Re: I learned something about myself, today

On Jul 16, 8:09 pm, John <fixedgearh...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 16, 6:52 pm, "jeanne-nzlstar*" <fancyfrog...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



roflmao, john.
sounds like that block with a variety of names and
if i'm reading your description correctly, the problem might be using all
those different scraps.
try a 9 patch with 5 squares in one fabric and 4 squares. in a different
fabric.
the result might be much more acceptable visually.
there is a pix of what i called the floating 9 patch on my webshots.
dont have the link at hand as i'm busy trying to get back to square one with
this stupid computer.www.webshots.com
my username there is nzlstar.
sorry, best i can do at this point in time as i'm reading my eyeballs into a
stupor.
hope that helps,
j.

"John" wrote...
I did, in fact, learn something. I saw a pattern that is called "split
9 patch". You take 9 different squares of fabric and sew them together
into a traditional 9 patch and then lay it out on a cutting mat and
cut the sewn together square down the center and across the center.
You take the resulting 4 sewn pattern pieces and rearrange them with
each other into a new pattern that somewhat resembles crazy quilting.
I saw something that was done by someone and thought I would give it a
try. Well what I learned is that I like the order of a "Traditional"
designed pattern and I don't like the randomness of the non
traditional assembled pattern. I think I am so used to the formal
design requirements of classical furniture construction, that I find
it unsettling, to step outside the established order of pattern
design. I know that will disturb some people who get great pleasure
from trying new ways of doing things that are not in any way
traditional, but I think there is room for a lot of different ways of
doing this thing called quilting. My true pleasure is producing a
cleanly put together traditional design of quilt pattern and then
assembling that into a traditional quilt. I think that will keep my
interest until I stop quilting and you pry that seam ripper, from my
cold dead fingers, to paraphrase Charlton Heston, but so be it. I know
that I never liked doing the more modern type of furniture for people
and I don't think I ever did as good a job on it as I did on the
classical pieces I did. Isn't it nice that there is room enough for
all the various approaches to quilting that the craft allows. Plenty
of space for all to play in, and I think I found mine.

John

Actually I used 2 colors per block and made 4 different blocks. One of
each color pair with a reverse of the 2 colors for each 9 patch. I
just don't like the randomness of the design. I have felt this way
about the quilts I have made for a long time. Take for example the
1000 piece quilts I made in 5 different variations along with multiple
variations of place mats in the same pattern. Those quilts that were
made with a definite pattern placement of an observable pattern, were
more satisfactory to me, as opposed to the random placement of color
squares. Not that there was anything wrong with the random examples, I
just liked the definite patterned design better. This, to me, was also
the best objective comparison of the phenomenon when you consider that
I was using the same diagonal square color base square. The only
variation was the placement of the color square. Same square/different
placement. One random/ the other patterned placement. That is about as
controlled an environment as you can get, and I think that, for me, it
proves the observation. Like I said, there is a big enough playground
for everybody to find some thing that interests them when it comes to
quilting. there is no hierarchy when It comes to quilting. Only
personal satisfaction.

I think you should read the above post again as it relates to the
making of the 5ea. one thousand piece quilts. I used the same diagonal
squares for all the quilts. I placed the squares in recognizable
patterns on two of them and used random placement on the other three.
Other than the placement, the quilts were all of a large size although
not exactly the same size. Virtually all of bed size. that is about as
controlled an experiment that I can think of. They were not made to
test the theory of my enjoyment as to square placement, but were made
for specific purposes. Like I said, I liked the ordered placement of
the squares on the two quilts, more than I liked the random placement.
One of the ones that were random was chosen to be placed on permanent
display at the local library. You would think that I would be "most
proud" of that quilt, but I am not. I am proud to have had it placed
there, but I "like" the ones with the pattern better. This is what I
am talking about, and I think this comparison is what I was trying to
get at, when I first posed this theory. In another forum I was musing
about this and somebody suggested it might be right brain dominance,
that was formed by years of working with classical woodworking
styles.I had posted that I had made a number of modern pieces of
furniture for people, and while they were technically fine and the
customers were happy, I lost interest in them as soon as they were
delivered. My other pieces, which were of the Classical styles, I
would hold in my shop and pour over them for a day or two enjoying
them and looking at the detail and subtlety that was used to produce
the piece. That is the sort of thing that I mean when I talk about
liking the ordered nature of things, rather than the random. My eyes
used to wander over the pieces and visually drink in the details that
made up the whole. Not so with the modern almost machine made
examples. Just my own personal story about how I approach design. I
find I do the same thing with quilts I make. I finish them and lay
them out on the cutting table for a day or two before I put them to
their intended use. I pour over them and evaluate my execution of the
process that is required to accomplish this particular pattern and
note where I might need improvement. this is what I mean when I say I
prefer ordered placement rather than free form placement or design.

John
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: some quilt photos
    ... The squares were cut 8" then cut into quarters with 1" sashing. ... There are actually 2 very similar quilts. ... The pattern was adapted from The Best of Black ...
    (rec.crafts.textiles.quilting)
  • Re: What is this stuff called?
    ... The waffle squares are on the bias about 16/inch. ... formed apparently by hot calendering the square pattern so squares are ... You were supposed to take the pillow home with you along with all that plastic stuff on your tray. ...
    (alt.sewing)
  • Re: What is this stuff called?
    ... The waffle squares are on the bias about 16/inch. ... formed apparently by hot calendering the square pattern so squares are ... Is seems if your talking about a Poly Mesh stabilizer. ...
    (alt.sewing)
  • Re: What is this stuff called?
    ... The waffle squares are on the bias about 16/inch. ... formed apparently by hot calendering the square pattern so squares are ... Is seems if your talking about a Poly Mesh stabilizer. ... used for those 'green' shopping bags. ...
    (alt.sewing)
  • Re: What is this stuff called?
    ... The waffle squares are on the bias about 16/inch. ... formed apparently by hot calendering the square pattern so squares are ... Thanks, JPBill ...
    (alt.sewing)
Loading