Local quilt show: observations

On Aug 17, 8:40*am, John wrote:
On Aug 16, 11:52*pm, Sherry wrote:





On Aug 15, 2:58*pm, John wrote:

On Aug 15, 1:25*pm, John wrote:

Let me start off with a disclaimer. If any of you are offended by my
observations, then I am sorry. If you derive pleasure from the things
I am commenting on, then go ahead and continue to enjoy them. My
opinions are my own, and "might" coincide with others, or maybe not..
That stated, herein follows a brief recounting of todays visit to the
local yearly quilt show.
*Lois and I showed up at the local show and started viewing the
offerings from large bed sized quilts to small wall hangings and items
of apparel. The one thing that struck me, and Lois, was the fact that
the degree of overall quilting by machine was of a singular nature.
This observation applied to about 75% of the quilts. The other 25%
were hand quilted, and this observation does not apply to them. They
were very nicely done.
As to the 75%; I have never seen as large a group of quilts, in my
life, that were done in such a random manner that defied the sewn
seams of the pattern, of the quilt. It is as if the person doing the
quilting, and some of them were "professionally" machine quilted, and
they used that word "professionally", loosely, in my opinion, *was
insensitive to the fact that they were crossing over the seams of the
pattern of the quilt on autopilot in an effort to confuse attempted
artistic random loops and squiggles, in the guise of art, and not
respecting the pattern seams as defining elements of the quilt. Now if
this is the new norm and I am completely out of step with State of the
Art Free motion quilting, then so be it, I am out of step. If you look
at the other 25% of the quilts that were hand stitched. they used
overall quilting in the appropriate seam bordered elements of the
pattern and stayed within the confines of the seams and produced a
quilt that respected the pattern design and complimented that with
area quilting which enhanced the overall appearance. Out of probably
35 Machine quilts, I think there were probably 2 or 3 that met the the
above criteria of respecting the seams, and not going over them
randomey, in an attempt to achieve, I don't know what. It is almost as
if people take a class on free motion quilting and then throw away all
the time honored traditions of using quilting and stippling within
area elements that respect the seam lines of the sewn pattern, and
throw themselves into the process of random placement of the needle on
autopilot. Thank you very much,but I think I will get on the other
bus, on this show.
So there you have it. My personal take on the recent, and not so happy
viewing of the state of the art of Machine quilting, as it pertains to
Knox County, Ohio. And once again, I hope that I have not stepped on
any toes here. Or otherwise raised any hackles.

John

I can understand the limitations of money into the overall equation.
But, I do all of the quilting on all of my quilts myself; with a
machine, and proudly so.
1. If I didn't do it, all myself, I wouldn't call it, "My Quilt".
2. If I paid to have it quilted, I wouldn't enter it into a show.
3. I don't like the look of all over quilting on small pieced tops.
4. Number three does not apply to art quilts which are different than
small pieced quilts, and have a different type of piecing pattern than
traditional small pieced pattern quilts, and therefor might be a
candidate for overall machine quilting. I don't make Art Quilts, so I
have no personal experience with that element of the medium. I neither
like or dislike them. They are a different kettle of fish, for me.
Neither better nor worse. Just different. If I ever did do an Art
Quilt, I would certainly consider an all over quilting pattern, if I
thought it would not detract from the design.
*Maybe I am a traditionalist in this regard, but one of the quilts
that I really appreciated *was machine pieced, and hand quilted. The
hand quilting was stitched in the ditch. Now there was somebody that
took hand stitching to another level. She buried the stitches in the
fold of the seam and they were not even seen in some instances. That
takes commitment when it could have been done by machine with no foul..
Except it wouldn't have been hand quilted. Kudo's to her. I wish I
could do the hand stitching, but these old stubby hammer pounded
fingers just won't cooperate. My own personal cross to bear, I guess.

John- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stitching-in-the-ditch is difficult to do by hand, I think. It's just
tough
to push the needle in & out, for me anyway, and still maintain
some degree of consistently small stitches. OTOH, at the same time,
creatively it's the easy way out. No marking, no creative process to
come up with a design that will complement the pattern. Depending
on the pattern, sometimes I think it looks okay. Other patterns, it's
just kind of blah. Some patterns just scream for feathers and wreaths
and cables and loops and .....
I don't see anything wrong with entering a quilt you paid to have
machine
quilted at all. But then I only enter quilt shows for fun and I get a
kick out
of the compliments I get from the people who saw my first horrible
attempts just 4 short years ago. That's the buzz I get from quilt
shows.

Sherry

I agree that some designs call out for feathers, intertwined rope
links, fans, or rosettes. Those sorts of things are long standing
ideal elements of quilt design that are found in the best of quilts.
But, and this is the thing, they are mostly found within the confines
of borders, in large open areas, and other places without any pattern
piecing, underneath them. You wouldn't do a feather pattern on top of
a log cabin square of piecing. You might do it in another area of the
quilt that contains the log cabin pattern, and place the feather, ect,
in the open spaces of the design. If you look at hand quilting as an
example, you never see, or should I say I have never seen, overall
design of random squiggles, done by hand, on top of a pieced pattern
where you would run across the stitching seams of the pieced square,
with that rosette, or fan, or whatever. . That, and only that, is what
this whole dust up is trying to clarify. And once again, anybody who
loves doing that sort of thing, then you have my permission, as if it
was needed, to continue enjoying your chosen style choice. Just don't
expect me to get excited about it, as if that really mattered either.

*John- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You've got me thinking now. This is actually an element of quilting I
don't
have a lot of confidence in my creative abilities. :-)
Since I don't like to stitch in the ditch, on most of the handquilted
ones I
stitch 1/4 line *away* from the seam, then for borders my favorites
are feathers or cables. (I'm thinking this would look weird on a 1
inch log cabin, what do you think?)

The biggest reason for this is that I have never found a method to
mark the
quilt yet and again, don't have the confidence to just wing it without
marking first.
I drug out some antique quilts to have a look yesterday. They're
allover
patterns. Crosshatch seemed to be big, as was Baptist fan pattern. And
some
just tiny stitches in long lines very close together. One "echo" type.
No rosettes there!

I have a quilt top that I was real pleased with but it has been in a
drawer for nearly
a year. Because I'm waffling about what to do about quilting it. If I
take a pic of
it, do you think I could get some suggestions (from all) ?

Sherry

In article
,
John wrote:

If you look at hand quilting as an
example, you never see, or should I say I have never seen, overall
design of random squiggles, done by hand, on top of a pieced pattern
where you would run across the stitching seams of the pieced square,
with that rosette, or fan, or whatever. .


And that would probably be due to the fact that it's more difficult to
hand quilt across seam lines -- a limitation that doesn't exist
(usually) in machine quilting.

--
Sandy in Henderson, near Las Vegas
sw.foster1 (at) gmail (dot) com (remove/change the obvious)
http://www.sandymike.net

On Aug 16, 11:52*pm, Sherry wrote:
snip
Stitching-in-the-ditch is difficult to do by hand, I think. It's just
tough
to push the needle in & out, for me anyway, and still maintain
some degree of consistently small stitches. OTOH, at the same time,
creatively it's the easy way out. No marking, no creative process to
come up with a design that will complement the pattern. Depending
on the pattern, sometimes I think it looks okay. Other patterns, it's
just kind of blah.

