I agree, I would not give any extra twists to the passives. Sent from my iPad
> On Oct 26, 2014, at 11:15 AM, David C COLLYER <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Clay, >> >> However, I have found that in Binche, when I have long stretches of >> half-stitch, punctuated by gimps, the more pressing need is to be certain >> that the same bobbin is leading through all of this, so that giant holes >> don't appear when tensioning "downstream", so to speak. In cases like this, >> I may even add two twists. > > I fully agree with all you wrote. However, if you imagine a large leaf with a > gimp or pair of gimps acting as the vein, it is a passive pair passing from > one side to the other, so the leading bobbin is unaffected. It is this > passive pair which I am wondering was given a twist as it passed through the > gimp. > > Actually I've found it doesn't make a whole lot of difference, except that I > reckon the work just looks better if I don't twist it. That way both threads > in the passive pair will keep going in their original direction. There are no > great holes because of the gimp and the leading bobbin going round a pin. > > Gosh it's far easier just to DO it than try and talk about it in mere words!! > :) > David in Ballarat, AUS > > - To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to [email protected]. Photo site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lacemaker/sets/
