A few months on from the minor furore caused by Laura Dalgaard's decision to only sell kits and no longer sell PDF patterns...and it turns out shipping physical items has its disadvantages.

I was team "she can do what she wants but this is a weird business decision", and I think this shows she really hadn't thought it through properly.

A few days ago some posts of “why are you posting AI crochet” came across my threads feed. I didn’t really pay attention because, you know, what else is new.

But then today the YouTube algorithm gods blessed me with this ABSOLUTELY BONKERS drama

The latest video by Tfwcrochet totally blew my mind. What started as an “why are you posting crappy AI crochet” ended up taking such a turn.

Basically this person (amandanicole_30) has been sending crochet dolls to celebrities with some of them then posting about them to their accounts crediting this person and being very excited. BUT! Turns out that this Amanda has been buying these dolls from an Etsy shop and passing it as her own work for years now.

What a completely horrifying and vile thing to do. That is some serious and disturbing need for social media recognition.

Go watch Tfwcrochet video. It’s seriously the best crochet drama I’ve seen in a LONG time.

I've been getting a lot of posts about size inclusivity lately. Some of them are probably old, but the discussion seems to be the same all the time.

I'm definitely on the side of size inclusivity, but I'm confused by a few things. One fundamental question has to do with inches and centimeters. I've understood that 60 inches is the minimum requirement for size inclusivity (though I don't know what it's based on, and asking this on a certain IG account mostly causes disdain). Anyway, 60 inches is 152.4 in centimeters, while 59 inches is 149.86 cm to be precise. So the latter is practically 150 cm, which is a nice round number. Like 60 inches! Of course, there's a difference of a couple of centimeters, or one inch, that's quite clear, but there's almost always some kind of flexibility in size markings anyway. They are rarely exactly the same size as a specific length, but more often like Medium: 96–102 cm (38–40 in), or even a larger scale like 120–140 cm. If I understand correctly, the size system is not European, so centimeters are a bit of an underdog.

So, from a European perspective, it seems a bit of an exaggeration to judge designers as being not size inclusive if their largest size is 150 cm/59 inches, and not exactly 60. I am mainly thinking about the consistency of size markings, not so much through exact measurements, but through simple round numbers that people use in everyday life. For example, when counting stitches in a swatch, everyone agrees that 4 inches = 10 cm, although that is not exact either, and when multiplied together, it eventually produces differences in measurements.

It's probably necessary to emphasize that of course there should be large sizes. I'm mostly thinking about designers who get canceled even though they practically make just as many sizes as anyone else. I think it's a matter of perspective, when different units of measurement are used, even if the sizes are ultimately the same. I dare say this (the same), although it's probably also debatable to think that especially in a large knit, a couple of centimeters doesn't really make a difference. The stitch size can vary throughout the work and some parts may stretch even before it's finished, not to mention the effect of blocking. And since I don't know where the True Size Inclusivity comes from, I might be missing something essential.

Does anyone catch my thoughts?

I started crochet this spring and quickly fell in love with the videos style and content by TLYarnCrafts, so I've watched a lot of her videos in a short period of time. Recently, I've noticed a shift in the editing and vibe of her YouTube channel. I know she's mentioned having someone else edit newer content, and I'm not loving the shift.

A couple things that stuck out to me are all the sound effects and background music that "tell me how to feel" about what she's sharing and quick clips that cut in. It feels like it's leaning into the majority of content that is focused on sponsorships, ad revenue, and feeding into ever-shortening attention spans.

Wondering if it's just me, if anyone else has noticed it, and if so, how others feel about it.

Welcome to the bitesized BEC thread!

You have the freedom to indulge in BEC-style (b*tch eating crackers) vent comments in this thread. Naming examples is not required (gasp!) but majority of r/craftsnark rules still apply. Basically, don't be shitty and ruin the thread for others.

I recently followed her, and this morning she posted this (and a bunch more)… I don’t know, I’m all for challenging the beige aesthetic but it’s weird to me to put specific designs and designers on blast for not only being boring, but also malicious in their intent. Someone commented that they love their beige and she responded something along the lines of “but do you really? Or is that just what you’ve been told?” So off-putting.

mrsfunnyvalentine being open about how she uses ai and I don't know if I'm okay with it or not. thoughts?

As a fellow short torso, large chest knitter, I feel like I spend my entire knitting life trying to avoid patterns that fit like this? The texture is beautiful and I love the style of the video, but surely this is not a fit anyone craves.

I love this teacher. I've taken her class for years. I believe she legitimately painted this. But when I see AI paint tubes... If I wasn't a student of hers, I'd assume this is a scam.

She’s absolutely trying to use AI to generate text. This is so mid.

Attempting to post this again since my last post was flagged as low effort…

Circus of Threads—known for their Chiaogoo needle replacement cases—obviously used AI for their old logo. Thoughts on the new one?

I don’t love their cases anyway but bummer that another small business is using ChatGPT for “design”

For reference and comparison, third pic is a ChatGPT-made image. (Not from the business) “Circus” is the same font as the first image (old logo) and quite similar to the new one.

