom, so the solution was to secure it slightly loosely. Otherwise, the loom was operative, and I marked the wall switch for the computer so I would never turn it off again.

What drama!!

Later in the evening, I might have heard him mumble, "Well, it is just a matter of reprogramming..." but he might deny it if we ask.

* * * * *

Friday evening I finally managed to weave a few centimeters; I went with two pattern wefts. So far I haven't been adventurous in my color choices. Two pattern wefts slow down the appearance of color changes, and it works beautifully with gradation, but good gradation can also be flat, and I plan to pepper it with some excitement, also.

One obstacle now is the transition from one draft file to another. I spend a lot of time looking at the files on screen to see if one design flows on to the next, but I am never sure until I see it on the loom. To make things easier, I decided to make/edit the files longer. In fact, I wanted to weave this afternoon but I didn't have a nice transition between any of the five files I had made, so I tried to write/amend some more. Funny how this is so easy some days, but other days it never happens.

I wouldn't say two pattern wefts weave quickly, but with ample distance between the breast beam and the first shaft, the shuttles line up comfortable and the operation is smooth.

* * * * *

As of Thursday, we've been in New Zealand for 30 years. I wouldn't have become a weaver if we didn't move here, so thank you, Aotearoa. 

About Time, Eh.

Purple cauliflower seedlings that survived my less-than-elegant transplant, from one packet of seeds purchased a few years ago.

Sum total of white cauliflowers from a packet purchased at the same time. :-D

This spring I spent more hours outside than I expected, thanks in part to the cooler temps and periodic rain which kept hay fever down. It's November and this spring I used my meds maybe half a dozen times, which is super extraordinarily amazingly few, in spite of winds upwards of 68km/h in the last week, making 40kms "normal" these days. We also had the fire going three nights in the last ten days, and maybe again this weekend with expected lows of 5C, although forecast is as reliable as astrology this spring; we will run out of firewood at this pace. (November is usually when conscientious shoppers start buying the following winter's firewood.) I'm determined to put in all the seeds I collected/bought in the last few years in the ground, even while accumulating a few more packets of dwarf beans and a couple of zucchinis. And first time ever, peas! If I have to stick stuff in between flowers, so be it!  

Then there is my avoidance of work, in this case overthinking about drafts, because I am so aware I haven't grasped all the information I need about this project. I was coaxed to get back on the loom, however, by a long-time weaver friend, and Ben, and on Thursday, with the wind up again, I went downstairs and started weaving my first proper piece. This worked great because I got some clarity on what I want to do re. drafts/patterns. And though the loom mechanism is still not at its best, (the foot pedal doesn't leak air any more, but sometimes I must press with my heal to drop the shafts, making "walking" awkward,) the weaving feels faster. Or, because I'm not sampling but weaving, I am concentrating on different aspects, and that somehow translates to... the perception of speed.

Colors look glittery, but this is the last part of Thursday's work. I want to use mainly the blue half of the color wheel in the pattern wefts, but other than purple, I have so many more of the yellow half.

Friday's top half; here I was trying to capture how different angles show off different parts of the pattern or color combos clearly. You may think, "Duh, of course," but it's more marked in real life, particularly in what you don't see. In the top photo, for e.g. the you can see more pattern in the yellow weft area than in real life. 

Things I learned:

* Selecting weft colors "on the spot" works. Although I aimed for something of a gradation for the pattern wefts so far, anything has gone on in the tie down. They're lovely to see as I weave, and though they may disappear after the 20/2s bloom, I know they're there, and maybe one day the wearer will, too. 

* Standing up and weaving, I thought of weaving a slightly wider warp. I'd love go bigger if I can. I also toy around with the idea of 20/2 warps with 60/2 wefts; I've woven in this way once or twice, and not only it takes eternity, 60/2s don't full nicely. Still, if I can find a way, and beat loosely, maybe?????

* There was something else seemingly important but not technical I wanted to tell you, but now I can't remember because the technical stuff is easier to put into words, while aesthetic/feeling stuff, not as much. I hope it comes back in the next "sitting".

