I have always thought of CRAW cubic right angle weave as RAW with 6 sides, 1 bottom, 4 sides, 1 top. However it appears that this with the combination of the thread path used to create these 6 sides is what really constitutes CRAW.
Here are some projects I've done where I do indeed have 6 sides, but I first built a base of RAW, then built the sides and then closed the top. If you have Marcia DeCoster's Beaded Opulence, have a look at Serena.
I have a cube of raw, but I went about it differently. In the case of the fire polish cuff, it is still quite structural, based I suppose on the beads. I also only closed every other group of side beads leaving channels between the rows of cubes.
On the top of Lilliana, I also beaded a base of raw, then the sides, then joined the tops but in every row. This results in a dense (cubic) fabric but it maintains the soft fluid quality of RAW.
So now onto other thread paths. We've been taught not to cross the intersection in RAW, although I have found a use for breaking this rule, but in CRAW (as I have found documented so far) you cross the intersection of your bottom, and put on your new beads in the same direction each time. You then run a thread all the way through your top beads before beginning your next cube.
I made a piece not following this rule, I instead went through a shared side bead and alternated CW and CCW adding the side beads. I also skipped the thread pass through the top beads. I'm happy with the result, although it is very firm, which in this case is what I wanted.
I have quite a bit more experimenting to do before I decide the pros and cons of the different thread paths. I'm thinking a session with white size 8 beads and black thread will help to unravel the mysteries for me.
Have you CRAW'd? Do you have a favorite thread path? Want to contribute to my research? Please leave a comment with your CRAW experiences.
18 comments:
I've found most of the demos for CRAW overcomplicated. It's just hard to explain in words...
But, basically, I'm building a 1 unit of RAW box/cube - base, then the sides. Then, to "close" it up, I weave around to the top and circle through the top 4 beads to close it up.
I've done that method of CRAW to start all of the CRAW projects I've done, and they work out just fine.
I've also thought of it as a 1-unit piece of tubular RAW...then, you just close up the top and bottom :o)
Is that clear as mud? But, I do understand where you're brain is going - after doing so many of your projects, I started out wondering what the big difference was, too...
I have been CRAWing for the past few years now and use the same thread path that I have seen demonstrated by Anna Elizabeth Draeger on a video I saw on the B&B website.
My CRAW experiments have all been with changing bead sizes and making turns. The fluidity of the fabric allows for smooth turns and the ending step of passing through the last top 4 beads to "secure" the CRAW section allow for each turns without the CRAW gaping open.
Maybe I can get Shawn to take a photo for me today of a recent necklace with both changes in bead sizes and turns.
I also have two new ideas rattling around in my beady brain using this stitch. I'm liking the zen of the stitch.
I was baffled by CRAW for a long time, as anything written on a flat piece of paper (or computer screen) that was not in 3-D or video demo - I was completely lost !
I recently did a project with a basic tubular RAW rope. The difference is that it is embellished between the rows. Essentially, it became CRAW.
I did it in the standard tubular RAW format (sharing side beads, not skipping through the bottom intersection).
But it would have been easier to use the Heather Collin video's method of CRAW...
I thought skipping through the intersection was sacrilegious, because its no longer a RIGHT ANGLE...
While I'm still a little confused as to the proper method, I believe with a little more experimenting, either or both have their advantages / disadvantages.
But who could argue with bead play as an experiment! ;)
Hmm I've had so much fun with this stitch too. I started with one of Sabine Lippert's projects.
I resorted to using 6 different bead colours before the six sides made sense! After that I was totally hooked...
I love CRAW - it's so nice and firm; a great structural weave. I tend to do it a bit differently than what I've seen before, though it turns out the same in the end - I lay the piece down on the table, and add a new "box" to the end, finishing the stitch on one side of the rope, the side that is opposite the side laying on the table. It makes it easier for me to see what I'm doing for some reason.
Some of the most intriguing CRAW (and triangular RAW) is done by Huib -- with a unique and easy thread path. Take a look at his Dragon Talons and Wave Length. It's the only way I've seen to do CRAW that's relatively quick! Remind me and I'll show you next week.
