Need some help with own pattern and chart

[kmare91]

Hi all, I'm trying to come up with a pattern and this is only my second or third time so forgive the chart if it's hard to read. Essentially what I'm trying to do is create a triangle shawl that consists of columns of v stitches and columns of big fans that are always increasing and on either side of each other. One of the pics is my chart showing what I'm wanting, the second is a diagram with symbols that may help you see the layout more and the third is a swatch I have worked, that needs a little improvement. 

 

So as you see, the Main issue is in the swatch, one row is higher than the other because how I have created new stitches is just by adding chains on either side which seems like the only way otherwise it's going to majorly buckle. 

 

Does anyone have a solution or tips for me if you can see what I'm trying to do? It's so much appreciated. Thanks so much!! 

[Granny Square]

This is a pretty stitch pattern. I've taken your photo and drawn lines at the bottom of rows (starting with row 2, not the pinpoint which is the start of row 1).  You've gone wrong at row 4, the bottom of row 4 is missing on the left side where the red line is going over black, and the left side of the stitches that belong on row 4 are on row 5.

When you want to increase just a couple of stitches on each side, you can just put 1 or 2 extra stitches into the first and last stitch, but you are going to have to add foundation chains + turning chain to the end of a row before a big increase, then turn, work across the chain, then across the fabric, and then make foundation stitches at the end of the row.  But, depending on where you pattern 'goes', and I think your pattern may 'go' there, foundation stitches may not work (they only work, or work best, when the foundation stitches are solid stitches of the same sort, unless you get really creative).

The other way would require you to break the yarn in the row before the long row, so break the yarn after row 2.  From the point of view of the photo, assuming that row 3 will be made right side facing us (right to left), and row 3 is the top red line that extends way beyond the stitches on each end.  So as you'd crochet that red line, you'd need enough chains to support the right side (photo point of view, which will be the END of row 4) that extends beyond row 3, then stitch across row 2 to make  row 3, then enough chains to support the other end of row 4 that extends beyond row 3, plus turning chains.

There's a reason there are so many straight sided triangle shawls, they are much easier to increase a little on each side!

I hope this all makes sense (and that I wrote it down right), it is a little mind bending.  In a nutshell, for a big jog of an increase, is that you have to plan ahead with the base chains in front and behind of the previous row.

You might consider working this long end down, would be much easier tho the shells would be facing the other way.  You could do the shaping by 'scooting over' with slip stitches across the beginning end, and stopping short at the other end.

 

[kmare91]

 

 

31 minutes ago, Granny Square said:

This is a pretty stitch pattern. I've taken your photo and drawn lines at the bottom of rows (starting with row 2, not the pinpoint which is the start of row 1).  You've gone wrong at row 4, the bottom of row 4 is missing on the left side where the red line is going over black, and the left side of the stitches that belong on row 4 are on row 5.

When you want to increase just a couple of stitches on each side, you can just put 1 or 2 extra stitches into the first and last stitch, but you are going to have to add foundation chains + turning chain to the end of a row before a big increase, then turn, work across the chain, then across the fabric, and then make foundation stitches at the end of the row.  But, depending on where you pattern 'goes', and I think your pattern may 'go' there, foundation stitches may not work (they only work, or work best, when the foundation stitches are solid stitches of the same sort, unless you get really creative).

The other way would require you to break the yarn in the row before the long row, so break the yarn after row 2.  From the point of view of the photo, assuming that row 3 will be made right side facing us (right to left), and row 3 is the top red line that extends way beyond the stitches on each end.  So as you'd crochet that red line, you'd need enough chains to support the right side (photo point of view, which will be the END of row 4) that extends beyond row 3, then stitch across row 2 to make  row 3, then enough chains to support the other end of row 4 that extends beyond row 3, plus turning chains.

There's a reason there are so many straight sided triangle shawls, they are much easier to increase a little on each side!

I hope this all makes sense (and that I wrote it down right), it is a little mind bending.  In a nutshell, for a big jog of an increase, is that you have to plan ahead with the base chains in front and behind of the previous row.

You might consider working this long end down, would be much easier tho the shells would be facing the other way.  You could do the shaping by 'scooting over' with slip stitches across the beginning end, and stopping short at the other end.

 

Wow, thank you so much for the wealth of information, but I have to admit I'm pretty confused. So you're saying while foundation stitches have worked fairly well to this point minus the uneven rows, you're thinking that there will be a point where the foundation stitches won't work? 