* This is really turning into "the weaver does what she wants" style. The color/number changes are abrupt; the pattern threading changes are abrupt, and in the past, even the lifting changed abruptly. I'm not sure if this is conducive to crating attractive (flowing, i.e. styles I tend to prefer,) pieces to sell. I realize like realism vs post-Impressionist/abstract, it's a matter of taste. But the pieces coming off this warp will retain this fragmented look. 

* Having said that, for discipline/learning as well as for a kind of visual cohesion, I'm trying to make/weave drafts with some continuity. For e.g. if a draft's last pattern shed has 4 and 5 up, I'll choose as the next draft something starting with 4 and/or 5, or 3 or 3+4, or 5 or 5+6 up. I haven't fully understood how to do this with ease yet, but on screen, drafts must look OK lined up in succession. 

* I have at least two other warps to be woven in tied unit. I may consider a more flowing pattern shaft threading next. But, if the threading and lifting flow, will the color/number changes in the thread look more disjointed?

Conundrum: (Read this only if you are as interested in tied unit weaves as I am; otherwise, skip to the last paragraph, or better yet, go do something that engages your mind!)

In my current project, this is the minimum unit of required lifting, ("repeat" in weaving lingo), which makes the cloth's weave structure "tied unit weave". (I think "three-tie unit weave" to be precise, because I'm using three shafts, 1, 2 and 3, to tie down.) In a real draft, I have multiples of these repeats all the way, and all my drafts end with a pattern lift with 2 up so I can move on to the next draft. 

In the two above examples, I'm lifting no pattern shafts. This can be woven as is, and it makes a cloth mostly warp-colored on one side, weft-colored on the other, can highlight the tie-down pattern, something else I'm interested in, but we'll ignore this today.

Usually I include pattern shafts to lift, which are for appearance/patterns you see right away rather than the structure which, well, keeps all the threads together in the cloth. Here I lifted Shaft 6 twice, and 7 and 8 twice after that. I had imagined, because tie-down shafts were lifted 1-2-3-2, I could weave forwards or backwards using the same draft files as long as I remembered to insert a pattern shed lifting Shaft 1. So:

The purple picks show the last repeat of the draft without the pattern picks. Next I reversed the order in green. Then I inserted the pattern shed lifting 1 in red, which must be sandwiched between tie down sheds, in orange, which are either 1+2+3 or 4+5+6+7+8+9, alternately. And therein lies the problem: I can't just flip the drafts and weave; I must alternate the tie down shafts. And it's much easier on the eyes to make up a new draft. It took me a few days, even with the weaving software screen staring at me, to see exactly how this (didn't) work!

The truth is, if I wove either of the tie down sheds twice in a row, they may not show up glaringly in the finished cloth, but I'd know, and now you would, too.

* * * * *

I'm riding this momentum in the coming weeks; eight sitting should complete one scarf. Stella could tell I have been weaving from my posture. (She adopted some of my violet cauliflowers.) It's nice to recall weaving helps the thinking as much as the other way around.

On the other hand, the season is changing, and I love when my mind obsesses with finding/trying new recipes, making the most of the latest produce to return to supermarket shelves. And that propels me outside, when the weather is cooperative.

"Random", What a Strange Concept - The Tied Unit Weave Warp Samples Part II

I'm glad I did more sampling, ostensibly to test different washing cycles, but in trying out different styles of lift plans, too. In the course, I made a big discovery, or should I say, had a monumental "Doh!" moment: whatever anomalies I include, I am weaving a tied unit weave, yielding its characteristic A- vs B-side "opposite" looks.

I apologize the colors in these photos aren't accurate, (and rather dull,) as they were taken over multiple days in different lights. But I did pull out my trusted camera so at least the focus is better. I've always woven 20/2 cotton, regardless of the structure, at 42EPI; the tension and beat at or near highest possible, though they differ depending on the loom. I use a 6-dent reed.

First, the wash cycle:
* Sometimes reed marks remain in the cloth post wet-finish, but after a while they disappear while handling. They really do!
* I put all samples in laundry net/bags.
* As regards wrinkles, these cloth tend to straighten themselves out in due course, even without steam press. 
* Re. 60/2s, when I say visible, you can see them if you know they exist; I'm not sure if the wearer will even notice during regular use.