Hi Sherry,

Just for the sake of discussion ('cuz I'm learning quite a bit about
quilters, if not quilting, from this one ;-) what about the
(admittedly lesser) creative process of finding/designing a pattern
that will compliment SITD quilting? When we first started quilting,
we began with SITD for the obvious reasons. We found that (agreeing
with you) it's not appropriate for every layout, and (disagreeing) we
had to put a little effort (creative process) into finding/designing
layouts that *did* look good. It may be "quick & dirty", but we
happen to like the "pillowy" effect it produces; it's not trapunto,
but in some cases it can emulate it to a degree, depending on the
piecing. It's also warmer than stitch-dense patterns, as there's more
dead air space (higher "R" value) between top & backing. We've
advanced beyond it in the course of the journey, but since we do
actually like it, I still like to design tops specifically intended
for SITD. ;-)

Doc

John, You started this thread with a disclaimer that you had no intention
of offending anyone. It has been interesting to read through folks thoughts
on
the actual quilting we do.
Looking at your quilts and beautiful woodworking it is very easy to see you
are a perfectionist. I confess I probably take a more slap dash approach
though my work not terrible. LOL Yep, there is room for all of it and we
can enjoy what we do.
Thanks for opening up the discussion.
Taria


I agree that some designs call out for feathers, intertwined rope
links, fans, or rosettes. Those sorts of things are long standing
ideal elements of quilt design that are found in the best of quilts.
But, and this is the thing, they are mostly found within the confines
of borders, in large open areas, and other places without any pattern
piecing, underneath them. You wouldn't do a feather pattern on top of
a log cabin square of piecing. You might do it in another area of the
quilt that contains the log cabin pattern, and place the feather, ect,
in the open spaces of the design. If you look at hand quilting as an
example, you never see, or should I say I have never seen, overall
design of random squiggles, done by hand, on top of a pieced pattern
where you would run across the stitching seams of the pieced square,
with that rosette, or fan, or whatever. . That, and only that, is what
this whole dust up is trying to clarify. And once again, anybody who
loves doing that sort of thing, then you have my permission, as if it
was needed, to continue enjoying your chosen style choice. Just don't
expect me to get excited about it, as if that really mattered either.

John

On Aug 17, 10:33*am, "Taria" wrote:
John, *You started this thread with a disclaimer that you had no intention
of offending anyone.

25+ years on Usenet has taught me that that *usually* means, "A whole
lot of people are likely to be offended by what I'm about to put down,
BUT..." :-)

If John isn't "quilt police", he's most certainly a "quilt snob" (not
that there's anything WRONG with that... :-) Actually, after reading
his last missive on being self-taught by the books he's read, I think
I understand it now. Often, we're strongly influenced by the first
exposure we have on a particular subject, and when seeking out further
information, some folks tend to gravitate toward those that agree with
or build upon the precepts of that first exposure. Other folks get a
lot of different perspectives, decide what they agree with/like
because of the people they are, and build their libraries on those
precepts. I'm not trying to cubbyhole John or imply that either
applies to him - I don't know him that well. However his journey
progressed, it seems apparent to me that the books he's read seem to
be of similar schools of thought (I say that only because I have read
books with differing views, so I know that they're out there.)
There's nothing wrong with any of that either.

I'm not offended by anything here; I'm LMAO at a lot of it. What I'm
getting from John though, whether his intent or not, is: "Do whatever
you like, but if you intend to enter it any show that I'll have any
say about the judging in, either make it *exactly* the way I think
quilts should be made or don't bother entering it, because I'm not
going to brook any of that nonsense." What I'm having trouble
discerning though is his *attitude*; I can't tell if he's sincere
about the way he's putting some things or if he's being facetious.

As I said before, "I had no idea something like this would be such a
big deal..." I can respect John for sticking to his guns (and I'm
really tempted to add, "even if he is completely wrong and talking out
his..." but that would just be my being a horse's patoot again).
Opinions can't be wrong - only different.

Doc

John,

Thanks for bringing up this excellent and pertinent (at least to me)
topic :-).

Due to physical limitations, up to this time I've sent my quilts out
to a professional longarm quilter. Due to financial constraints, I've
only had them do one of the simplest all over patterns. While I have
been delighted with getting a finished quilt, I have also known that
the end result was not optimum. Given the quality of my patchwork,
that did not bother me too much, though this issue was always in the
back of my mind.

