Computer programs and floss usage.

I am not quite sure why I am writing this, as I suspect the
majority of rctners are not the slightest bit interested. But then,
I am a scientist, and I just cannot bear there being any
misunderstanding about calculations, numbers and counted cross
stitch. First let me give you a true story from the patterns of my
maidens.
For my first maiden, La Source, I got the pattern from one
Mylene Cionello, who lives in The Philippines. The pattern
came with a symbol count, the first one I had seen, and this is
what started me off measuring floss usage. It also came with all
sorts of numbers which claimed to give the amount of floss required
to stitch the pattern, and which I totally ignored.. A couple of
years later, I got the pattern for Ariadne from the same source,
only this one did not have a symbol count. I wrote to Mylene
asking where the symbol count had gone, and she replied that she
had had so many complaints from customers that the amount of
floss listed on her patterns was just plain wrong, that she no longer
included that part of the computer output. What she had done
was to throw the baby out with the bath water. The symbol count
is always accurate and useful. Calculations on the amount of floss
required are highly suspect. Some people are very profligate with
floss usage; and some very parsimonious. Also floss usage depends
on canvas count and number of threads in the needle.
I gather that programs like Pattern Maker, at least some of
the more expensive ones, give symbol counts; but they also
claim to calculate the amount of floss required to complete
the project. Symbol counts are wonderful. Floss usage
calculations, as Mylene found out, can be dangerous.
I have recently come across two designers who seem to rely
to some extent on these floss usage calculations. The object of
this message is the warn people about their dangers. The first
lady was kitting projects, and came up on rctn to ask how she
could work out how much floss to put in the kits. I tried to
help, but the last I heard, she said she had found a computer
program which gave her exactly how much floss was required,
and was using these figures. At this point I gave up trying to be
helpful. Recently Victoria noted she had found patterns which
gave symbol counts and floss requirements. I wrote to the
designer asking whether it would be worthwhile having a
discussion on the subject, but was told she merely used the
figures given by the software she used.
All of which leads me to suspect that some people who
have design software which gives floss requirements as part
of their output, are under the impression that such figures are
accurate, and potentially useful. I am quite certain such figures
do not give an accurate idea of how much floss any particular
stitcher will actually use, and I doubt whether they are at all
useful, except as very general guidance. But then, only if the
figures refer to the actual canvas count and threads in the needle
that the stitcher happens to be using. Just a friendly warning to
unsuspecting stitchers.
--
Jim Cripwell.
The gods do not subtract from the allotted span of one's life, any
time that is spent in stitching.
Adapted from a sign on The Cobb, Lyme Regis, England.

I hope we not going to start that hare again Jim! ;-))

I don`t think anyone really thinks that our design software can be totally
accurate in that respect - there are too many variavles. Yes, you can
easily and fairly accurately calculate how much thread 100 stitches all in
one block will use (which, I suspect, is the only criteria calculated by
such design programmes) but it`s a totally different kettle of fish where
100 stitches scattered over a large design is concerned. It`s just common
sense. Not forgetting that just about everyone will get a different number
of stitches out of the same length of thread, according to the method of
stitching and their personal tension.

Pat P


"F.James Cripwell" wrote in message
...
I am not quite sure why I am writing this, as I suspect the
majority of rctners are not the slightest bit interested. But then,
I am a scientist, and I just cannot bear there being any
misunderstanding about calculations, numbers and counted cross
stitch. First let me give you a true story from the patterns of my
maidens.
For my first maiden, La Source, I got the pattern from one
Mylene Cionello, who lives in The Philippines. The pattern
came with a symbol count, the first one I had seen, and this is
what started me off measuring floss usage. It also came with all
sorts of numbers which claimed to give the amount of floss required
to stitch the pattern, and which I totally ignored.. A couple of
years later, I got the pattern for Ariadne from the same source,
only this one did not have a symbol count. I wrote to Mylene
asking where the symbol count had gone, and she replied that she
had had so many complaints from customers that the amount of
floss listed on her patterns was just plain wrong, that she no longer
included that part of the computer output. What she had done
was to throw the baby out with the bath water. The symbol count
is always accurate and useful. Calculations on the amount of floss
required are highly suspect. Some people are very profligate with
floss usage; and some very parsimonious. Also floss usage depends
on canvas count and number of threads in the needle.
I gather that programs like Pattern Maker, at least some of
the more expensive ones, give symbol counts; but they also
claim to calculate the amount of floss required to complete
the project. Symbol counts are wonderful. Floss usage
calculations, as Mylene found out, can be dangerous.
I have recently come across two designers who seem to rely
to some extent on these floss usage calculations. The object of
this message is the warn people about their dangers. The first
lady was kitting projects, and came up on rctn to ask how she
could work out how much floss to put in the kits. I tried to
help, but the last I heard, she said she had found a computer
program which gave her exactly how much floss was required,
and was using these figures. At this point I gave up trying to be
helpful. Recently Victoria noted she had found patterns which
gave symbol counts and floss requirements. I wrote to the
designer asking whether it would be worthwhile having a
discussion on the subject, but was told she merely used the
figures given by the software she used.
All of which leads me to suspect that some people who
have design software which gives floss requirements as part
of their output, are under the impression that such figures are
accurate, and potentially useful. I am quite certain such figures
do not give an accurate idea of how much floss any particular
stitcher will actually use, and I doubt whether they are at all
useful, except as very general guidance. But then, only if the
figures refer to the actual canvas count and threads in the needle
that the stitcher happens to be using. Just a friendly warning to
unsuspecting stitchers.
--
Jim Cripwell.
The gods do not subtract from the allotted span of one's life, any
time that is spent in stitching.
Adapted from a sign on The Cobb, Lyme Regis, England.