 

Can you clarify a little further what you mean by just adding one or two extra stitches to the first and last stitch?, I sometimes have a hard time visualizing things. And you're so right about the reasons there are so many triangle shawls with pattern going horizontally and always the same edge! that's why I had to make what I wanted because I searched high and low. 

 

If I broke the yarn, you're just saying that would help me even it up? How would I attach it again for row 3 so I could still get the needed number of chains on either side of the row? Thank you so so much 

 

[kmare91]

I've experimented every which way tonight for hours, and I thought I had a good way by making closed chain loops on either side and backwards sc'ing to make the big fans, and this worked for me until it was time for another fan row, and then it needed me to make a v stitch AND and chain 2 space ( for the next rows fan to be put in) all in that one fan, so I was trying to just shove it all in using a series of chaining and backwards sc'ing to do that, until it really just became too much and now I can't keep up. Before I wasn't understanding what you mean by where my pattern is "going" heh, it definitely continued to get more and more complicated with the new additions needed. I think I had to just work further to actually see what you meant. 

 

I saw a pattern very similar to this YEARS ago and all I had were pictures, except there were clovers in the columns and it was a bit different of course, but I've always thought it would look so nice, and I've been charting it out for a while and managed to make a rectangular version ( or started it) but I wanted it so badly to be a triangle shawl because I've never seen that anywhere... aaaaaand now I know why

 

Thank you so much for your help. I think this idea is a no- go for now because it's simply too complicated to keep up with trying to make the beginnings and ends of the same row have all that they need and it's a matter of trying to cram stitches where they shouldn't have to go and making essentially 2 rows out of 1. 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2019 by kmare91
wrong word used to describe pattern

[Granny Square]

You're welcome and sorry for the confusion, but you are right it IS hard to visualize (and explain).

I probably should have re-worded the "adding a couple of stitches in the first and last stitch" comment to something like "adding a couple of stitches in the first and last stitch to make a straight-edged triangle shawl is easy, but you are trying to do something WAY more complicated".

Where foundation stitches do not work well is in some lace patterns where you need a chain space at the bottom edge, and I thought I saw that happening at the extensions, immediately above the top edge of the little triangle.   ....hmmm, what popped into my head as I typed that is --  maybe you could add chains by repeating the step that makes the base for the next stitch?  No idea if that would work outside of my head tho....

BUT, if you don't have any areas where you need a chain space at the bottom edge, or if my above brainstorm actually works, you could do this:  at the end of a row, make an extension with foundation stitches to end that row.  Then, chain the number to support the beginning extension of the next row, plus turning chain.  Turn, work across the chain and the stitches and then end with foundation chain extension as before, make chains to support the initial stitches of the next row....and so on.  So, all the extension and prep for next row's extension happens in 2 adjacent steps--end of 1 row, beginning of next.

You have had more patience than I would have had to try to work backwards.  Seriously however, this would be a piece of cake top down - much easier to shorten rows in a jagged manner like this than lengthen them. (and top down triangles seem to go faster because the rows get shorter not bigger   )

[kmare91]

57 minutes ago, Granny Square said:

You're welcome and sorry for the confusion, but you are right it IS hard to visualize (and explain).

I probably should have re-worded the "adding a couple of stitches in the first and last stitch" comment to something like "adding a couple of stitches in the first and last stitch to make a straight-edged triangle shawl is easy, but you are trying to do something WAY more complicated".

Where foundation stitches do not work well is in some lace patterns where you need a chain space at the bottom edge, and I thought I saw that happening at the extensions, immediately above the top edge of the little triangle.   ....hmmm, what popped into my head as I typed that is --  maybe you could add chains by repeating the step that makes the base for the next stitch?  No idea if that would work outside of my head tho....

BUT, if you don't have any areas where you need a chain space at the bottom edge, or if my above brainstorm actually works, you could do this:  at the end of a row, make an extension with foundation stitches to end that row.  Then, chain the number to support the beginning extension of the next row, plus turning chain.  Turn, work across the chain and the stitches and then end with foundation chain extension as before, make chains to support the initial stitches of the next row....and so on.  So, all the extension and prep for next row's extension happens in 2 adjacent steps--end of 1 row, beginning of next.