Quick Cycle/cold water: 20/2 doesn't seem to full as much as other cycles; retains reed marks; not a lot of wrinkles, and what is there comes out in dry pressing. 60/2 is equally visible on A- and B-sides, particularly where the hue contrasts that of the pattern weft, but not enough to influence the overall appearance of the cloth; they are more like dots in between fat threads.

Quick Cycle/warm wash: 20/2 fulls well; reed marks are gone; very little wrinkles, which comes out in dry pressing. I may be imagining but the dye may wash off slightly more than cold washes. 60/2 is equally visible on A- and B-sides, particularly where the hue contrasts that of the pattern weft, but not enough to make a difference to the "colors".

Regular Cotton Cycle/cold water: 20/2 fulls well; reed marks are gone; finished cloth is very wrinkly and does not straighten out in dry pressing. 60/2 is more visible on the B-side, but still hard to see. (In contrast to the other two, I stuck this in with my regular laundry.)

* * * * *

Now the tied unit weave part:
Now that I realize it's just a tied unit weave, I see its characteristics all over, the previous smaller pieces included. The difference is what I called "design cells" sometimes being smaller. (You've probably been shouting this since 2020, even 2010.)

This time around I prefer bolder designs.

A-side.

B-side of the approximately same section. I also decided I'm not a big fan where the same warp is lifted too many picks in a row. Also, lifting in fussy ways I used to, for e.g. 1&2&5&7 may not make attractive shapes/lines I want in this project. (I tried it somewhere in these samples, but I can't even tell where, which tells me something.) 

I also liked sections where I used two pattern wefts after one tie-down.

A-side.

Bottom combination is similar yellow and yellow-green pattern with light teal tie-down.

Sorry about the tragic photo. Top combinations, I first used the Christmas red and green in the pattern, purple for the tie-down; later I switched to a saturated, (doesn't look it here but trust me,) teal and red in pattern. The top section with teal looked absolutely dull/dead while weaving , I had to see if it looked as bad without the red, and it didn't.

B-side; the colors are pretty accurate. The first section with similar colors looks "delicately striking" in certain lights, but I couldn't capture it in a photo.

* * * * *

I've been thinking about randomness in weaving. Nearly 20 years ago I did a swap with a local bone and stone carver and he wanted me to weave something "random". I thought about it for a long time, could not think of one element of randomness in the way I wove then, and ended up weaving something quite un-random looking.

Likewise, I say I thread thread the pattern shafts randomly in these projects; I say I choose colors quite randomly. But this is not true; I don't have concrete plans, and "play by ear," but I don't close my eyes and use whatever I pick up first, which is how I define random. The more I get used to weaving this style on the big loom, the less I worry about weft colors, or the tie down and shaft combo, but it's still hardly random. Because this question arose early in my weaving life, I'll probably think about this forever, every so often. But it's a nice question, don't you think?  

* * * * *

I'll go back to making more lift plan drafts, in bolder rather than delicate designs. It's supposed to rain often this week, so I hope to get started on a scarf proper. 

Where Shall I Begin? - The Tied Unit Weave Warp Sample Part I

Wednesday last week, I got a big sample off the big loom. There are numerous factors/issues/points of interest in this piece I don't know where to focus, but I should start somewhere. Some contents in this post also repeat what I wrote here, but I'd like to include all pertinent information here. This is going to be a haphazard post, because I haven't finished observing, but bear with me.

* After the trouble and repairs of a year ago, the loom works, but shaft lifting feels slower, dropping even more so and erratic. I press the foot pedal to lift the shafts, and take my foot off it for the pedal to return to normal position and the shafts to drop, but sometimes the latter doesn't happen, so I must press the pedal with my heel, forcing it back into position. It's annoying, but I can tolerate because this is a two-shuttle weave, and my mind is on colors. I would be silly-crazy to attempt a one-shuttle weave until this is fixed, though.

* About halfway into this sample, I got accustomed to my new foot stool and anti-fatigue standing mat; and perhaps because the shaft movement is slow, I can walk comfortably. I weave looking down on the web from a higher position than weaving seated, and can reach the selvedges comfortably. This is 53.5cm on the loom.  

