Apr 27, 2007

No FOs here!

Well, I like the lace upper back well enough...but not for this particular top. Even though the upper columns of faggoting do line up with the similar columns in the Dayflower Lace pattern, to my eye they appear totally unrelated, and in fact the upper panel achieves a certain dominance--which I had not intended. Maybe I can use that lace panel for something else. I actually don't mind the wavy quality of the accent ridge--or wouldn't mind it, if it continued around the circumference of the garment, but it only waves in the area of the upper lace panel.

As shown in the photo below, I decided to try two different ideas for the upper bodice: on my right, no decreases to compensate for the underbust increases, and plain stockinette except for the faggoting around the neck and armholes. On my left, above the bust decreases and extra decoration. I much prefer the plainer side, although I think it looks a little wide, and might benefit from more decreasing at the armhole edge.

Anything else? Looks a little tent-y, you say? I agree; I think the underbust fit needs to be closer.

And then there is the matter of the faggoted edge treatment I tried: although it looks okay from some angles, I had not anticipated that it would have a larger row gauge than the stockinette fabric, meaning that it flares in a rather unflattering way around the armholes, in particular (with the aid of gravity, the neckline seems to lie flat enough).

Ah, well. Blue ramen noodles, anyone?

(Don't worry, I only frogged back to the lace.)

1 comment:

Julia (MindofWinter) said...

Oh Good! You turned the comments on - I'd been meaning to do that and didn't get to it!

I totally agree with you on the top - it's better when it's plain and should be a teensy bit less wide. I love the dayflower lace, though - gorgeous.

Congrats on getting a pattern into the summer IK - I just know that you're going to be the next big thing in design.

xox, J