You have had more patience than I would have had to try to work backwards.  Seriously however, this would be a piece of cake top down - much easier to shorten rows in a jagged manner like this than lengthen them. (and top down triangles seem to go faster because the rows get shorter not bigger   )

Thank you so much for replying again   I've attached a pic of what I *tried* to do, just for reference, but looking at it with fresh eyes today, it would have never worked out, it's increasing far too steeply, and that's with my best foot forward and it still looks bizarre. 

 

I did think about top down briefly, but I didn't know if that would work, but now that you mention it, I'm intrigued!

I've done far fewer top downs than I have the other way, of course the only real issue is that the fans and v's would be upside down but it really wouldn't make a difference to me because the overall look would still be the same. 

 

Do you have any idea how I'd get the number of my starting long chain needed to start doing that? And do you know when I would need to take a row off/ decrease? Would it be after every shell row AND every v stitch row ( so there wouldn't be a huge jump) or after every couple v stitch rows or? hmm..

 

Thanks so much again, this help means a whole lot to me and encourages me to think in ways I'm not normally able to

[Granny Square]

A cool thing about starting with a chain is if you are not sure of a stitch multiple, or if it tells you to chain x hundred, you can chain a bit longer than you think you need, or in case you undercounted and pick the extra chains out later - it will not unravel from the beginning end.  You can do this with foundation stitches too, but chains are easier to pick out tbecause you have to pick the whole end thread thru each loop 1 at a time and chains have fewer loops.

I'd use what you already have as a sort of gauge swatch.  Usually you want a full sized shawl to be wider than your wingspan, so if you are 5' tall you'd want it to be at least 6' which would be an extra 6" beyond each fingertip for example; too small and it's harder to keep on without pinning.  So figure out how wide you want it, then how many stitches per inch in your swatch, do the math, add a few 'just in case I miscounted chains' for extra measure, and maybe a few more because your stitch pattern has some sort of repeat you will need to deal with.

For the decrease scheme, you'd need to figure how deep or shallow you want your shawl and then use your swatch to figure out how many rows this is.  And then, as a double check, I'd diagram it out.  You could just diagram half, your pattern's center is a dc, ch, dc V stitch so I'd start the diagram with that as 1 "edge" of the diagram and then the rest of the stitches to 1 side of that.  This is not uncommon in symmetrical pattern diagrams, you just read each row left, then right.

I'm catching something in your second photo that I didn't think about from looking at your diagram.  For a few rows (bottom up) you are increasing by a little 3-stitch V stitch on each side, OK, but then this big honking 8 stitch shell comes along as an increase on each side, then back to the little V stitches, and it's curving downward--which is entirely the wrong way you want it to curve (for fit), if there is any curve you'd want it to curve around your neck not toward your back.  I think it would be better to keep the increases even(ish), and (looking at the last photo bottom up), have the first row with the shells be a half shell on each side, then the next row a whole shell on each side.  Does that make sense? 

 

Edited July 28, 2019 by Granny Square

[Granny Square]

Also, re: top down vs. bottom up...in your first pic (yesterday), I thought your increases were on the order of 8 stitches, every so often--which is easier top down.  Was looking at your crocheted piece closer than to your diagram.

BUT, f your increases are really on the order of 3, 3, 3, 4 (per your diagram in the first post and assuming increasing by half shells), then bottom up should work fine.  

[kmare91]

Would I still need to break yarn and add it back for half shells? I suppose I need to work it out with a swatch

 

Thank you so much 

[Granny Square]

No, actually you are back to "adding a couple of stitches in the first and last stitch to make a straight-edged triangle shawl is easy".   

I just had that first photo with the huge transition that increased from the initial little triangle to 3x the width in the next row stuck in my head, sorry my light bulb was a little slow to switch on. 

You should just be able, at the end of a row, to chain 3 (to stand for 1 DC) turn and add 1 DC in the first DC, and 2 DC in the next for half a shell, or another chain and a DC in the second DC for a V stitch.  By spreading the 3 or 4 edge increases over the first and second DC, rather than all but the turning chain in the second DC which would be more typical, I'm thinking it should look a little smoother but the stitch count will come out the same.

[kmare91]

3 hours ago, Granny Square said:

No, actually you are back to "adding a couple of stitches in the first and last stitch to make a straight-edged triangle shawl is easy".   

I just had that first photo with the huge transition that increased from the initial little triangle to 3x the width in the next row stuck in my head, sorry my light bulb was a little slow to switch on. 

