:(((
"Pixie" <Pixie@AnnWheatley.com.invalid> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:a9t2s5dn25d753k0be55kpvghom4vb9ik1@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 17:27:56 -0700, Herb <Herb@the.herb.garden> wrote:
>
>>bigmama wrote:
>>
>>> The letters are moved and there are spaces blanks without stitch.
>>
>>Thanks for the info .. now I see the gap at the bottom of the "m". Not
>>sure what you mean by "the letters are moved", because they were done
>>the same as any other design element, not as 'letters'.
>>
> "Letters are moved".... yeah... they are. The whole design moved...
>
> The letters stayed where they were Herb... (cos you and I know they
> can't "move" on the file) it was so freakin' huge by the time the
> letters were sewn (last colour) it had moved so much in the hoop that
> the letters "appeared" to have moved.
> The letters are exactly where they should be. The fabric moved.
>
> Herb... a hint... underlay stitches. I know you aren't a fan, but the
> time has come to figure out on that click and go program where the
> button is that does it... and do it perpendicular to the direction of
> the embroidery stitches going on top of it.
> But, having said that, underlay stitches alone would not have helped,
> more later.
> On a design that BIG, and you mentioned this yourself, 66,000+
> stitches is just heading for disaster - on a number of levels.
> Without underlay stitching to give it some sort of initial
> stabilisation, it didn't have a hope of staying aligned.
> Again, in saying that... I'm thinking it wasn't hooped correctly...
>
> For a start, see how all the bigger patches of stitches are ALL
> horizontal.
> Parallel to the weft of the fabric. You are digitising in the same
> direction as the weave ... this always produces tears.
> Vertical and horizontal stitching is a no no (at beginner levels)...
> especially for the faint of heart... /grin
> Even a 5 degree shift will put the stitches in a stronger position.
> Underlay first will keep them there...
>
> All this does is bunch the weave of the fabric together as more and
> more stitches are laid down. For smaller projects this may not occur,
> but the stitches are in danger of just disappearing into the weave or
> pile of the fabric.
> That is why underlay stitching is so important on bigger projects.
> Think of a corset and the lacing up. The more lacing, the tighter the
> waist gets. Pretty as that is in RL, it's not ideal in machine
> embroidery.
>
> That is effectively what happened and how the letters "moved". By the
> time they were sewn, the design was narrower on the fabric.
> The letters ARE actually sewing where they should, the fabric is just
> not in the same place it was almost 60,000 stitches ago!!
>
> For something this big, I would have to have used a layer of cutaway
> (probably two) to belay any movement. And not floated underneath, I
> would have hooped it to death. This design was never gonna stay
> aligned without something immovable underneath. And I mean immovable.
> Hard to do with a design this size. I'm not a fan of anything wider
> than 150mm... I've seen a lot of crappy attempts at the big hoop stuff
> by women with weak wrists (hooping problems).
>
> Adjusting stitch compensation (where colours overlay each other just a
> bit more to compensate for movement) would be needed in this.
> The design looks neat and aligned on the computer screen. The viewer
> isn't fabric. Fabric moves when stitched to death, like this is.
>
> And! Just to throw another variable in ... machine tension. They are
> all different. It is something a digitiser cannot even guess at.
> This will also cause movement problems. It is not something you should
> have to worry about. One should be aware of one's individual machine
> quirks.
>
> Oh... as an aside. Some of the colours are just in the wrong order
> completely.
> Colour five just gets eaten up by colour ten. I zoomed in on it
> thinking it was just misaligned stitches, to discover it is supposed
> to be highlighting. It didn't seem necessary to the design as a whole
> anyway, but most of it gets covered by the blue at a later stage,
> making it superfluous.
> The program is picking up too many unnecessary colours and not knowing
> what to do with them.
>
> It was a valiant attempt. I hope I haven't sounded "picky".
> You wanted to know, so here ya go... /grin
>
> Pixie :-))
> One last word of advice... you don't know the sewing abilities of the
> person requesting a digitising project...
> You doan know the one million ways they can screw up anything you
> offer, and without even trying! /grin.
> No... this design was destined to die a slow and natural death upon
> sewing it out.
> But I have also seen what can happen to a perfectly good offering...
> It was sad to watch... /grin
>
>>
>>> "Herb" <Herb@the.herb.garden> ha scritto nel messaggio
>>> news:0I6wn.220012$Jq1.57426@en-nntp-05.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>
>>>>bigmama wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Thank you Herb but I tried to sew and the result isn't good.
>>>>
>>>>So I can do better next time, I'd like to know what kind of thing(s)
>>>>were
>>>>wrong with it.
>>>>
>>>> - Herb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Thank you the same.
>>>>>"Herb" <Herb@the.herb.garden> ha scritto nel messaggio
>>>>>news:fK5wn.49519$7n7.45893@en-nntp-14.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>bigmama wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I hope that it is now clear
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It was perfectly clear in your original request.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Did you receive the digitized design that I posted two and a half
>>>>>>hours
>>>>>>ago?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
|