Yet, I have not worked in a vacuum. I've taken a glance at a book
called something like, "Quilting Makes the Quilt" at a book store and
that book really demonstrates that the actual quilting can make a
great difference in the final look of the quilt -- dramatically so.
I've also seen beautiful quilting at shows, in magazines and other
books. I bought some of those quilting books, even though it is
unlikely that I'll actually do any quilting, except on small wall
hangings.

I've been seriously considering making a Dear Jane (DJ) or Dear Hannah
(DH) quilt (or some other complex sampler quilt). Quilts like these
need a bigger commitment than quilts that I have made in the past. It
seems to me that if I do make one of these quilts, then it would
deserve more consideration regarding the quilting than I've done in
the past. Given that all of the pieced blocks are different, then
such quilts would ideally have each block quilted separately in a
manner that enhanced that individual block. This would cost
considerably more than the simple, overall quilting designs that I've
previously had done on my quilts and needs to be considered in the
funding of the project.

Please don't get me wrong. I don't mean to imply that simpler pieced
quilts don't also deserve beautiful quilting -- one only needs to
look at some of the gorgeous wholecloth quilts to debunk that :-).
Personally, I find great beauty in wholecloth and simple patchwork
quilts. I only mean that if one puts so much time and effort into the
patchwork side of a quilt, then it would seem a shame to not use the
same level of consideration with the quilting.

Regarding the crossing of seams when quilting, I'm far from an
expert :-) and I tend to break the "rules". I take my quilting
perspective from applique. There are times when applique does not
cross block lines and others in which it does. It all depends upon
the desired effect. If a patchwork quilt's design is best enhanced by
staying within the seam lines wnen quilting -- great. On the other
hand if its design is better enhanced by sewing over seam lines, then
IMHO that's the best way. Given that applique is more pronounced than
a quilt thread, I do think that one would have to be careful in the
way quilting crosses seam lines. I also agree that an overall quilt
design is most probably not the best design for a quilt, but it may be
the quilter's only option at the time due to monetary, time and other
constraints.

BTW, while this is "critcism", it is "constructive criticism". This
is how we improve our work so I want to thank you again for your
comments.

Bev in TX

Oh, yes, I *would* do a feather quilting pattern on a Log Cabin! Imagine a
very subdued Log Cabin block in beautiful neutrals. Then an outrageous
feather quilting pattern- beautifully executed- with tons of detail in a
glorious thread that really stood out... and maybe some yummy beading to
really set off the quilting design. (Now this is a dream- I am not capable
of doing quilting of that caliber!)

The block setting could be the long diagonal rows of color (can't think of
the name of that setting- furrows???) with long curvy feathers down the
length following the diagonal. Or the diamond Barn Raising setting with the
feathers confined to each diamond shaped area. Oh yeah. There's room for
anything and everything in quilting.

But make that Log Cabin in small florals and prints- ugh- no feathers. No
way!

Leslie & The Furbabies in MO.

"John" wrote in message
...
On Aug 16, 11:52 pm, Sherry wrote:
On Aug 15, 2:58 pm, John wrote:



On Aug 15, 1:25 pm, John wrote:

Let me start off with a disclaimer. If any of you are offended by my
observations, then I am sorry. If you derive pleasure from the things
I am commenting on, then go ahead and continue to enjoy them. My
opinions are my own, and "might" coincide with others, or maybe not.
That stated, herein follows a brief recounting of todays visit to the
local yearly quilt show.
Lois and I showed up at the local show and started viewing the
offerings from large bed sized quilts to small wall hangings and items
of apparel. The one thing that struck me, and Lois, was the fact that
the degree of overall quilting by machine was of a singular nature.
This observation applied to about 75% of the quilts. The other 25%
were hand quilted, and this observation does not apply to them. They
were very nicely done.
As to the 75%; I have never seen as large a group of quilts, in my
life, that were done in such a random manner that defied the sewn
seams of the pattern, of the quilt. It is as if the person doing the
quilting, and some of them were "professionally" machine quilted, and
they used that word "professionally", loosely, in my opinion, was
insensitive to the fact that they were crossing over the seams of the
pattern of the quilt on autopilot in an effort to confuse attempted
artistic random loops and squiggles, in the guise of art, and not
respecting the pattern seams as defining elements of the quilt. Now if
this is the new norm and I am completely out of step with State of the
Art Free motion quilting, then so be it, I am out of step. If you look
at the other 25% of the quilts that were hand stitched. they used
overall quilting in the appropriate seam bordered elements of the
pattern and stayed within the confines of the seams and produced a
quilt that respected the pattern design and complimented that with
area quilting which enhanced the overall appearance. Out of probably
35 Machine quilts, I think there were probably 2 or 3 that met the the
above criteria of respecting the seams, and not going over them
randomey, in an attempt to achieve, I don't know what. It is almost as
if people take a class on free motion quilting and then throw away all
the time honored traditions of using quilting and stippling within
area elements that respect the seam lines of the sewn pattern, and
throw themselves into the process of random placement of the needle on
autopilot. Thank you very much,but I think I will get on the other
bus, on this show.
So there you have it. My personal take on the recent, and not so happy
viewing of the state of the art of Machine quilting, as it pertains to
Knox County, Ohio. And once again, I hope that I have not stepped on
any toes here. Or otherwise raised any hackles.

John

I can understand the limitations of money into the overall equation.
But, I do all of the quilting on all of my quilts myself; with a
machine, and proudly so.
1. If I didn't do it, all myself, I wouldn't call it, "My Quilt".
2. If I paid to have it quilted, I wouldn't enter it into a show.
3. I don't like the look of all over quilting on small pieced tops.
4. Number three does not apply to art quilts which are different than
small pieced quilts, and have a different type of piecing pattern than
traditional small pieced pattern quilts, and therefor might be a
candidate for overall machine quilting. I don't make Art Quilts, so I
have no personal experience with that element of the medium. I neither
like or dislike them. They are a different kettle of fish, for me.
Neither better nor worse. Just different. If I ever did do an Art
Quilt, I would certainly consider an all over quilting pattern, if I
thought it would not detract from the design.
Maybe I am a traditionalist in this regard, but one of the quilts
that I really appreciated was machine pieced, and hand quilted. The
hand quilting was stitched in the ditch. Now there was somebody that
took hand stitching to another level. She buried the stitches in the
fold of the seam and they were not even seen in some instances. That
takes commitment when it could have been done by machine with no foul.
Except it wouldn't have been hand quilted. Kudo's to her. I wish I
could do the hand stitching, but these old stubby hammer pounded
fingers just won't cooperate. My own personal cross to bear, I guess.

John- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Stitching-in-the-ditch is difficult to do by hand, I think. It's just
tough
to push the needle in & out, for me anyway, and still maintain
some degree of consistently small stitches. OTOH, at the same time,
creatively it's the easy way out. No marking, no creative process to
come up with a design that will complement the pattern. Depending
on the pattern, sometimes I think it looks okay. Other patterns, it's
just kind of blah. Some patterns just scream for feathers and wreaths
and cables and loops and .....
I don't see anything wrong with entering a quilt you paid to have
machine
quilted at all. But then I only enter quilt shows for fun and I get a
kick out
of the compliments I get from the people who saw my first horrible
attempts just 4 short years ago. That's the buzz I get from quilt
shows.

