Pages

14 December 2013

Playing with Celeste

I was lucky enough to win a copy of Frivole's pattern - Celeste in her recent giveaway.  So pretty.

Well I looked and looked at it but just couldn't pluck up the courage to make picot gauges.  I tatted for all those years (pre-internet) without ever using one (because I'd never heard of them!) and couldn't see why I'd need them for regular tatting.  Actually I wonder when gauges were invented - anybody got the answer to that?  

Anyway, the answer to my problem (with apologies to Frivole) was to make the long picots into long beaded picots as they act as a foolproof (well it is an OG tatting it) gauge without the hassle of finding an old credit card to make a 'real' gauge!!!

I think this motif (see below) is stunning.  I'm going to make another with beads in the centre too and more on the outside instead of picots.  Just need BC3 to help me work out the numbers on each shuttle but I'm sure he'll manage that!!  The beads mean that it keeps it's shape very well too - I haven't even pressed this one yet and honestly don't think it really needs to see an iron either!!!!


17 comments:

  1. Looks lovely, I was doing this pattern last night, usually I don't use a gauge and can do picots by eye, but I made a gauge as it's in centimeters and then the fingers would not work around the gauge, but in the end I finished and it looks lovely, I like your idea to use beads on the long picots works better than a gauge. I wonder who did invent gauges we never had them when we learned tatting.
    Margaret

    ReplyDelete
  2. Does look good BC3 well done! As for gauges ... I think they are for those who can't 'measure in their minds'! The only time I've used one the pattern didn't work! Depends a lot on the tatter! Off to see if I've got that pattern too...

    ReplyDelete
  3. wow! - a stunning result. I think picot gauges must have been invented by an engineer, because they like everything to be precise, and there seem to be rather a lot of engineering tatters around. I did tat one motif which demanded their use and it was very effective, and probably worth the effort - but as I didn't enjoy the process, I never bothered again.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is a great idea cause I like to eyeball my size of picot too. I do know that gauges are use with fishing line netting and wonder about tatting gauges from that angle.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great idea with the beads. Looks lovely.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Love your take on this. It's beautiful!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oooh, very shiny with the beads. Picot gauges date back to Riego's time, except she called them "purling pins." I guess they eventually went out of favor until they were discovered again.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Very pretty Jane. How do I obtain the pattern? I did send for a tatting gauge, but rarely use it. When I made JoAnn Engelbreicht's angels I use a gauge for the picots that have to have a ribbon through them. I've made them too long and they look funny. But too small makes it difficult to get a ribbon through.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mad Tatter - I put a link to Frivole's blog on this post. I'm sure it's there somewhere!!! Look at the tabs at the top of the page.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. i DON4T KNOW IF i DARE SAY THIS; iT IS JUST A MATTER OF TASTE; i ADMIRE Jane's work with the beads, but I prefer the original CĂ©leste. Sometimes 'less is more', as I just discovered on my X-mas tree. sometimes, Frivole's patterns have a sophistication, which you don't have to like. But I do. I hope you don't hate me now, Jane,...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oh, Tally Tatty, I had to smile at this. Of COURSE it's a matter of taste but I was really being lazy and hate picot gauges so just thought I'd play with beads!!! Hate? Doesn't come into my vocabulary!!! I smile and move on but you weren't saying something that I would disagree with anyway!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Very clever! I like it with all the beads!

    ReplyDelete
  14. It does have a different look with the beads.

    ReplyDelete