* The warp end colors/numbers and pattern shaft threading are as "random" as they can be, i.e. I had no plans and selected/assigned them on the spot. 

* I used Shafts 1-3 for diamond-shaped tie down; Shafts 4-9 for pattern; that's six shafts for pattern, the same as on my sample table loom on which I've woven my previous "random" tied unit weave. If/when I thread another tied unit piece, I would leave an empty shaft between tie-down and pattern sets. While threading, I sit between the shafts and the back beam, i.e. I am threading from the back of the shafts with Shaft 16 nearest me, I might use the highest numbered shafts for tie-down and lower numbered shafts for pattern. This loom has a big shed, so this is feasible. 

Colors

* There are two rules/guidelines regarding colors in weaving I never bought into. One is, when in doubt, use black weft. I don't; black kills the warp, except in limited context. I use charcoal gray, navy, or dark purples, if I must, but prefer to find colors that make the most of warp colors. The other is, red and green make mud. I've found this to be untrue; the right value/hue/saturation combo or proportion make them sing in harmony. For some reason, my two dissents rang louder and clearer while I wove this particular sample. 

* In spite of my dissents, I still find these warp colors and numbers/placement/distribution difficult, (unattractive?) and wonder if I should try harmony, (yellows? oranges?) or control/suppression, (saturated green, teal, hot pink.) I feel ambivalent about purples. While sampling, I was partial to controlling and looked for strong, saturated pattern wefts, but looking at it now, I should also try another piece with more harmonious pattern wefts on the yellow half of the color wheel.

* This next point relates to texture, below; as I wove I was amazed how much the 60/2 tie down wefts contributed to the overall color, how much I could see them, so much so I tried three contrasting tie down wefts against some pattern wefts, but after wet finishing, they disappeared from the A-side, (the side I see as I weave,) while they show up aggressively in some parts of B-.

* There are still many aspects puzzling me regarding colors, but I think I'll make selections more or less spontaneously as in the past. 

These are 60/2 for tie down. I don't have a lot of saturated colors, and no blues, so I wound everything from purple to yellow, and selected pale greens of various descriptions. I have many more of these "raincoat" colors, and a couple of greys, black and white, which don't interest me in this project.

Many/most of my 20/2 are saturated, and I wound every color I have.

Wet Finishing

* My observations become ambiguous, but bear with me. From left to right: 5-point diamond before rethreading this warp from last year; 4-point diamond from a sample woven on Klik in 2015-ish; and the latest. I can't see the three-point diamond in the latest sample. As well, I beat as hard as I can when weaving cotton, but now I'm uncertain if the beat is gentler when I weave standing up on the big loom vs. seated when I'm pulling the beater towards me, or on the table loom.  

* Above the fold is B-side; below, A-side. The pattern weft expands so much in wet finishing, the tie down wefts become invisible in most places, the exception being the skinny stripes at the top, where it's too visible. These are not wrong wefts in wrong sheds, and occurs only on B-side; corresponding A-side looks normal. Having figure that out, I wonder if this is caused by the beat, wet-finishing, or different characteristics of the looms and how I weave on them. But then it could simply the number of pattern shafts lifted at once. [Insert crazy-face emoji.]  

On the left is a section of Sunflower I; the right, the purple piece I once gave a spiffy name to but now can't remember, both woven on the sample table loom. Tie-down wefts, in comparison, is visible IRL but not excessively so.

* My cotton pieces are wet-finished inside/out of laundry bags, in hot/warm/cold water, in regular/quick cycle in the washing machine. Sometimes it's steam pressed right away; sometimes line dried, then pressed; sometimes not pressed. Writing this, I realize how inconsistent I've been, so I'll stick to the same options from now on, once I figure out which are the best. Wet finishing and the beat influence the appearance, in particular of the pattern wefts, but I haven't noticed any difference in the texture/hand of the cloth; all the samples and two finished pieces feel more or less the same.