Thanks Jim for the discourse; I can think of one or two designers who will
make a note if they think more than one skein is needed. I think, if I was
buying this pattern, I would hope the estimate would be on the generous
side. I am usually pretty stingy with floss, but would far rather buy too
much, rather than too little; especially if overdyed floss, with really
different dyelots, are used.

Thanks for the words of warning, though. Just remember, buy an extra skein;
you just cannot have TOO much stash LOL

Gillian
"F.James Cripwell" wrote in message
...
I am not quite sure why I am writing this, as I suspect the
majority of rctners are not the slightest bit interested. But then,
I am a scientist, and I just cannot bear there being any
misunderstanding about calculations, numbers and counted cross
stitch. First let me give you a true story from the patterns of my
maidens.
For my first maiden, La Source, I got the pattern from one
Mylene Cionello, who lives in The Philippines. The pattern
came with a symbol count, the first one I had seen, and this is
what started me off measuring floss usage. It also came with all
sorts of numbers which claimed to give the amount of floss required
to stitch the pattern, and which I totally ignored.. A couple of
years later, I got the pattern for Ariadne from the same source,
only this one did not have a symbol count. I wrote to Mylene
asking where the symbol count had gone, and she replied that she
had had so many complaints from customers that the amount of
floss listed on her patterns was just plain wrong, that she no longer
included that part of the computer output. What she had done
was to throw the baby out with the bath water. The symbol count
is always accurate and useful. Calculations on the amount of floss
required are highly suspect. Some people are very profligate with
floss usage; and some very parsimonious. Also floss usage depends
on canvas count and number of threads in the needle.
I gather that programs like Pattern Maker, at least some of
the more expensive ones, give symbol counts; but they also
claim to calculate the amount of floss required to complete
the project. Symbol counts are wonderful. Floss usage
calculations, as Mylene found out, can be dangerous.
I have recently come across two designers who seem to rely
to some extent on these floss usage calculations. The object of
this message is the warn people about their dangers. The first
lady was kitting projects, and came up on rctn to ask how she
could work out how much floss to put in the kits. I tried to
help, but the last I heard, she said she had found a computer
program which gave her exactly how much floss was required,
and was using these figures. At this point I gave up trying to be
helpful. Recently Victoria noted she had found patterns which
gave symbol counts and floss requirements. I wrote to the
designer asking whether it would be worthwhile having a
discussion on the subject, but was told she merely used the
figures given by the software she used.
All of which leads me to suspect that some people who
have design software which gives floss requirements as part
of their output, are under the impression that such figures are
accurate, and potentially useful. I am quite certain such figures
do not give an accurate idea of how much floss any particular
stitcher will actually use, and I doubt whether they are at all
useful, except as very general guidance. But then, only if the
figures refer to the actual canvas count and threads in the needle
that the stitcher happens to be using. Just a friendly warning to
unsuspecting stitchers.
--
Jim Cripwell.
The gods do not subtract from the allotted span of one's life, any
time that is spent in stitching.
Adapted from a sign on The Cobb, Lyme Regis, England.

Pat P wrote:
I don`t think anyone really thinks that our design software can be totally
accurate in that respect

You would be absolutely *amazed* at what the general public expects. I
imagine the designer who furnished Jim his maidens got a *lot* of angry
replies to purported floss useage.

