Stumpwork and felt padding

The book I'm reading says to make 3 or 4 shapes of different sizes and then
'lay' down the smallest to largest on the ground. The top layer can be
overlayed with stitching before attaching to the ground or stitched over when
it's in place.

I opted to stitch before attaching. My initial attempts look awful sigh Is
there a rule of thumb for the proportions of felt shapes?

Also, other than practice making perfect, suggestions for neatly attaching what
might be termed an applique on top of the felt would be appreciated. In this
case, I had problems with edges that I wanted to 'tuck' under the backstitching
outline.

--
another Anne, add ingers to frugalf to reply

anne wrote:
The book I'm reading says to make 3 or 4 shapes of different sizes
and then 'lay' down the smallest to largest on the ground. The top
layer can be overlayed with stitching before attaching to the ground
or stitched over when it's in place.

I opted to stitch before attaching. My initial attempts look awful
sigh Is there a rule of thumb for the proportions of felt shapes?

I haven't run across any "rule of thumb". Directions are always: a
layer the correct size, then subsequent smaller sizes. If you stick
about 1/8" difference you'll do fine.

Also, I've always put the largest shape on the bottom. This creates a
mound shape. But it looks like your directions are attempting to do
something different?

Also, other than practice making perfect, suggestions for neatly
attaching what might be termed an applique on top of the felt would
be appreciated. In this case, I had problems with edges that I wanted
to 'tuck' under the backstitching outline.

Why is there a backstitching outline? Normally felt pieces are whipped
down. Then the applied piece is stab stitched into place, hiding those
stitches in the embroidery stitches. I'm confused here. Probably
because I've not seen the method you are describing. So, we'll learn
together. :-)

To tell you the truth, I've never used felt as an underlayment,
preferring instead to stuff an applied shape. What design is this? Or
book/author?

Dianne
--
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com

Dianne Lewandowski said
I haven't run across any "rule of thumb". Directions are always: a
layer the correct size, then subsequent smaller sizes. If you stick
about 1/8" difference you'll do fine.

I used my graphics program to incrementally downsize the pieces with the
smallest piece being 50% of the top layer. Quite likely, my increments were too
drastic.

Also, I've always put the largest shape on the bottom. This creates a
mound shape. But it looks like your directions are attempting to do
something different?

Yep -- I'm using an autographed copy of Stumpwork, Why Not (self published)
which was loaned to me by a friend who hosted the authors when they were in the
U.S. awhile ago. Their technique also creates a mount shape, having the largest
on top seems to give a nice and even pillowed effect which may or may not be
the same if the smallest is on top.


Why is there a backstitching outline? Normally felt pieces are whipped
down. Then the applied piece is stab stitched into place, hiding those
stitches in the embroidery stitches. I'm confused here. Probably
because I've not seen the method you are describing. So, we'll learn
together. :-)

As is often the case with me, the designs I try to do aren't always suited to
the technique I'm trying to learn. In this case, I was working with a modified
machine embroidery design, a rather roly poly granny. The body is a bit off due
to unfamiliarity with how to size the padding but the face is where I had the
most problem. Essentially, all I stitched on the top layer were suggestions of
facial features and didn't want very visible 'decorative' stitches outlining
the face.

To tell you the truth, I've never used felt as an underlayment,
preferring instead to stuff an applied shape.

I've done tarpunto stuffing which has worked well for me on 'large-ish' areas
but felt seems to be the way to go if one wants to have 'small-ish' and/or
individual areas pop off the background.

--
another Anne, add ingers to frugalf to reply

anne wrote:

I've done tarpunto stuffing which has worked well for me on 'large-ish' areas
but felt seems to be the way to go if one wants to have 'small-ish' and/or
individual areas pop off the background.

I've stuffed teeny petals and raspberries. :-) It doesn't take much.

I will simply have to try more applique. Interesting how the two
techniques differ (small on top vs large on top).

Delightful conversation! The more people talk, the more I learn. :-)
Dianne
--
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com

Anne,
I sometimes , `pile` embroidery stiches, or knit a `pile` in order to
get a very tiny 3D detail
mirjam

Mirjam Bruck-Cohen said
I sometimes , `pile` embroidery stiches, or knit a `pile` in order to
get a very tiny 3D detail

In one of the books I've been studying, it was suggested that a shape be first
filled with chain stitches. Other layers of stitches would then be placed on
top but these wouldn't go through the ground.
--
another Anne, add ingers to frugalf to reply

That would work or I use Satin stitches under neath for shape.

Many years ago a woman sent me a picture of a peacock. It was stunning
embroidery. The padded areas were all done with layer upon layer of
satin stitch.

Never thought about knitting for height. :-)
Dianne

Mirjam Bruck-Cohen wrote:

Anne,
I sometimes , `pile` embroidery stiches, or knit a `pile` in order to
get a very tiny 3D detail
mirjam


--
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com

I use a lot of knitting and crochet to get Pile Up and relief of
several heights.
mirjam

Many years ago a woman sent me a picture of a peacock. It was stunning
embroidery. The padded areas were all done with layer upon layer of
satin stitch.

Never thought about knitting for height. :-)
Dianne