You should just be able, at the end of a row, to chain 3 (to stand for 1 DC) turn and add 1 DC in the first DC, and 2 DC in the next for half a shell, or another chain and a DC in the second DC for a V stitch.  By spreading the 3 or 4 edge increases over the first and second DC, rather than all but the turning chain in the second DC which would be more typical, I'm thinking it should look a little smoother but the stitch count will come out the same.

OK so I tried half shells first and that really helped but I don't know if I followed what you were saying correctly. But the best thing about this is that everything is working out evenly instead of having to go backwards and jam crazy stitches in there. But its still curving, maybe too much, what do you think? 

 

 

[Granny Square]

Hey, a lot of progress tho, in spite of the curve. 

I wonder if it would help to make the shells 3+3=6 stitches instead of 8?  I think it would be a plus to then have the increases on each side always 3 stitches, and after a few rows it would add up to a lot fewer stitches and hopefully enough to keep the edge straight.

Fingers crossed! 🤞

[Granny Square]

I was thinking some more about this, and realized the right way to go about this is to 'do the math' instead of guessing how many stitches should be in the shells. 

The triangle patterns I've done before have been: tip of the triangle is x stitches, and you add y stitches to each side every row.  (x can equal y, and does in your case but doesn't have to)

So looking at your 2 diagrams, which I know you aren't following any more, but they both start with 3 stitches.

If we keep the idea of adding 3 stitches to each side, each row increases by 6.  So row 1 is 3, row 2 should be 9, row 3 should be 15, row 4 = 21, row 5 = 27, row 6 = 33....so this is how you'd figure out how many stitches your shell should be.  The right number for the shell could be 7, or 5, or even 9, and you may need to delete a V stitch on each side and and (maybe) replace the deleted V stitches with 1 or 2 chains to keep the count right.

edit...I failed to take into account the chains between the Vs in the above.  I still believe the gist of what I said is right (each row should increase by the same number, half that number on each side) but I the details of what I said are off.  If you add stitches in the middle (like the shell), it's going to curve if you don't also omit the same # of stitches (like a couple of V stitches) in the middle to make room for them.  

Edited July 29, 2019 by Granny Square

[kmare91]

5 hours ago, Granny Square said:

I was thinking some more about this, and realized the right way to go about this is to 'do the math' instead of guessing how many stitches should be in the shells. 

The triangle patterns I've done before have been: tip of the triangle is x stitches, and you add y stitches to each side every row.  (x can equal y, and does in your case but doesn't have to)

So looking at your 2 diagrams, which I know you aren't following any more, but they both start with 3 stitches.

If we keep the idea of adding 3 stitches to each side, each row increases by 6.  So row 1 is 3, row 2 should be 9, row 3 should be 15, row 4 = 21, row 5 = 27, row 6 = 33....so this is how you'd figure out how many stitches your shell should be.  The right number for the shell could be 7, or 5, or even 9, and you may need to delete a V stitch on each side and and (maybe) replace the deleted V stitches with 1 or 2 chains to keep the count right.

edit...I failed to take into account the chains between the Vs in the above.  I still believe the gist of what I said is right (each row should increase by the same number, half that number on each side) but I the details of what I said are off.  If you add stitches in the middle (like the shell), it's going to curve if you don't also omit the same # of stitches (like a couple of V stitches) in the middle to make room for them.  

OK, I'm back with a new plan. After much consideration I've decided I want to go with a top down and I have a plan just need some help putting it into play. 

 

OK so what I've got is, I want 3 v sts and I want them 2 sts apart and then the shells I want in the 6th stitch after the V's 

 

I am NOT good at all at the math and you're gonna wonder how I made it this far in life if I can't do this but oh well. 

 

So I messed around with chains, thought I needed increments of 6 so I did ch24 for the foundation then added 3 which counts as the first DC of the first v stitch. 

 

But as you can see here in my swatch, I'm left with two extra at the end, when I really need 3 I guess? 

 

As far as tapering, I want decreases to happen every time one full shell is completed if that helps. 

 

Thank you so so so much 

 

 

[Granny Square]

Hey I'm no math whiz, my little calculator is always by my side.  But in this case, it's just counting stitches.

