I've Finally Learned My Lesson

Since I seem to be incapable of choosing a pattern with no mistakes in it, my mantra has become: "Check for errata!"

Case in point:

See the nifty larger cables? Here's my first attempt:

I thought something was funky, but I didn't snap until several rows had been knit. I ripped out everything, checked the stitch legend for the graph, and fixed the mistake. (One cable cross says to hold in back when it should be held in front.) So I got this:

You'll notice, however, it's still not right. Check out the beginning of the big cables in the Vogue photo.

I did Google & find errata for this pattern. Unfortunately, it doesn't fix where the cable starts - ie. it needs to start crossed, rather than cross after 3 rows. You'd think while they were fixing, they would've fixed that, eh? I mean...it really noticeable. Ahem.

Do I want to rip again? Nope. Do I care about the cable beginning? Probably. Will I rip & fix it. Probably. Later. After I work on a couple of other projects that don't have mistakes.

Those of you who are about to begin, however, might want to take a minute & change the cable instructions so at least someone's sweater turns out like the picture with their first try! (The fix: start on row 3 of the chart, changing the smaller cable crossing to start with row 3 rather than row 1. There, Vogue - see how easy that was???)

Here's a larger pic of what I have so far:

Look quick - it won't be here much longer!

Happy Monday!

Comments

[Larry]

You seem to have some sort of divining rod for finding patterns with errors. I'm sure that's a skill that could be marketed. But the sweater is going to be a knockout, once you get it all corrected.

[Bron]

It's a gift, Larry. There are days I truly feel blessed.

Not many days, mind you, but there are a few.

[Leisel]

I'm so sorry to hear about your frustrations. It seems as if the independant designers (like the gal who designed Rogue and Eris) do a much, much better job of putting out good patterns.

I wonder if it has something to do with the deadlines involved with working with a publisher. Always trying to race the clock, and just barely having time to throw something together, and no time to check it properly.

Still, though, you'd think that the deal about where the cables cross would've been to obvious to miss. It's right at the beginning of the more complex instructions.

[Andrea]

Your small cables seem to twist the opposite way too. Jeez, you do seem to be good at finding the screwy patterns!

[Bron]

Andrea - yep - they do go opposite of the pic. I didn't mention it 'cause..well...I'm sick of bitching about patterns! But trust me - I'm following the pattern correctly. I had the same problem with Tapestry - another Vogue pattern. Cables going in opposite directions from the pic.

Makes me think twice before starting another Vogue pattern!

I hear ya, Leisel - the mistake is just so darn obvious! I'm kicking myself for knitting so long without paying attention to the picture. Grrrrr!

[Cecilia]

but the color is bee-yoo-tiful! (I don't own it . . .yet!) ;-)

[Pam]

Is this pretty common with Vogue patterns, all the errors? Think I'll stay away from them if that's the case. I love the cables, though.

[Bron]

Hehehe...yep, Cec - the color makes up for a lot!

Pam - I've heard that Vogue patterns in general have a lot of errors. I think it's significant that the two I'm making from this magazine both have errors!

[Leisel]

The cables could cross opposite the picture because they reversed the image when they printed it for the magazine. I've seen them (generic knit magazine/pattern source they... I can't remember who it was, so I don't know if it was Vogue or not) do that before.

[Bron]

True, Leisel. I've seen that done before. But in this case the large cables would be reversed also so it's due to the pattern mistake. I changed one crossing, but didn't change the other. Eh - at this point, I'm just doing what I think looks good. ;)