When reading a pattern how do you distinguish when someone wants an increase of multiple stitches in a row vs just multiple of the same stich in a row. I feel like it’s instinctual now, and there is is no set rule when I look it up, but I still double guess when I’m writing patterns.
For example, if you were to be doing a granny type stitch, would you write it as:
dc 3, ch 2
3 dc, 2 ch
Some other way - Reply below
0voters
I personally would read them as:
“dc 3, ch 2” = double crochet 3 into the same space, chain two.
“3 dc, 2 ch” = 3 double crochets in a row, two chains
I’m just curious to hear your thoughts on this as it is an increase, but at the same time it’s not necessarily an increase.
I just find it to be a bit awkward to have it stated dc 3 into the next st or ch space every time that it’s needed in granny style crochet.
And for granny stitches I find it difficult to determine if it really is an increase as it’s the style of stitch, like to do the granny style it’s a cluster of three, it’s not necessarily increasing the size, yet it’s increasing the amount of stitches in that particular space.
I think dc inc 3 could still still be found confusing as are you doing 3 dc into the same space, or are you doing inc into the next 3 spaces. - Like if I were to read a pattern I can typically tell what they’re expecting based on the pattern, but when I start to write my own I start to over think it.
If it were other types of stitches, I would of course use inc, but in granny style stitching it doesn’t necessarily feel like it’s increasing.
Sorry for the ramble, I’m just trying to explain my thought process behind it. I do find your reply helpful so thank you.
this is interessant. personally i write smth like “sc 3” as single crochet into each of the next 3 stitches, and “3sc” as an increase stitch, but i did learn 3sc as sc into each of the next 3 stitches lol. i also will use {} to denote stitches worked into the same space. so personally i think i’d write granny stitch as {dc 3}, ch 2 lol. altho i might also do {3dc} but idk… i prefer dc 3 bc it uses it as a verb i guess? lol.
I recently had this discussion with my tester group. Clusters are 100% different than increases since they cluster up int a single stitch, regardless of how many stitches went in to creating a cluster.
I believe that the stitch # is the standard way, but I don’t believe many people understand that intuitively or have learned it. I think it’s good practice to include a small stitch directory in a pattern which will alleviate confusion and also if someone sees enough of a single convention in multiple patterns across designers, they’ll learn the convention.
where I landed after my discussion with my tester group was to try to indicate a shell stitch. I haven’t gotten feedback on the approach yet, but it’s an extra indicator that the pattern is calling for something different rather than having a typo or something. So, now for my dc 3 increases, I will write 3-dc shell. We’ll see how people like it, I suppose.
oh I like that, I might have to try that in some of my new patterns.
I typically include a note above the patterns that says something along the lines of ‘granny stitches are listed as dc 3, these are 3 stitches worked into the next ch space from the hook’
But yes granny clusters are totally different, which is why I don’t believe that inc would be the proper term to use for it.
I’ve usually seen it written as ‘3 sc in same st’ or for granny squares ‘3 dc in same ch sp’. I personally only use the term ‘inc’ if it’s two stitches being worked in the same stitch / space. If you have multiple 3 dc clusters being worked in a row, I would usually write it as ‘(3 dc in same ch sp, ch 2) ×..’ with ‘..’ being however many repetitions you need
This is the standard way to write a granny stitch pattern and is essential for pattern clarity. People need to know “where” to place the stitches. If you don’t state “where” the stitches are to be placed, people will assume that they work the stitches into the top of the previous rounds stitches as normal. Your pictures and written pattern won’t match.
You’re right, it’s not an increase. It’s the stitch pattern/design.
Without any further context to the instructions “dc 3, ch 2” and “3 dc, 2 ch” means the exact same thing. The decision to place the stitch first versus the number first is entirely a personal preference.
The instructions above, regardless of the order, tell the maker to place one stitch into the next 3 stitches and to then chain 2.
One way to signify that a “group” of stitches is to be worked into the same stitch or chain space is to place them into brackets/parenthesis. Such as:
[dc3, ch2]
You would also need to include a note at the beginning of your pattern that tells the maker any instructions within [ ] are to be worked into the same stitch or chain space.
thx! i think i saw it in a pattern and liked it. i also know @/WalktoCrochet uses the same format, although we came up with it independently.
yeah, there’s always variation in how things are written. that’s just how life goes i guess. but yeah!! nice to see someone agrees with me about the verb. :)
