Double, double... (next try)

So the next try was more... ordinary?
Straight pockets, plain weave between them, coins (but only at the ends).

The coins give a nice weight to the ends, and also add glitter. They are almost impossible to photograph, at least the glitter :)
Some examples:

(Yes, there are coins in there)

I have tried various "dragon scales" (fillings?), but coins still remain the best. I have tried sequins (for instance here), but they have no weight - and also do not like to be machine-washed, and can melt if pressed with a too hot iron.
I have tried finding mirrors, but can only find thick, single-sided and square. Had I found round mirrors I might have tried, but square with rather sharp edges seems to invite disaster.

I also tried stringing beads and let that pick "float" between layers, but did not like the results.

Another idea, still to be tested, is to have (coloured) warps floating between layers. Something like this:

As you can see, I haven't thought enough on this... but I think that at least the cross-wise one-layer areas have to be twill. -There are several more variations outside what is pictured here, including point threading/treadling. And it still remains to decide what kind of yarn would look nice for the "floaters".

Double, double...

toil and trouble [...] Scale of dragon [...]

As you may have noticed, I like double weave for achieving special effects in one item (as opposed to double width).
It started with a somewhat hazy idea: what if I could make a (scarf) with a pointy end, with kind-of-diagonal pockets, and put someting in the pockets, and...
More or less like this:

(The unwoven ends would be a fringe, which would be "pointed", too)

After fiddling with the structures possible, and the scale possible (I have "only" 16 shafts), I came up with these:

To make it more, er, interesting to sample, I decided on a singles linen 28 for warp, with a cotton 30/2 for weft.
The first that happened was that is was impossible to make the pointy end with a singles linen warp... more or less all "outside" ends broke when I tried to poke the shuttle through. Well, plan B, then: just make the full width from the beginning.
That worked, sort of. After all, it was just a sample, so I didn't have to weave a whole scarf, right?
In the first picture below is the plain-weave-for-the-joined-parts. It worked, it worked, hooray!

Here is the basket-weave-for-the-joined-areas sample:

Hmmm... interesting: it is nearly impossible to see where the single-layer areas are! Maybe something fun could be made out of that phenomenon...?

However. The basket weave version was much more difficult to weave. Where there are areas of plain weave with a "normal" sett, there are also areas where to judge the beat - with the basket weave areas it was all too easy to beat too hard.
And, anyway, the pocket size possible with only 16 shafts was really too small. For the "dragon scales" I wanted to stuff them with, anyway (10-öre coins).

So the whole ideas was shelved for a while.

Reflections on an exhibition

Some days ago, I went to the opening of a summer textile exhibition. The gallery in question has, since it's opening, made a point of mixing amateurs and professionals. All exhibitions have been "thematical". (In quotes, because I don't quite agree that, for instance, "textile" is, hm, narrow? specified? enough to constitute a "theme".)

Anyway. The contributors were told to write a short "narrative" about their relationship with textile(s). These narratives would be placed near the artefacts, the idea being that the whole exhibition should "tell a tale" about the relations between mankind (womankind?) and textile.

There would be (nearly) no judging - (you know: diversity, blah blah, personal expression, blah blah, connexion with foremothers, blah blah...)

In the hall(s), there were many textiles on the walls - embroideries, tapestries, rugs, tablecloths... Here and there, there were boards with quotes (generally only one sentence, maybe two). The quotes had the writer's name, and a number. The artefacts were not numbered.
In the biggest hall there was a big podium, on which many items of clothing were placed, together with several other items. In one corner, there was a sketch of the podium, with numbers. The quotes were placed beside the sketch.
There was also a big "divan" with a selection of cushions (20 or so), all very different. The result was a mish-mash of unrelated cushions, impossible to "see" (as there was another cushion half on top, an embroidered beside a printed and so on. No numbers, no quotes (that I could see).

So what did I learn?
- I learned that, probably, it is easier to build an exhibition if the theme is narrowed. (I remember one called "blue textiles" from several years ago, in a different hall. It consisted of everything from antique Asian textiles (blue, of course) to the latest (blue) jeans.)
- I learned that a "good idea" ("a mountain of cushions", for example) can turn out not ot be - and that it probably is a better idea to re-think the concept. (In this case, a wall of shelving with all cushions beside each other would have a) allowed many more cushions and b) allowed visitors to see them one at a time. It would still communicate "a plethora of cushions".)
- I learned that, if you ask contributors to write "about half a page", then either show that whole half-a-page or not. Cutting out one sentence will not necessarily be enough to convey the thoughts. The quotes could have been presented as a catalogue instead?
- It is also impolite to make identification impossible (ie having numbers on the quotes, but not on the artefacts). What if I had wanted to buy, or contact, the maker of that fantastic (say) tapestry?
- I also learned not to let myself be talked into something that I instinctively would not be part of. I will not enter any exhibition at that gallery again.

This nice little dragon adorned the park where we were having picnic on our way home:

Slightly better?

Now it (the not very exciting) is finished into a circular scarf. The (Morse code) text says "make ends meet", from both directions.

A circular (or moebius) scarf can be worn in several ways:

On a cool summer evening, perhaps? (It can be used without a cat, but he really, really wanted to be in the picture...)

Just twice around.

Or, if it isn't needed, but you don't want to lose it (to the cat wanting to get back up, for instance):

I prefer the moebius finishing (a half-twist before sewing), but as this one has two distinct sides it could not be. But I have another idea...

Not terribly exciting

Woven, cut, washed, mangled. Some reed marks did not wash out.
Looks better from further away?

Seen from too near, the pattern is not visible:

Maybe this threading is better on a 2/2 tie-up?
Below the green sample wet finished - top part same as the orange, bottom with a 2/2 for the background, 1/3 for the other block.
(If anybody but me can see the warpfaced block :-)

But the drape is great, especially after mangling!

Upcycled

Remember the skeins I machine-washed?

Now I have made spools of both of them, plus one un-washed.
The washed ones behaved well, in all ways. Each consisted of 6 hanks, each of which were approximately 740 meters.
This is more-or-less in accordance to what I have learnt elsewhere (see the article "To read older weaving literature") - except there should have been 8 hanks. Well.
But... the un-washed skein, which looked quite similar in grist - consisted of 6 hanks, each approximately 960 meters...

I wondered if it had something to do with the washing, but:
1. the washing was done almost without agitation, and in cold water
2. the 740 meters look Very Familiar -
So why are the hanks from the other skein longer?!?

Well. The best answer is always "sampling", right?
For a 30 ends-per-inch I had 18 spools of the new yarn and 12 from the stash, in varying grists (from 16/2 down to 30/2, I think).
I warped for An Idea, on two beams.

The idea did not work, that was very clear even after just 20 cm.

Re-threaded for another idea, less complicated. Here are two small samples of that:

They are two variants of using a "wall-of-Troy" threading for a 2-block weave.
The top sample:

and the bottom:

Probably, the real weft will be a it cheerier - yellow, orange?
And I think I have to use the top structure...