Sherry

I agree that some designs call out for feathers, intertwined rope
links, fans, or rosettes. Those sorts of things are long standing
ideal elements of quilt design that are found in the best of quilts.
But, and this is the thing, they are mostly found within the confines
of borders, in large open areas, and other places without any pattern
piecing, underneath them. You wouldn't do a feather pattern on top of
a log cabin square of piecing. You might do it in another area of the
quilt that contains the log cabin pattern, and place the feather, ect,
in the open spaces of the design. If you look at hand quilting as an
example, you never see, or should I say I have never seen, overall
design of random squiggles, done by hand, on top of a pieced pattern
where you would run across the stitching seams of the pieced square,
with that rosette, or fan, or whatever. . That, and only that, is what
this whole dust up is trying to clarify. And once again, anybody who
loves doing that sort of thing, then you have my permission, as if it
was needed, to continue enjoying your chosen style choice. Just don't
expect me to get excited about it, as if that really mattered either.

John

On Aug 17, 11:39*am, Bev in TX wrote:
John,

Thanks for bringing up this excellent and pertinent (at least to me)
topic :-).

Due to physical limitations, up to this time I've sent my quilts out
to a professional longarm quilter. *Due to financial constraints, I've
only had them do one of the simplest all over patterns. *While I have
been delighted with getting a finished quilt, I have also known that
the end result was not optimum. *Given the quality of my patchwork,
that did not bother me too much, though this issue was always in the
back of my mind.

Yet, I have not worked in a vacuum. *I've taken a glance at a book
called something like, "Quilting Makes the Quilt" at a book store and
that book really demonstrates that the actual quilting can make a
great difference in the final look of the quilt -- dramatically so.
I've also seen beautiful quilting at shows, in magazines and other
books. *I bought some of those quilting books, even though it is
unlikely that I'll actually do any quilting, except on small wall
hangings.

I've been seriously considering making a Dear Jane (DJ) or Dear Hannah
(DH) quilt (or some other complex sampler quilt). *Quilts like these
need a bigger commitment than quilts that I have made in the past. *It
seems to me that if I do make one of these quilts, then it would
deserve more consideration regarding the quilting than I've done in
the past. *Given that all of the pieced blocks are different, then
such quilts would ideally have each block quilted separately in a
manner that enhanced that individual block. *This would cost
considerably more than the simple, overall quilting designs that I've
previously had done on my quilts and needs to be considered in the
funding of the project.

Please don't get me wrong. *I don't mean to imply that simpler pieced
quilts don't also deserve *beautiful quilting -- one only needs to
look at some of the gorgeous wholecloth quilts to debunk that :-).
Personally, I find great beauty in wholecloth and simple patchwork
quilts. *I only mean that if one puts so much time and effort into the
patchwork side of a quilt, then it would seem a shame to not use the
same level of consideration with the quilting.

Regarding the crossing of seams when quilting, I'm far from an
expert :-) and I tend to break the "rules". *I take my quilting
perspective from applique. *There are times when applique does not
cross block lines and others in which it does. *It all depends upon
the desired effect. *If a patchwork quilt's design is best enhanced by
staying within the seam lines wnen quilting -- great. *On the other
hand if its design is better enhanced by sewing over seam lines, then
IMHO that's the best way. *Given that applique is more pronounced than
a quilt thread, I do think that one would have to be careful in the
way quilting crosses seam lines. *I also agree that an overall quilt
design is most probably not the best design for a quilt, but it may be
the quilter's only option at the time due to monetary, time and other
constraints.

BTW, while this is "critcism", it is "constructive criticism". *This
is how we improve our work so I want to thank you again for your
comments.

Bev in TX

I finally read this thread today and find everyone's opinions very
interesting. FWIW, I tend to lean towards John's outlook. I'm not a
terribly experienced quilter, only quilting for the last 8-10 years.
I guess I would consider myself a 'traditionalist' with respect to
quilting. I machine piece (mostly) and hand quilt only. Most of the
quilts I have made have all been queen or king quilts. Most are very
traditional piecing patterns. My personal preference seems to be
alternating plain blocks with pieced blocks of varying patterns. I
have also done a quite (to me) contemporary 'watercolor' quilt with a
gazillion little seams. Surprisingly, on that quilt I did a very
meandering quilting design over the body of the quilt because it
seemed to call for it. But then, the traditionalist side of me roared
her head and did cables and other typically traditional patterns in
the various borders, all (I thought, at least) very complimentary of
one another. I like the opportunity that the plain/solid blocks give
me to show the actual quilting designs. I find SITD very painful so
have migrated to outline or echo quilting where the blocks are pieced
so as, IMO, not to detract from the piecing but where the quilt
sandwich needs to be held together.