Scale/Proportion

* This is a simple idea I'm having difficulty putting into words. In wider pieces as in the current warp or the abandoned 2019 piece, I prefer to make the smallest design cell/unit larger, while narrower pieces can stand smaller design cell/unit. What I mean is, on wider pieces, the cloth/scarf as a whole looks more attractive when we can see the design from some distance. In the same abandoned piece, the design cells are enormous. They don't have to be as big in this warp, but have a look.

The white pattern weft area, from the bottom, (but ignore the very bottom 2cm,) lifting three pattern shafts for three pattern repeats; two for two, and one for one. And this is only half the width of the current warp. Because of the white weft, the one pattern shaft for one repeat is visible, but depending on the weft color, not so much. I'm not saying I won't do small, but the bigger cells' visibility make the cloth more immediately attractive, even. (or especially,) with, weft colors closer to the warp. 

I am not rethreading this warp again, so what this means is, as a general rule, the design in this project may be more effective if 2, 3, or 4 pattern shafts are lifted at a time, rather than 1 or 5. And the pattern lift should be more than four times "consecutively"; e.g. in a repeat of:

1+2+3, 1+P, 4+5+6+7+8+9, 2+P, 1+2+3, 3+P, 4+5+6+7+8+9, 2+P

P should be, say, 4+6+7 for all four pattern lifts, or more. This is great because I have fewer "good" options to consider, and making of lift plan files simpler.

Having written this far, I'm not convinced I really believe what I said. The wearer can still enjoy cell-level design up close, e.g. one pattern shaft being lifted for just once.

This is a big design on a Sunflower warp sample. It's not unattractive, and I'm not against it. Here I tried two/three? pattern lifting/colors for every tie-down lifting, so I needed it to be bolder so I can see.

On the same warp, I tried smaller cells/units. Sometimes, depending on the context, changing pattern shafts too quickly look like a lifting mistake. 

Even the abandoned project with enormous design cells had some interest close up, but it's not enough!! Now I'm wondering why I didn't stay with this because I can see merits. It took forever to rethread and make Hellebores, which was wonderful, but just saying...  

EDIT, Oct 6: In terms of scale, I'm also re/considering how few picks of a different/contrasting color I can include and make it effective. I'm currently weaving a few samples to try out wet finish options, so I'll try that out in different contexts.   

* * * * *

So far, this is what I learned from this sample, but I'm sure there's more to it, while a lot depends on my preference. My mind is still muddy because factors are so interrelated. Worse, I have a lot of tied unit samples and I can't say anything is definitive/consistent, except I beat hard on the sample table loom. (I hope I didn't jinx myself and start to go soft there.)  

What next? Making lift plan files. I'm trying to retain the randomness/spontaneity of the table loom, making shorter files to mix and match. I may also weave a couple of samples to experiment with the different wet-finishing options.

I'm So Not the Pretty Sketchbooks Type

Gov Walz's face reminded me I was thinking about pretty notebooks/sketchbook/visual diaries in July, and weather to start a new project as means to make such a book. It went nowhere as I was outside weeding as much as possible back then.

* * * * *

Often I wish I were a type of maker who kept pretty sketchbook and visual-diaries. I'm not. I write on backs of receipts and envelopes, and occasionally scribble in notebooks, while saving a bunch of nicer ones for "later". My books are usually filled with words, rough sketches, thumbnails of different sizes and complexities, chronologies, and lists, lists, lists.

Then again I'm not a looking-into-the-past person. I have little useful information in my records, and prefer to reinvent the wheel every time, so even if I managed "pretty" books, chances are I won't revisit them often. (It's the same with seldom revisiting past blog posts; reading past posts is like listening to my own voice on tape.) Occasionally I cull sheets of paper and ceremoniously burn then in the wood burner in winter.

The only real record of my weaving past are my samples; you know those three-drawer wire shelves for vegetables? I have two full of samples.

A tapestry weaver posted a link to this article in FB. These makers are dedicated sketchbook folks, and I was interested in what they had to say, and found them... a little tiresome. I'm never short of ideas and the good ones tend to stay with me without my committing them on paper. Developing ideas; that's where paper comes in handy, but I just jot or scribble in a rush.