Thanks Lisa, can't wait to see you!
And I would have included Huib in my research but he is currently traveling in Europe.
Hey Marcia,
Chris and I both do CRAW different. She has always worked each unit and I have worked top bottom and sides of rows. Her work is more rigid. Although the same amount of thread. I think she is able to keep the tension tighter. (this is a particular skill she has) We both took Huib course this summer. when he was here and we now call it Hubuliar right angle weave. He sneaks around the corner, does not go all the way around to get into postion to add a bead. It is fast and works. The fluidity of the projects fabulous. Adding speed to Chris's beading was mind bogling. She finished his projects all three in a little over a week. They are beautiful and have a wonderful movement.It was hard to do this at first and I still have not returned to this method in my own projects. Rules are made to be boken, right?
Hey Marcia,
Chris and I both do CRAW different. She has always worked each unit and I have worked top bottom and sides of rows. Her work is more rigid. Although the same amount of thread. I think she is able to keep the tension tighter. (this is a particular skill she has) We both took Huib course this summer. when he was here and we now call it Hubuliar right angle weave. He sneaks around the corner, does not go all the way around to get into postion to add a bead. It is fast and works. The fluidity of the projects fabulous. Adding speed to Chris's beading was mind bogling. She finished his projects all three in a little over a week. They are beautiful and have a wonderful movement.It was hard to do this at first and I still have not returned to this method in my own projects. Rules are made to be boken, right?
Can't wait to see the Huibular method, that will make the 5th method I will have seen. Given I understand your method to be like mine, and Chris's to be like the one I usually see illustrated.
I'm terribly old fashioned... it took me forever to get the thread path down, only looking at 2D drawings. I do it the old fashioned way, I think, I CW and CCW all the way through the cube. I start with three raw units, join them, snug up top and bottom, and then begin the process of making the next one, as Heather does in her video - but I use a completely different thread path than she does; the CW and CCW. Takes forever, but I think it holds its shape better - I did try Heather's method, but my path seems to help me keep my tension much more easily, and I'm so used to doing it that way I can't seem to get into the habit of doing it her way. :) (Plus, using the CW CCW you always end up back where you started, with the needle in the same position to go again.)
Thanks Ned, I do it your way. I did look up the David Chatt way yesterday in Valerie Hectors book and it is the Heather way. I will say that it seems to result in a softer more fluid fabric then our way. Or at least mine is quite solid. Good for what I am currently making but I can see the advantage of a more fluid stitch. Is yours fluid?
Hi, Marcia!
Don't know if you remember me, but there I am from Beadfest Philly all those years ago! http://maddesignsbeads.blogspot.com/2009/08/great-young-header.html
I remember asking you if you'd ever done cubic RAW waayy back then, and you'd never heard of it, but you showed me how to layer!
Haha, how styles change fast! I remember thinking of that moment when I first saw CRAW getting frequently published. I first read about it years and years ago in this book:
The Art of Beadwork
It's a little complicated at first but the section in this book covered a lot of different things you can do with it, not to mention some of its history.
:)
Sarah Federman
Which is the same book I just realized you mentioned above! Haha, oops!
I see you have moved on, maybe you will see this. Been a busy week. We do it very similiar except when I do a corner. I find Chris's method is better to keep tension and for changing directions. Because she thinks unit by unit. Huib has a very exciting method for changing directions. He uses a flat base and triangular top. Again easier to transition to if you are thinking one unit at a time. debi
Oh my gosh Sarah, I so totally remember you! You were the first in class to finish...and I did a blog post on you. Nice to see you here! Would love to hear what you've been up to.
Hi Debi, still checking comments....wish I could 'see' your way. I think I've identified about 5 wears now. Someone offered to show me the Huib way next week so I'll compare then.
I just started CRAW and have completely and totally followed Heather's video. I'd sure love to see how you and Nancy Dale do it.
Post a Comment