What am I doing wrong?

scottly's picture

This is what Eyelet & Flame Chevron is supposed to look like-

and this is what mine looks like-

I cannot figure out what I'm doing wrong, there is nothing complicated about this pattern - it's just yo's, ssk's and K3tog's.

Here is the chart, can anyone tell what I might be doing wrong?

As you can see my yo's are arching in the wrong direction and my SSK's are lumpy - I hate lumpy SSK's. I've tried slipping both knitwise and slipping the first stitch knitwise and the second purlwise and still lumpy. I don't know - I'm really discouraged.

Comments

Joe-in Wyoming's picture

The previous comments bring

The previous comments bring up all I would've said, Scott. It's a nice pattern as it knit up but I can see why you wanted the Flame Chevron...it is a stunning design and great for socks. -- Books, knitting, cats, fountain pens...Life is Good.

fuzzed's picture

In addition to what's

In addition to what's already been said, you should consider that the knitted blue sample photo was most likely knit from the bottom up. You're knitting a cuff down sock, therefore your knitting is going top down. If you turn your sock around so the knitting is facing bottom up to match the direction of the knitted blue sample photo, the arches will curve in the same directions.

And from the Techknitting Blog, here's her method for a neat left leaning decrease to replace the SSK.

scottly's picture

If that weren't so funny I'd

If that weren't so funny I'd be embarrassed. I didn't even think about the pattern being upside down. Thanks for the link for the left leaning decrease too. I can't wait to try it.

MMario's picture

re: the ssk - have you tried

re: the ssk - have you tried doing k2tog tbl instead?

scottly's picture

For really open lace I

For really open lace I almost always use k2tog tbl instead of an SSK but for something tighter it too looks lumpy. Do you suppose the lumpiness will dissappear after the first washing? Lattering always does.

scottly's picture

OMG, you're right! For the

OMG, you're right! For the benefit of others here's the chart (explication) that V.M. refers to:

I checked for errata for the book that this came from (Vogue's The Ulitmate Sock Book) but didn't come up with anything but you're absolutely correct that published pattern is incorrect.

philvm's picture

Dear Scottly, Good news... I

Dear Scottly,
Good news... I think that you make no mistake...
I think that you respect the explication, but the reference foto (blue) is not the same pattern as the explication....

I think that the correct explication, to get the same effect than the blue photo, is there....
http://knitty.com/ISSUEfall06/PATTserrano.html

GOOD LUCK ;-)