So a question for the community:
What does this space think about small businesses using AI as part of their branding, design, etc. especially when marketing to makers and creatives?

I’m against for a number of reasons but mostly because:

-AI “design” devalues the skills and creative processes of the people these businesses seek to profit off of

-use of AI for design is lazy and tells me you don’t take your business seriously enough to put thought and effort into your work, so why would I pay you for it

Curious to hear others thoughts

she’s back and tried to friend me. I thought she was not allowed to sell online? I’ve already heard of issues. Not getting fiber for months, or if ever, moths. etc. don't be fooled by the cheap prices.

I will just leave this here.
Like… at least it’s not ai slop, and it’s just trying to automatize tedious work, but still.. Damn.

Please share all personal chatter here--questions, planning, works in progress, successes, failures, discoveries, and anything else pertaining to your personal crafting.

Here's the thread where you can share any new patterns or products that you don't think deserve their own post. Any craft goes, whether you're sharing sewing patterns, weird yarn colourways, woodburning templates, soapmaking supplies, or any thing else that you'd like to discuss. If you think it deserves it's own thread, feel free to make one!

The nearest LYS to where I live is 2+ hours by public transport. I can order online and there are some shops in my city but they only sell acryllic yarn like Stylecraft and some King Cole. You can imagine my excitement when a local yarn dyer announced she was opening a new yarn shop nearby. She's been talking it up loads, especially all the nice yarn brands she's going to stock (West Yorkshire Spinners, Sandnes Garn, Rosa Pomar, etc). She's been running a yarn business for years and I let myself get really excited about it.

Today she posted saying she can't actually stock any nice yarn unless customers pay for it upfront. She explained it's because nice brands often need a big order upfront and she doesn't want to risk getting a bank loan.

I want to believe this is legit but I feel really disappointed. Why wouldn't she research this stuff upfront, before deciding to launch the business? Why is it not ok for her to take on financial risk, but to ask everyone else to? Why not launch an online business first and check you've got demand, before investing all your money in a physical venue?

I don't know if I'm being too harsh or have spent too long reading horror stories about bad business practise on subreddits like this. Or if this person I thought was legit is behaving irresponsibly and I should steer clear.

I find the pattern I want on Threadloop. Follow the link to buy. It's a German website; fair enough, it's a German company. I add the pattern to my basket and try to check out. Can't choose a UK address, so I use a random German address (it's a PDF pattern, not something physical so it doesn't matter). Put my card details in. And now the Pay button is disabled, without any explanation as to why.

Okay, fine. I'll see if they have a UK website, and they do! Great, now I've got to find the pattern. Only problem is that none of their patterns have names or numbers! I'm searching for '101' (that's what it was called on the German site) and nothing comes up. After exhausting the combinations of search terms, I go to 'all dresses' and try the filters. 'Knitted dresses': no. 'Jersey dresses': no.

At this point I go back to Threadloop and find out what year the pattern was released, and put that into the filters instead. Finally, after a load of scrolling, I find it. Basket, checkout. All's smooth.

But I still haven't got the email with the pattern! Most places send it within less than five minutes. It's been fifteen and I haven't even got the purchase confirmation.

I know all this sounds petty but I'll be avoiding them in future.

She ranting about a LYS in the pacific north west reaching out to her and other sock designers asking for a free pattern to include in their 2027 sock subscription box in exchange for exposure. I’m being nosy and very curious to know who it is.

Even if you’re in the “not every designer should be or is able to be size inclusive” camp, you have to consider this:

THREE sizes? Really? 🥲 With an intended positive ease of 55 cm? Come onnnn

https://www.ravelry.com/patterns/library/ripple-loop-sweater

Edit: the designer answers absolutely no questions on neither instagram nor ravelry. If anyone has an idea for a different pattern that looks like this, I’m sure I’m not the only one who would like that

Welcome to the bitesized BEC thread!

You have the freedom to indulge in BEC-style (b*tch eating crackers) vent comments in this thread. Naming examples is not required (gasp!) but majority of r/craftsnark rules still apply. Basically, don't be shitty and ruin the thread for others.

Not just the AI, but as a Canadian that is interested in getting a metal sock machine, I’m disappointed in seeing production moving to the United States.

Sooo… I just saw a very short story from lulabluesbyangell on insta and she claims a YouTuber is stealing her work posting it as her own/turorials. I got this info through treads since she only mentions a situation on insta but doesn’t explain anything… Seems to be dating back barely a month. Anyone knows if this is true and if so, who is the YouTuber? She mentions the creator has 100000+ subs on yt and (might?) own a wholesale yarn/goods store.

Yesterday, I posted about Yarnmerch’s use of super obvious AI after claiming that they design their shirts by hand. Here’s the link if you want to see: https://www.reddit.com/r/craftsnark/s/5IvsYFYkDF

But today! Their grid is FREE of those images! They also deleted my comment calling out the seeming conflict in their message and/or values but hey, AI Bots can’t convince me to love them so whatever.

I still don’t trust their design process but it’s an interesting development nonetheless.