If I were to start a pretty book, I could print out drafts and paste them alongside threads and sample swatches, but this sounds like a lot of work for info I'll unlikely revisit. For me it's record-keeping for the sake of the record-keeping. Oh, I am being so negative!

Past records starting 2002, some hard-cull survivors, and doodles, mixed media, and other non-weaving stuff.

* * * * *

I finished the dreaded 2023 Matisse not-project in last week, dreaded because it was left untouched for half a year. I don't know why I lost enthusiasm, particular the Green Stripe Mme. Matisse. Compared to the earlier Lydias, Mme. Matisse was not a happy face, and it was as if I was channeling M. M's feeling towards Mme. I liked this Lydia disguised as Mme.

If pretty sketchbooks/notebooks are the desired outcome, I could work though a "How to" books and improve/enhance my design skills, perhaps. I brought some out, relishing how I enthusiastically started working on many, not finishing most, and why I didn't like certain books. Many made me feel they may be useful to tapestry weavers and "fiber artists" but not to cloth weavers. That doesn't bother me as much these days; I'll take what I can get out.

Alternatively, I could draw more faces, and since it's July already, I need to stick with it for less than six months if the project doesn't excite. To that end, I printed out Marlow and my favorite Vincent portraits. But nothing jumps out.

Still Meandering a Similar Path

I have been sitting on a few drafts this winter. This one originally came about a couple of months after the previous post.

* * * * *

Folks and teams I support usually don't come out on top in reality TV shows, sports championships, and the like. I didn't hold too much hopes for my fav US VP candidate, the current Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, so I was doubly thrilled when he was chosen. And even though he looks and sounds to be a thoroughly normal, nice guy, he is a seasoned politician, bound to disappoint purists like me at some point. Still, I'm still a fan of sorts, and I started doodling his face mid-August.

I find images on paper easier to draw from, so I printed out a dozen. I imagined his face wouldn't be too difficult until I tried a few blind contours. No, I have to learn it. The learning is still ongoing, and I've started including semi-blind-mixed-with-gesture style, and the more I got used to him, the more I prefer images with a bit of character.

Another thing I learned was drawing from photos are harder compared to drawing from paintings, e.g. the bard, because "it's all there". The styles of paintings I use as models have already been through abstraction by the artists, so I don't have to edit much. While selecting and printing the Gov's photos, thoughts about how I design/play resurfaced. You already heard some of it the last post, but I feel compelled to record from a different angle, not solely focused on weaving but more the way I "think", I think.

* * * * *

In the early days, I worked either recipe-based or vision-based. Recipe-based meant I found an attractive weaving project in a book or online, adapted it to suit me, and wove. This approach was fairly successful, but unsatisfying. Vision-based approach, (it sounds so grand, doesn't it?) was when I saw a mind-picture of an attractive cloth, (which used to happen rather often,) I worked backwards to built a manageable project. How close the finished cloth was to the original mind-picture varied, but I found this approach more satisfying.

In the days, (brace yourself!) when I was single-handedly trying to elevate handweaving to a Fine Art in New Zealand, (or, questioned why Art exhibitions refused nicely-woven cloths, but accepted tapestries or weird "textile art" with loose ends hanging down,) I spoke to a lot of art teachers from the polytechnic where I worked, many involved in the once famous-in-NZ Nelson Weaving School. One thing they agreed on was "Art" included "intention". I suspected they pictured local potters making 100 of the same mug from how they described a craftsperson's work, (Nelson is/was famous for pottery in NZ,) but I never learned what they meant by "intention". I knew neither of my two approaches included it. 

So I "did" design courses mentioned in the previous post, but also on my own using ideas found in books and the Internet. These were, however, methodical/procedural instructions, and I found no room for "intentions". The only thing I learned was though I didn't find collage useful in designs, "particularly in textile art" as it was repeated to me, I enjoyed it and still occasionally indulge in it.

