Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Finally one sock is complete.

This sock seemed to take forever to knit. I guess I just wasn't able to grasp the pattern as quickly as I usually do. Eventually I got it and the foot was done in no time.



Here is a close up of the stitch pattern, it is quite interesting.



The only problem is that it fits me. It should not. I need to rip the toe back and get rid of 1/2 inch. That brings me to this question...today, on sockapaloooza sign up day...do you account for a negative ease in the length of a sock?

I've already cast on and knit a couple inches of the second sock...so it is ready for Mickey!

16 comments:

Stephanie said...

Very nice. Are you signing up for sockapalooza?

christine said...

Thanks for the link to sockapalooza; of course, I had to committ myself to yet another KAL!
What pattern is that? Looks great!

Laura said...

What a good question! I have been wondering how much negative ease for circumference is best for socks, but I haven't gotten around to looking up an answer in my many sock books. I will be checking back to see what other people say about this.

nona said...

Beautiful sock -- worth all the hard work. When knitting a sock, I add no ease to the circumference of the foot and make the sock a tad shorter in length then the foot. There's nothing worse than a baggy sock, so when in doubt I error on the small side.

msubulldog said...

I think you would have to figure in some ease. Somehow.
In the Falling Leaves sock pattern, they figure a 1" neg. ease in circumference, but the IK Cable Rib pattern figures almost 2" neg. ease (unless it's designed for a very narrow foot).
And now that I've said that, I've never seen a sock pattern that talks about lengthwise ease. They all say to knit the foot the desired length minus ~2" for the toe. . . .
Is it possible that you'd account for ease around the foot, but not for length? (I guess a snug sock is always better than a too short sock!) I'm interested to see what others think.

Jeanie said...

Ooooohhhh aaaaaahhhhhh! What a beauty!

Angela said...

It's beautiful! Your version looks better than the picture in the book!

Jacqui said...

I like about a 1/2" negative ease in the length of my socks. I also like about an inch in the circumference. Now if I could only get my gauge to match my gauge swatches! lol

Jacqui said...

Should have mentioned: the ease in the circumference depends on the stitch pattern. I use less ease in a less stretchy stitch and more with a rib. I like my socks to fit snugly.

Purly Whites said...

Oh, so pretty! I usually don't account for negative ease in the length of my socks, just in the circumference. And so far, so good. Although, the exact opposite of what Nona says she does, so I guess as long as one of the measurements has negative ease, it's all good.

Areli said...

Ooooooh...very pretty, I love the pattern.

Jeff Schiller said...

Hi Cuz! Sexy Knitters Club huh? hoookay... (backs slowly away)

Anyway, keep up the blogging! I'm pretty lost when it comes to knitting but it looks like you have a lot of readers.

I'll add a link to your blog on my site... drop me an email of other family member's sites/blogs (jeff _at_ codedread _dot_ com).

grumperina said...

Those are fantastic! I see absolutely no problem with the socks fitting your feet, hehe :).

Wool Winder said...

Beautiful! I'm not much of a planner when it comes to knitting socks. I just knit, check the guage (somewhat) and pray they will fit. That's probably why some of my socks fit better than others!

Wanda said...

Gorgeous sock pattern. I really like it.

kris said...

hmmm, for some reason i've missed a bunch of your posts! part of me wishes i'd never seen this one, though, because now i absolutely need to knit this sock as well. it's gorgeous. argh!