Here it is with the stabilizer washed off.

I think he likes it…

Kwik Sew 2912 in 4T. This is before washing out the stabilizer on the front.

This has two layers of water soluble on the top and a layer each of solvy sticky and cut away on the bottom.

Colors as follows –
1. C&C Black
2. Sulky Yellow
3. C&C D8-543
4. C&C C9-300A
5. C&C G8-256
6. C&C E7-57A

Jack needed black pants for his holiday program. (He still needs a white shirt and red tie, but that’s another story.) These are no fuss elastic waist pants in a fine wale cord with a flannel lining.

These are Kwik Sew 2918, size 4T. They have a 1 3/8″ allowance for the elastic casing, so I took 1″ off the top of the flannel lining to reduce the bulk there. The colors in the photo are a bit off and I keep crashing GIMP when I try to adjust them. The corduroy is black, and the kitchen island they are laying on is also much darker than it appears.

Now, I have to admit to doing the dumbest thing. I sewed the corduroy into a pair, then sewed the flannel as a pair. I then put them inside each other and proceeded to connect them at the leg hems. Trying turning that back right side out. It doesn’t work. I picked apart one leg hem, then realized that what I really needed to do was take apart the crotch seams on the flannel. That wouldn’t have been too bad had I not sewed those first and then sewed the inseam as one length. Seam ripper, seam ripper…


Note to self – line pants as follows:

Sew outside pants.
Sew each leg of inner layer separately.
Attach inner and outer at leg hem.
Sew crotch of inner layer.
Sew waistband.

Zoe is Mama Snowman in her class holiday play. She is to wear a white top in case it shows when she stands behind the cardboard snowman she’s pretending to be. We’re stretching “white” to include shirts that are white with silver snowflakes. The plan is to dye this after her program’s over as I’ve learned that white is just not a color my children should wear.

Pattern is just a basic top, Ottobre 1/2001, #21, size 128.

I was placing an order for new winter boots for the girly and noticed the fleece neck gaiters. Guessing at the dimensions, I whipped this up.

The cut dimensions were 12.5″x18″, with the stretch along the 18″.

Made one for Alex, too. Cut dimensions 15″x21″, stretching along the 21″. His probably could have been 16.5″ rather than 15″. I ladder stitched the second seam on Alex’s so it could lay flat.

Jack’s is going to be the same dimensions as Alex’s with a snoopy embroidery, I think.

And here they are modeling their new pjs – and hat, from a sweet mama I “know” from an online message board.

This pair is for Zoe’s birthday.

I made these a few weeks ago and am in the process of making another pair. Kwik Sew 3016, size 6 with the length of size 7 in the bottoms and an additional inch in the sleeves.

The embroidery for the top on the second one just finished.

The design is from Bunnycup Embroidery. It’s stabilized with a layer of Sulky Sticky + on the bottom and two layers of Super Solvy water soluble on top. Pink microfleece – cozy for winter.

Embroidery thread and colors:
1 – Coats & Clark 18-460
2 – C&C H8-48A
3 – C&C J8-158
4 – C&C UB-277
5 – C&C G6-38

I’ve tried to figure out how to flatlock fleece on my serger for a while, never achieving much success. After my favorite pair of fleece socks passed the two holes in the bottom mark, I decided I either needed to get it working or buy new socks. I searched online, finding helpful sites telling me to adjust my tension and so on. They all sounded like they knew what they were talking about, but my serger is a BabyLock Imagine. There is no tension to adjust. (Yes, I know I can make some adjustments to the needle tension, but that wasn’t relevant here.)

Once again, I pulled out my trusty manual and carefully followed the instructions for flatlocking. I just couldn’t get the fabric to lay flat. I decided to look at the other stitches. The blanket stitch and ladder stitch looked like possibilities. Would they be strong enough? They are described as decorative stitches and I’m trying to keep a sock together. The blanket stitch instructions involved water soluble stabilizer and more fuss than I wanted, so I went with the ladder stitch first. I’m so glad!

Check it out -

A hot topic of discussion lately on one of the forums I frequent has been JoAnn’s processing of buy one get one free items. It seems they have recently implemented a new computer system where all the lowest priced items are free in a buy one get one scenario. At first glance, this seems like a reasonable process. But, a closer look and one quickly realizes the flaw. If there are only have two items in the transaction, the lower priced item should be the free one. If there are multiple items, the distribution of discounts needs to change. Huh? Here’s an example.

Ann has filled her basket with buttons, which are part of the buy one get one free sale. Gold buttons are $10. Red buttons are $4. Blue buttons are $3. Yellow buttons are $2. Ann picks up two of each, expecting her total to be $19, as follows:
Gold buttons $10
Gold buttons $0
Red buttons $4
Red buttons $0
Blue buttons $3
Blue buttons $0
Yellow buttons $2
Yellow buttons $0

Total —–> $10+$4+$3+$2 = $19

Instead Ann is charged $28 when it is calculated this way:
Gold buttons $10
Gold buttons $10
Red buttons $4
Red buttons $4
Blue buttons $0
Blue buttons $0
Yellow buttons $0
Yellow buttons $0

Total —–> $10+$10+$4+$4 = $28

Ann questions the total and the cashier explains that is how the computer does it, but if she rings each set of buttons separately, Ann’s total will be $19. Of course Ann would prefer to use her $9 to get lunch on the way home from shopping, so the transaction is canceled and rung as four separate transactions. Ann leaves the store, having paid what she expected but is frustrated by her shopping experience.

There are several things wrong with this. (Or, this is why JoAnn should care about this problem.)

1) It’s a terrible customer experience.
You either pay more than you expected or suffer through multiple transactions.

2) It’s an inefficient use of store labor.
Cashiers are either ringing multiple transactions for one customer or ringing returns and new transactions after the original.

3) It’s more expensive to process all those transactions on several levels.
a) Ringing multiple credit card transactions is more expensive for the merchant than single transactions.
b) There is a higher amount of data needing to be transferred/kept on the servers. Even though they are smaller transactions, there are still many more of them and each one has transactional data attached to it.
c) Customers given 5 receipts for 10 items are more likely to lose the receipt they need (one of the five, undoubtedly) and need assistance.
d) see above re: store labor cost inefficiency

4) It distorts the store’s sales numbers. By having so many more transactions, it skews numbers computed about the average per transaction. The average transaction’s sales dollar total goes down, for example. The attachment rate of other products goes down – if Sue buys 10 b-g items and 3 associated items, the cashier rings 5 transactions. The first 4 transactions are only b-g items. The fifth is b-g and 3 other things. So, in quick data analysis, it looks like 4 people came into the store and only bought b-g items.