Before your last post, I was trying to "do the math" earlier today on what the shell should be, based on your photo (the last one from yesterday); by counting the stitches in the rows above and below a shell row (directly connected or associated with the shell's span), and I came up with 5 stitches is what the shell should have been (see my messy sketch below, I drew vertical lines showing the stitches I counted in the photo above your 8-stitch shell, but my drawing shows a 5 stitch shell) . Then I tried to extrapolate a few row edge increases but it got messy and I gave up.

So a shell of 8 is not impossible, but then you need 8 stitches above and below it to not skew the fabric.

Re: chaining for 'plain' DC (or, when the very first stitch after the turning chain is a DC), you need 2 more chains  than the number of DC.  In your head, chain 4, DC in the 4th chain from the hook.  You have 2 dc, 1 is the real one, and one is the 3 chains that you skipped.  So in other words you made 2 more chains than the number of DC stitches you ended up with. BUT you aren't starting with 2 DCs together, it's DC (which is the turning chain), chain 1, DC at the start, so need 3 more than the total number of DCs...which is what you did, so I'm scratching my head, that should have worked.

"As far as tapering, I want decreases to happen every time one full shell is completed if that helps."  To make sure I am following you, you are going back to the stepped shaping that you started with?

Edited July 29, 2019 by Granny Square

[kmare91]

3 hours ago, Granny Square said:

Hey I'm no math whiz, my little calculator is always by my side.  But in this case, it's just counting stitches.

Before your last post, I was trying to "do the math" earlier today on what the shell should be, based on your photo (the last one from yesterday); by counting the stitches in the rows above and below a shell row (directly connected or associated with the shell's span), and I came up with 5 stitches is what the shell should have been (see my messy sketch below, I drew vertical lines showing the stitches I counted in the photo above your 8-stitch shell, but my drawing shows a 5 stitch shell) . Then I tried to extrapolate a few row edge increases but it got messy and I gave up.

So a shell of 8 is not impossible, but then you need 8 stitches above and below it to not skew the fabric.

Re: chaining for 'plain' DC (or, when the very first stitch after the turning chain is a DC), you need 2 more chains  than the number of DC.  In your head, chain 4, DC in the 4th chain from the hook.  You have 2 dc, 1 is the real one, and one is the 3 chains that you skipped.  So in other words you made 2 more chains than the number of DC stitches you ended up with. BUT you aren't starting with 2 DCs together, it's DC (which is the turning chain), chain 1, DC at the start, so need 3 more than the total number of DCs...which is what you did, so I'm scratching my head, that should have worked.

"As far as tapering, I want decreases to happen every time one full shell is completed if that helps."  To make sure I am following you, you are going back to the stepped shaping that you started with?

What do you mean stepped shaping? You mean how there were big jumps when working bottom up?

Just trying to figure out how to decrease by not working one stitch each row for the most gradual angle, or I could do it like a top down pineapple shawl I've done before where it's a rather big jump after pineapples ( in this case shells) and it still looked wonderful. 

 

I don't know if we're on the same page, I hope so!

[Granny Square]

Hi, yes I meant "big jumps", maybe I should have said "stair step" shaping.  That would solve the 'problem' I was having maintaining the pattern exactly to the edge, I kept ending up with chain(s), although at an edge a dc(s) instead may not have looked too odd, just an edging I guess.

[kmare91]

I've succeeded with a swatch!! I think! 

I ended up having to chain 27 +1 so does that mean I just do multiples of 27 plus 1 for the full size version? 

 

So I'm using hdc in the last v stitch of every row and then slst twice until I move my way over to the next v stitch and so on.. 

[kmare91]

Tried the 27 plus 1 thing and it certainly didn't work. I must be way off.i also need it to be such that each end has three v sts. 

 

 

[Granny Square]

I like it!  Your swatch, not that your stitch multiple guess didn't work  (your second post popped up just as I was typing that). 

What I'd do is plot out half of the first few rows--half meaning from the outer edge just to the very center (because it will be mirror image on the other side of the center out, no need to plot both halves).  Maybe 1 'stair step' and the outer edge & first pattern repeat of the next stair step rows, just to double check that something weird and unexpected didn't come up; it shouldn't but you never know.  Presuming that works that should be enough to follow down to the tip, just noting the new spot relative to the new indented edge where you need to stop and turn around.  I hope that makes sense.  

And on the stitch multiple, count what you plotted, multiply by 2, and add 10 just in case.

I hope you post a final pic when you're done!