So, as much as I dislike H and E, I do have one positive comment I forgot to mention in my complaints of earlier posts. They do something that I have seen on several charts, and so far have not seen on the SQ patterns I have puchased. It's a "next page" recognition feature. Envision a page of your chart and on one side, the one that will match up to the next page, they show the next page's symbols, only those are shaded (kind of have a grayish tone to them). H and E goes with three rows, some others I have worked use anything from one to ten. It's a nice way to know what's coming up, and a good way to check that your pages match. Did my description make sense? And have other stitchers found this to be useful as well?
To be honest, it confuses me Julie. Dutch patterns don't use that method. When I saw it for the first time, it looked quite easy, but I did start to stitch those shaded rows . Counting and recounting. Until I got used to it. So what works for one doesn't always work for the other.
I have used patterns like that before and yes, I find it helpful to be able to match up the pages.
I have some of those patterns I am currently working on but as soon as I am done with them, I am going to devote myself full time to starting and completing my first Scarlet Quince pattern. I purchased the My Sweet Rose by Waterhouse and I am so excited!!!
I've done several patterns with duplicated rows shaded. I've gone back/forth on whether it's really helpful or not since the # of rows shaded varies. I've done some where it's 3-10 and there's no perfect number. Ultimately, you have to turn the page/flip the chart to really see if there's any close stitches. It can pose a problem of recounting the same stitches so you don't stitch the duplicate rows. What I find the most helpful is the booklet layout making it easier to turn the pages instead of fighting a huge chart. Ultimately, I'd have to say I prefer the booklet layout with no shading of duplicate rows...keeping it simple of what you see is what you stitch. I also think having the symbols reflect the color (light symbol = light color, dark symbol = dark color) do more for me keeping my place than duplicate rows ever could. Happy stitching!
I like the greyed lines, myself, though I can do just as well without them. I have a couple of patterns from somewhere where they had duplicate lines, but instead of greying them in, they changed the symbols. As the chart is in a language I don't speak, I had a heck of a time until I figured that out! I figure I'll only make a couple of mistakes stitching that before it is sunk in really good
I tend to agree with Sverzino... but I tend to mark in a few stitches of the next page on the previous page if the color continues, then I make sure to mark them off the next page, if you know what I mean.
quote:Originally posted by sverzino I've done several patterns with duplicated rows shaded. I've gone back/forth on whether it's really helpful or not... I also think having the symbols reflect the color (light symbol = light color, dark symbol = dark color) do more for me keeping my place than duplicate rows ever could.
This is a little off of the topic of this thread, but one (minor) thing I don't like about SQ patterns is that the pages are not layed out in complete blocks of 10. Since I work in blocks of 10, when I come to a block with 7 stitches on one page and 3 on the next, it gets to be awkward.
That being said, I am working on my 3rd SQ pattern and looking ahead to another.
I think all my patterns used 2 lines of overlap shading until I hit SQ, so I just sort of took it for granted. I must admit that I usually just folded those lines over to try and match up directly with the next page, so I was relieved to see that I wouldn't have to do that with SQ.
The situation where I could see overlap being helpful is when you're stitching a large pattern using parking and the overlap is a good 10 lines- this could help avoid the checkerboard look without excessive page turning.
I have been sometimes known to photocopy 2 A4 pages together on an A3 sheet to help with colour continuity- I then just fold in the edges to make an A4 size sheet in the middle with the previously seperated edges together.
The booklet layout certainly helps in this domain (except for joins on the front and back of a single page of course), but I agree that the best thing is chart square coverage matching the darkness of the colour so you can "see" the picture in the pattern. Why don't all patterns do that?
quote:Originally posted by Alanna ... but I agree that the best thing is chart square coverage matching the darkness of the colour so you can "see" the picture in the pattern. Why don't all patterns do that?
That is probably my favorite feature of SQ charts; since I tend to work design elements instead of blocks in a systematical way, if the symbols were the way most people used them, it would just be this never-ending book of symbols - I need my little milestones along the way, and the ability to see and work towards a certain thing (like my emphasis that one week to get that rabbit done on L&U) makes a project of this magnitude much more enjoyable. I guess if you are a more disciplined stitcher, then maybe that's not as important.
I don't know if that's a feature of the particular sw being used, or someone taking the time to assign the values to the symbols, or both. At any rate, it is effort that I very much appreciate! It just goes to show that these SQ charts are a work of art in themselves, because with the sw available today, anybody can convert a picture to a chart; to make it not crude really takes an immense amount of skill and patience, and a fine eye for color. I would also guess that knowing when to stop tweaking is also a necessary skill - that's probably where I would do myself in; just one more tweak - okay, maybe just one more, etc....
Here is another question about other companies:
Why is GK so much more expensive than SQ? These SQ patterns look much nicer cause they come in a nice book format with large type.
Has anybody done both companies that could give a comparison?