Believing at the root of my problem was my inability/hesitance to draw, I signed up for figure drawing soon after my 50th birthday. The first six months was filled with self-doubt, self-loathing, and questioning if I'll ever "be good at it." Then suddenly, I was enjoying the act of drawing, results be damned. I always used the largest A1 paper, and drew big. I became used to not looking at the paper, (standing next to a tall easel made it easy,) or using my non-dominant, left hand, because neither allowed me control. In the absence of responsibility, drawing became akin to having my right hemisphere massaged. I was not good at likeness, and Ronette the teacher tried to fix it, erasing my lines or drawing over, but she was full a foot taller, and what she saw was completely different from my own low altitude, so the drawings ended up with cubism-esque weirdness.

Meanwhile, I became more interested in the geometric/graphic possibilities on the loom and forgot about Art vs. Craft.
 

I also become infatuated with mixed media works I found online, and an Aussie friend Carol told me Seth Apter was having workshops in Australia in 2014, so off I went. His workshops were exciting; being with a bunch of Aussie ladies was fun; I met former weaver Hope after communicating with her for eight years. But the most impactful meeting was with Jade, who became an art therapist soon afterwards, and then started the Letter Journal exchange. I attended her two online art therapy sessions, first because I wanted to support her new venture, but later because I became interested in how art therapy worked.

She held two courses, each being four or five sessions. I can't remember what the instructions were, but I remember discovering time and time again the dichotomy within my personality. This might have also been during the year and a half when I suddenly ceased weaving. I didn't have a specific problem I wanted to solve via the therapy, (notice I didn't see not-weaving as a problem,) so I just enjoyed the ride.

We used art supplies to express whatever we wanted to express/represent, so the finished "artwork" was both a means and an end, but its value was what we put in while making the stuff; this was as close to "intention" as I thought I would get. I found these therapy fun, freeing, and rewarding. You've seen some pictures here, here and here. I wished I saved them - I only have the big tree and the pink doll now.

In a way Letter Journal was an extension of this process: I was free to use whatever and do whatever to make a spread anyway I liked without a plan, not knowing where I would end up. On the other hand, it was collaborative, and had weight limits because they needed to be posted, so each spread presented unique problems, and you know I enjoy solving those. LJs were all play, play, play in retrospect.

I must also mention in the early '90s when I took floral arrangement classes, the teacher Mrs Ikeda said it's OK taking pictures of the arrangement, (inexpensive digital cameras were just coming to the market,) but stressed the importance of sketching the finished arrangement. I found it easier than I expected to get in the habit; my sketches weren't accurate, but I learned the characteristics of some of the plants/flowers/stems/leaves, especially the angles in which different parts of the plants connected. She also made us walk away from the arrangement to see it from the distance we might see the arrangements at home. That's when I started doing weird things like getting up on the chair to look at it from above, (I put the tall vases on the floor in our apartment,) or crouch and look from below, (we had a 120cm-tall shelving unit where all flat containers were placed.)

The kind of tricks I get up to when I want to play, have a project, or design these days include:
* Turning things sideways or upside down for closer scruitney;
* Walking away and looking from a distance, or from different angles;
* Thumbnails, rough drawings - I find abstraction difficult but thumbnails allow me to learn which part I'm interested in, or must include;
* Drawing with my left hand;
* Making scale paper models;
* Physical cut/paste, collage, mixed media;
* Abstract/purposeless paint work, often using hands/fingers, kitchen tools, textured things around the house;

* Image manipulation on the computer.

One thing I don't use is a viewfinder. I have a tendency to look close naturally, to focus on details, so it has helped me more to look from a distance and try to see the bigger picture. 

 

The end. 

Weaving Books and Learning and Designing

Weavers in Facebook weaving groups insisting this or that being the latest "must have" book led me to these meandering thoughts.

I've woven one piece where I followed a recipe. It was a commission in 2008 and the client was notified I would weave it within a year, but she got impatient after a month or two. Instead of reminding her what I promised, I used Strickler #301 I always wanted to weave. 100% cashmere in two grays, she looked better than I imagined, I was actually taken aback, she being one of those women who always dressed nicely but not over-the-top-ly, with a beautiful head of shoulder-length snowy gray hair perpetually cut just so.  