That's the value of RCTN: to let the public understand what all of this
means, how it is not always useful and indeed can lead to
misunderstandings, and as Gillian noted: buy extra.

Dianne

I haven`t found any problems with matching up DMC or Anchor. I used to
blend them where they joined, but I don`t even do that now!

Pat P

"escapee" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 May 2004 18:08:20 -0500, Dianne Lewandowski
opined:

Pat P wrote:
I don`t think anyone really thinks that our design software can be
totally
accurate in that respect

You would be absolutely *amazed* at what the general public expects. I
imagine the designer who furnished Jim his maidens got a *lot* of angry
replies to purported floss useage.

That's the value of RCTN: to let the public understand what all of this
means, how it is not always useful and indeed can lead to
misunderstandings, and as Gillian noted: buy extra.

Dianne

The design I'm stitching now has 65 colors. It's the most colors I'd ever
used
on any one design. Many of the colors only use 100 stitches, some have
more.
Since the colors in and of themselves are somewhat, garish, I am not
buying
extra, but only one skein. DMC, to my knowledge does not have dye lots.

However, I would like to stitch the main body of the Buddha on the design
in
silks. So, when I do get to that part, I will be asking for help and
hints.

V

Jim, thank you for taking the time to compose the commentary.

I appreciate the heads-up on the uses and limitations of the software.

I have two cross-stitch designer programs and have, to date, used them
for little more than reading charts native to those programs. There's
obviously more ways for them to be useful.

I'm currently trying to figure out how any program could've specified as
_little_ floss as was allotted for a current project-in-progress. I'm
using two strands (on #14 aida), the areas are basically solid and the
back of the work just has wee vertical stitches (testimony to
parsimonious stitching). I ran out of the first color before I'd
covered 1/2 of the intended area.

Now, as if a light clicked on, I'm wondering if a generous-enough
allowance had been intended but the thread-cutting chore was given to
someone who'd measured off feet instead of yards. That'd explain it.

Diane Hare


F.James Cripwell wrote:
I am not quite sure why I am writing this, as I suspect the
majority of rctners are not the slightest bit interested. But then,
I am a scientist, and I just cannot bear there being any
misunderstanding about calculations, numbers and counted cross
stitch.

I always suggest if it`s closrest to 1 or 1 and a half skeins, for
instance. If the programme tells me that it uses nine tenths of a skein I`d
suggest a skein and a half, to be on the safe side, as people`s usage varies
so much - particularly if the stitches of any one colour are very scattered.
What I mean is, I don`t normally make it any more detailed than that, unless
it`s a very small design. If there are small areas of indeterminate flowers
I put the colours I`ve used and add the instruction to "use any flower
colour of your choice - a chance to use up any oddments you may have". I`m
sure the thread manufacturers wouldn`t approve - but TOUGH!

As I do a lot of buildings - tubs of flowers are often very useful for
disguising awkward corners and pretty the design up in any case!

Pat P

Gillian Murray" wrote in message
link.net...
Thanks Jim for the discourse; I can think of one or two designers who will
make a note if they think more than one skein is needed. I think, if I was
buying this pattern, I would hope the estimate would be on the generous
side. I am usually pretty stingy with floss, but would far rather buy too
much, rather than too little; especially if overdyed floss, with really
different dyelots, are used.

Thanks for the words of warning, though. Just remember, buy an extra
skein;
you just cannot have TOO much stash LOL

