There are a slew of wonderful how-to bandweaving videos out there, primarily by weaver Susan Foulkes, who focuses on pick-up style Sami bands. She often uses a special heddle that has extra slots (a Sunna or Sigga heddle) or extra holes (a Beaivi heddle) for pattern threads; however you may also use any rigid heddle or even an inkle loom to create the same type of band. There are a number of great videos on her Youtube channel:
Five Ways of Weaving Narrow Bands:
Weaving Narrow Warp Faced Patterned Bands (This one uses a regular rigid heddle, not one with extra slots or holes):
Wedge weave is a type of weaving style that gives a distinctive look as the “rows” are woven diagonally. According to what I’ve read, this style of weaving may have become less popular as buyers of rugs wanted a straight edge, and this gives a very unusual scalloped edge due to the way the weft pulls against the warp. There are many different ways to use this style, and some weavers drop in a little here and there while others weave this way for the entire project.
Here are some resources on wedge weave, also known as pulled warp:
Here are some image searches from Google (hopefully without the wedge shoes that keep showing up!): wedge weave images.
My little sample, about 4″ x 5″, worked out okay for a first try. I learned how to start and stop threads, add new colors, and carry a pattern. I also found out that the loose threads should be woven back in otherwise they’ll pop through to the front. I have some floats here and there, as I puzzled through how to reverse directions. I wove this on a Goodwood Pocket loom.
On the loom:
And off the loom. I was pleased to see that even with my loose and sloppy weaving, the scalloped edges came through:
Every so often, I think of a weaving technique I'd like to try. One is the Moorman Inlay technique, which creates an embroidery-type patterns woven into a solid background. For a little discussion about it, read these posts on Weavolution. I also found this excellent pamphelt on the Online Digital Archive of Documents on Weaving. Maybe because weaving is still a bit of a fringe craft (get it? fringe craft?), and maybe because I enjoy wandering the aisles of thrift and antique stores searching for weaving treasures from days gone by, I love reading the older documents about weaving:
Finally, the periodicals section lists numerous journals and pamphlets, and sometimes years and years of issues are included. I like seeing how much time is dedicated to the rigid heddle loom in some of these journals. Here's a sampling:
I've been thinking about built-in warping boards ever since I watched the commerical for a Clover loom (available in Japan only). The warping board is shown if you forward to the 1:40 mark. Here's a first try at adapting an expandable clothing rack to create a warping board on the Emilia. I think I could get twice as long of a wap if I zig-zag from side to side instead of go around in a circle. It looks strange, but it worked great.
I spotted this video while looking at Saori weaving videos earlier. It's an infomercial for a rigid heddle-type of loom made by the Clover (Hana-Ami) Company from Japan. I've seen similar rigid heddle looms where the heddle rotates or rocks and looks like a block of wood. What strikes me the most is the efficiency in warping. The loom has a built-in warping board that keeps the warp in place and under tension. It's simply rolled onto the warp bar after the ends are snipped. I wonder if this type of thing could be adapted to other rigid heddle looms. The board/pegs would need to fit in the frame of the loom and also have enough pegs for a decent length of warp. It makes me think!
The Ashford loom company has some wonderful how-to videos on warping a multi-harness table loom. There are three sections: one on winding the warp, the second on transfering it to the loom and using a raddle, and the third on sleying and tying on. I picked up a ton of great tips by watching them.
So, the question is, why would I be watching tutorials on multi-harness table looms? Hmmmm…
Stay tuned for the answer! (And if you're trying to guess, the answer is not an Ashford… )