In the early days I read a few books, studied a few structures, but always made my own plans, in part because I have never been a recipe follower; in part because I have a hard time understanding weaving unless they are accompanied by plentiful illustrations/photos/vids, but mostly because I had few equipment/material at the start, and no immediate access to more , so I needed to improvise. One memorable project, my very first on a four-shaft loom, required two sizes of the same yarn for a texture-striped shawl. I wanted to make a set of cottolin serviettes based on the look, so I crammed/spaced the same sized yarn, and as long as I was modifying, I varied the width of the stripes.

I preferred to learn structures, from Strickler in the first instance, but as mentioned because I don't understand weaving in words only, once I got the gist, I made drafts to see if I understood the definition of that structure. On the other hand, I wove plain weave for seven years, then almost exclusively twill ever since; I sit with a given structure for a long time trying to exhaust possibilities, and have rarely needed new structures. (I learned Rep and corkscrew for a sample exchange scheme but never wove either again; double weave because I had commissions for baby blankets which I wove double-width; and finally tied unit weaves on weaving teacher Ali's recommendation to weave a specific look. Lucky this one stuck. It's the same for me with yarns; when I find a good one, I stick with it and collect different colors.)

I took the NZ Guild's design course twice in the 2000s; once by correspondence and once in person, because both the teacher Alison and I were unsatisfied with what I (didn't) learn in the first round; we were both happier the second time around, seen here and here. It helped that I knew the subject well: depression. (My classmates' reactions were interesting, one admonishing, two encouraging/empathetic.) For teaching purposes, Alison used a set process she learned from studying design herself. I can't remember all the details, but the following made long-lasting impressions:

* Research - collecting words/images and learning about the subject, which was easy, until I got into abstract subject, and then the words/images got weirder and more interesting;
* Drawings, starting with thumbnail sketches; also drawing with different material to draw the same thing, e.g. pencil, finger, Q-tip, stick and much more; also collages. Thumbnail sketches removed the need to draw accurately, allowing experimentation worry-free and one after another. Same to some degree with collage with torn pieces of paper. The different material/lines was the best trick, and though I don't use it in weaving design, I still enjoy it in my mixed media;
* Selecting material after we have an idea of what we want to make, which was obvious to me but many weavers already with big stashes, a surprise. These days, though, with a big stash myself, I choose from my stash the most suitable, (so, samey??) rather than searching afresh;
* Deciding on values before hues; a shocking idea, this hasn't entered my MO, but I sometimes remember this. I don't even look at others' artwork in this way, though.

Once or twice immediately after the in-person workshop, I followed her process fairly closely, (except the value part,) but over the years my MO has morphed into something more organic, depending on what the project is, how much time I have, how involved I want to be, etc. I have a few techniques I return to, and mix/match as suitable, and use whichever methods come up naturally rather than plan. I still think I have something of an image of the finished product, and work towards realizing it, rather than starting from a blank slate and building up a project.

I have noticed, particularly in listening to Stella the jewelry maker, is as I gain more experience weaving, I rush through the earlier "vague" thinking stages, if I spend time here at all, and start thinking about texture, structure, and a specific look/hand early. OR, my thinking has become two-pronged, and I try to marry/justify the combination of vague thinking with the specifics of weaving almost from the start. It may not be a bad idea to have a checklist of methods I have learned/collected, and see if I can use ones I'm not inclined to think of, for a more unexpected outcome.

This fast track to technique/method comes from my insistence on making my stuff on the loom, of making cloth rather than "fibre art", with all its own set of restrictions we are familiar with. But I would like a little more involvement in my making, more time in the vague stages of, (I know, I know, it's a cliche now, so I'll paraphrase,) thinking outside of my old dog crate.   

I didn't read many of my books, (and I have oh-so-many,) but gazed at the all pictures, and some I read cover to cover. I believed one day when I'm more advanced, I would need these books. Until I realized I didn't. And stopped buying. In fact for a time I found news of the latest must-haves distracting, but now I don't even hear them. Phew! I'm not a well-rounded weaver who weaves many structures or end products, and I'm happy with a handful of rabbit holes. Plus, some of my older books have now-non-standard notations about the threading/tie-up/treadling, which I find confounding. I can figure some out, but others, I can't be bothered.

If you ask me what is the one must-have weaving book, however, it's Strickler, no contest.