Gillian
"F.James Cripwell" wrote in message
...
I am not quite sure why I am writing this, as I suspect the
majority of rctners are not the slightest bit interested. But then,
I am a scientist, and I just cannot bear there being any
misunderstanding about calculations, numbers and counted cross
stitch. First let me give you a true story from the patterns of my
maidens.
For my first maiden, La Source, I got the pattern from one
Mylene Cionello, who lives in The Philippines. The pattern
came with a symbol count, the first one I had seen, and this is
what started me off measuring floss usage. It also came with all
sorts of numbers which claimed to give the amount of floss required
to stitch the pattern, and which I totally ignored.. A couple of
years later, I got the pattern for Ariadne from the same source,
only this one did not have a symbol count. I wrote to Mylene
asking where the symbol count had gone, and she replied that she
had had so many complaints from customers that the amount of
floss listed on her patterns was just plain wrong, that she no longer
included that part of the computer output. What she had done
was to throw the baby out with the bath water. The symbol count
is always accurate and useful. Calculations on the amount of floss
required are highly suspect. Some people are very profligate with
floss usage; and some very parsimonious. Also floss usage depends
on canvas count and number of threads in the needle.
I gather that programs like Pattern Maker, at least some of
the more expensive ones, give symbol counts; but they also
claim to calculate the amount of floss required to complete
the project. Symbol counts are wonderful. Floss usage
calculations, as Mylene found out, can be dangerous.
I have recently come across two designers who seem to rely
to some extent on these floss usage calculations. The object of
this message is the warn people about their dangers. The first
lady was kitting projects, and came up on rctn to ask how she
could work out how much floss to put in the kits. I tried to
help, but the last I heard, she said she had found a computer
program which gave her exactly how much floss was required,
and was using these figures. At this point I gave up trying to be
helpful. Recently Victoria noted she had found patterns which
gave symbol counts and floss requirements. I wrote to the
designer asking whether it would be worthwhile having a
discussion on the subject, but was told she merely used the
figures given by the software she used.
All of which leads me to suspect that some people who
have design software which gives floss requirements as part
of their output, are under the impression that such figures are
accurate, and potentially useful. I am quite certain such figures
do not give an accurate idea of how much floss any particular
stitcher will actually use, and I doubt whether they are at all
useful, except as very general guidance. But then, only if the
figures refer to the actual canvas count and threads in the needle
that the stitcher happens to be using. Just a friendly warning to
unsuspecting stitchers.
--
Jim Cripwell.
The gods do not subtract from the allotted span of one's life,
any
time that is spent in stitching.
Adapted from a sign on The Cobb, Lyme Regis, England.

Those of us who have been stitching for decades would probably ignore
(or laugh) at the software's estimates and buy whatever we felt like
buying. The people who would be fooled are the novice stitchers who buy
the software to scan in a family picture or designers who are wonderful
artists but don't do any stitching themselves. Since I've come across
programs that *always* assume you are stitching over one thread no
matter what fabric count you plug in, floss estimates for these charts
would be grossly underestimated if you are stitching over two. Another
common software fault is assuming you always use two strands for
cross-stitch and one for backstitch. I'm sure some programs, especially
newer ones, allow you to change some of these assumptions. Others do
not and it is up to the user to figure that out.

Pat P wrote:

I hope we not going to start that hare again Jim! ;-))

I don`t think anyone really thinks that our design software can be totally
accurate in that respect - there are too many variavles. Yes, you can
easily and fairly accurately calculate how much thread 100 stitches all in
one block will use (which, I suspect, is the only criteria calculated by
such design programmes) but it`s a totally different kettle of fish where
100 stitches scattered over a large design is concerned. It`s just common
sense. Not forgetting that just about everyone will get a different number
of stitches out of the same length of thread, according to the method of
stitching and their personal tension.

--
Brenda
"Sometimes I'd sit and gaze for days through sleepless dreams all alone
and trapped in time." Tommy Shaw

"Pat P" ) writes:
I haven`t found any problems with matching up DMC or Anchor. I used to
blend them where they joined, but I don`t even do that now!

Pat P

Again the scientist in me urges me to comment. In the usual way,
there are no problems using different "batches" of embroidery floss. The
colour differences are very small. However, there are times when it is
important to buy all the floss at the same time, and this is where there
are large areas of one colour. And a colour that is particularly
troublesome is black.
The human eye is very sensitive to changes in colour when it is
viewing large areas. Slight veriations in colour cannot be detected if you
put two skeins of floss next to each other, but may show up when a piece
is finished. There was a story posted on rctn some years ago of a
stitcher whose project was something like animal heads, including a
leopard. She ran out of black, and had to buy new floss. It was not
until after the picture had been framed that she noticed the difference in
colour. I have a similar phenomenon with my Naked Maja, but since the
black is background it does not matter very much.
--
Jim Cripwell.
The gods do not subtract from the allotted span of one's life, any
time that is spent in stitching.
Adapted from a sign on The Cobb, Lyme Regis, England.

F.James Cripwell ) writes:
(snip)
is finished. There was a story posted on rctn some years ago of a
stitcher whose project was something like animal heads, including a
leopard. She ran out of black, and had to buy new floss. It was not

Sorry to follow up on my own post. The animal was a panther, not a
leopard.
--
Jim Cripwell.
The gods do not subtract from the allotted span of one's life, any
time that is spent in stitching.
Adapted from a sign on The Cobb, Lyme Regis, England.