While I've read with great interest the trials and tribulations folks
here have had perfecting their MQ skills, it's just not something I'm
interested in doing. I like handwork of all types and quilting for me
is very relaxing. While I can certainly appreciate a beautifully
machine quilted quilt, I tend to agree that the all over, meandering
type of MQing just does not have as much appeal to me. A MQ'd piece
where the quilting truly enhances the design of the piecing or the
overall quilt is my personal preference. If that makes me one of the
'quilt police' also, so be it.

Kim in NJ

In article ,
"Leslie& The Furbabies in MO." wrote:

Oh, yes, I *would* do a feather quilting pattern on a Log Cabin! Imagine a
very subdued Log Cabin block in beautiful neutrals. Then an outrageous
feather quilting pattern- beautifully executed- with tons of detail in a
glorious thread that really stood out... and maybe some yummy beading to
really set off the quilting design. (Now this is a dream- I am not capable
of doing quilting of that caliber!)

The block setting could be the long diagonal rows of color (can't think of
the name of that setting- furrows???) with long curvy feathers down the
length following the diagonal. Or the diamond Barn Raising setting with the
feathers confined to each diamond shaped area. Oh yeah. There's room for
anything and everything in quilting.

But make that Log Cabin in small florals and prints- ugh- no feathers. No
way!

Leslie & The Furbabies in MO.


That sounds gorgeous, Leslie. Not too terribly long ago, I made a pretty
scrappy (for me G) Northwind quilt. I was completely stumped as to how
to quilt it and finally ended up doing long diagonal rows of feathers in
the entire thing. It turned out really well, and the young couple to
whom I gave it loved it. I think feathers -- a traditional quilting
pattern -- can look beautiful in some very unexpected places.

That said, I don't plan to quilt feathers on the challenge quilt I'm
making for my guild.

--
Sandy in Henderson, near Las Vegas
sw.foster1 (at) gmail (dot) com (remove/change the obvious)
http://www.sandymike.net

On Aug 17, 10:28*am, Sandy wrote:
In article
,

*John wrote:
If you look at hand quilting as an
example, you never see, or should I say I have never seen, overall
design of random squiggles, done by hand, on top of a pieced pattern
where you would run across the stitching seams of the pieced square,
with that rosette, or fan, or whatever. .

And that would probably be due to the fact that it's more difficult to
hand quilt across seam lines -- a limitation that doesn't exist
(usually) in machine quilting.

--
Sandy in Henderson, near Las Vegas
sw.foster1 (at) gmail (dot) com (remove/change the obvious)http://www.sandymike.net

Sandy, I accept that hand quilting across seams is probably more
difficult than across plain cloth and batting. But I am sure that
those people I have seen, that have hand quilted all the seams with
SITD quilting, I will say, that at least for some of those people, it
is not to difficult. But, you are probably right, that is the reason
that most people don't do that who hand quilt today. But along with
that reason for those that hand quilt via the SITD method, and do not
do random stitch pattern, across seam lines, I think that esthetics
play an might play important part in their decision making. My whole
take on this is just because the modern machine allows someone to do
this, with ease, Is not in and of itself, something that should
motivate somebody who is appalled by the finished product, to "Give
her a try". It all boils down to esthetics. Like I said at the first
post, if you like doing it, "git her done" that way. I just won't be
spending any time oohing, and awing over the finished result. Just as
some who do that type of quilting, may quickly pass by my traditional
style. Choices, Ain't they grand?

John