On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 08:43:17 -0700, Herb <Herb@the.herb.garden> wrote:
>Pixie wrote:
>> 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.
>
>I figured that that part of the problem was hooping/stabilizer. I
>didn't want to appear to blame bigmama for shared failures.
>
One can be too "accommodating" in here Herb. The expectation will only
grow and then where will you be??!! It will do your head in!
I am seeing more and more, the little knowledge many Ladies have of
embroidery.
Yeah, it's fine to be a newb. I love helping newbs (if I can)... but
they gotta understand what can and can't be done, within reason...
As a Digitiser, YOU have to set the bar. Because the Ladies are just
looking at you like you are a piece of Prime Rib and expecting you to
deliver the tasty dish expected.
Do this and everyone learns at the same pace.
You wanna know -- (not necessarily in any order)
The fabric being stitched on. This sounds inconsequential, but it is
actually very important. A loose weave, a velour, a chiffon, a
loopy pile, an even weave cotton. All these have different
properties.
The rough FINISHED size... none of this "fits in" shite... A 10cm
design will fit in the biggest hoop. You are only interested in
the finished size.
>> 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.
>
>After my having done this for so long, you're right.
>
It won't hurt! I promise... /grin
>It's about time
>that I really should start learning how to really use these tools! I
>just looked it up in C'N'S and you tell it what kind of fabric, and it
>selects the appropriate "stitch length, density, and underlay." So it
>says. But it doesn't say or show (in the program or the user manual)
>just what it selects for each fabric or embroidery type. Needs some
>experimentation.
>
Time to move on from the baby pool!!...
Remember that Handy Manny one you did... zoom in and have a geek at
Manny's... erm... manbit...
/tinkle...
Because of an unfortunate misjudgement in the auto digitising stitch
direction.... Manny looks like He is very happy in his work....
If you get what I mean.... /erhem...
"Is that a wrench in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me??"
rofl....
And a lot of the outlining was a bit iffy... /hands over head...
>> 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
>
>I used Artista to do this. For some reason its default mode is just
>about everything in the same direction. The cheaper Click'n'stitch
>varies its directions, but has other problems.
>
Defaults??... Who uses defaults?? Accepting the status quo will not
help you move foreward.
You tell it what YOU want Herb.... /grin
Keep yer eyes on the road and yer hands on the wheel....!
None of this Cruise Control shite... you either wanna do it properly
or ya doan!
>> 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.
>
>The design I posted actually DOES have underlay stitches. Artista puts
>them in automatically.
>
Nah... that's not underlay... that's just a few running stitches to
get the stitching starting and ending somewhere handy. /grin
If that is as good as the underlay setting for Artista is.... ? ...
/gulp
I'm sure it's not.
>They may not be effective because the underlay
>stitches immediately precede their associated object - so the second
>object's underlay isn't laid down until the first object is completed.
>
Bit lost here. I would expect the colour being sewed, to sew some kind
of stabilising stitches, reflecting the density of the area to be
covered and then proceed to finish the overlay stitches.
Not following what you mean by "second object".
>> 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.
>
>Hmm.. ready to design a flexible monitor screen?
>
Typical bloke... I have encountered this "thinking" before with blokes
and embroidery...
You want to change the environment to suit the embroidery....
It's simple physics. Doing a JT Kirk on it and rewriting the program
won't work! (Simply because you are leaving out the Human variable).
Ok... I'll try to think like a man for a sec... (/dumbs down... ooh!
that hurts...floats around... so much empty space... /laff)...
Think paint. Paint on a hot roof. It has to stretch in the heat and
shrink in the cold.
You only have to apply this kind of thinking to the medium that your
embroidery is being sewn on. Fabric is not stable. That is why we use
stabiliser on projects that require it. So it can't move.
Next problem is weak wrists.... it just goes on and on!!
/toggles back to Pixie IQ.... much better... rofl
Why do I now have an urge to burp and scratch odd places...?? Yeuw!
>> 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.
>
>In fact it shouldn't have been there at all.
>
Hmmm mmmm.... You diddun run a critical eye over it for odd looking
things when you finished??
Did you ever notice Sue Box usually only puts out one design set a
year?? They're worth it though...
Sometimes two... but rarely.
It takes TIME!!! Lots of time...
>> 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.
>
>Artista can be TOO good.
>
Yes. That can happen with the more expensive software.
The trick is telling it what to look for and what to ignore...
Toggle some of those pesky "defaults".... /grin
> The CNS version didn't have this problem -
>
Because it's not "intellingent" enough to "see" it.
>but it had others. I never looked at the actual color selections and
>stitching sequence once the final image looked half-way decent.
>That'll teach me to 'assume'. Again.
>
It's not so much "assumption" as "acceptance" that it is doing what it
says on the box. "Click and Stitch"....
It's a big ploy to part you from your dollars..../grin
I have noticed that the harder a program is to "master" the better the
results that can be achieved. But you have to learn which ones to
press or toggle.
There is NO free lunch in digitising.
>> It was a valiant attempt. I hope I haven't sounded "picky".
>> You wanted to know, so here ya go... /grin
>
>Yes I did - and thank you.
>
Phew...
WWIII was not my intention!
>>
>> 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
>
>I've been picky about requestors saying how big they want a design.
>
This is a bug bear of mine. Bigger is not better.
In saying that. Some designs are so labour intensive that a bigger
size is just unavoidable, just to keep the detail.
People have to think "trampolene" when thinking hoops.
The further it is from the centre of the hoop to the edge of the hoop,
the more chance there is of screwing up the hooping.
It will just bounce in the middle.
Stretching the material to death is not the answer, as it's "memory"
will just pull it back as soon as the hoop is released. The design
stays the same and the fabric scrunches up at the edges when returning
to its original place.
>But haven't bothered asking about the intended fabric. Unless someone
>specifically says "I want to put this on a baby blanket", I just use
>whatever default fabric the application comes up with.
>
I have seen Ladies put a design like you one you just digitised on
stuff like chiffon.... and watch them wonder why it ate the fabric!!
Live and learn!
> - Herb
Have to run. Lunch date.
Pixie :-))
/polishes spikes... Hopper... yer next... /chortle...
|
| 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 |
|