Tag: buttonhole

In Search of the “Perfect” Buttonhole, Part I

I don’t know about you, but sewing a good-looking buttonhole, without a mistake, seems to be a nearly impossible task.  There are attachments for machines.  Some machines have 4-to-6 step built-in buttonholes.  Sew a buttonhole by hand?  Hmmm.  I’ve been tempted and then reconsider:  it’s not worth the stress (even though there are some great YouTube tutorials I have watched!).

In each of these, something can go wrong.  A perfect buttonhole can be destroyed with a slip of the seam ripper when making the final slash.  Birds nests of thread can collect under what looks like a beauty of a buttonhole.  Stitches can be skipped.

I have a small (compared to some people) collection of sewing machines, ranging from a treadle with a long bobbin (The Free #5), two old Singer handcranks (a back-clamping Lotus 66 and a 99), a Featherweight 222K, a Necchi hiding out in the garage in a horrid French Provincial table), some Kenmores (158.1030, 158.1400, 158 904, 158.19802), a Bernina or two (801S and 930), a Janome 6500, and a Pfaff Passport 3.0 (which I may trade in as it seems to have a few too many quirks).  I also have a Viking 19e, fixed at long last, which was my mother’s machine, and the one I used throughout my school years.  I also have attachments for the treadle, Singers, Kenmores, Berninas, and Janome – anything to make life easier.  Or purportedly easier.  Buttonhole attachments are included in the mix.  And as adjuncts, a coverstitch machine and a serger.

Not all attachments fit all machines.  Most are proprietary.  For instance, did you know that Singers of yore come with rounded corners and Kenmores are squared?  Round pegs – or rounded corners – do not fit in square holes – or squared holes.  And in reverse.  Thus, Singer attachments are not likely to work on a Kenmore, and Kenmores might not work on a Singer or a Bernina – but they might.

For awhile, Singer made slant-needle machines, and must have slant-needle attachments.  Kenmore machines range from low-shank, to high-shank, to super-high-shank.  These might require specific buttonhole attachments or shank adapters.

Let’s not talk about Kenmore buttonholers of some variety – many are proprietary to given machine models, and are not clearly identified.  Did you ever look at all the models than Kenmore made?  Maybe even more models than Singer.

I have 4 Singer buttonholers (gotten cheap off eBay – some for a couple of bucks) and a generic, low-shank one I bought 20 years ago at a local sewing machine store.  That last buttonholer is the easiest to use of all of them, but the old Singers are a lot of fun and do a pretty good job.

A good or great buttonhole attachment or machine function is a gift from the gods.  Imagine making clothes at home on a straight-stitch machine in a few hours – or several – and then spending the same amount of time (I would think) sewing in 12 buttonholes on a shirt or a blouse or a dress. Even if funky and weird, a buttonholer is up there with a washing machine and a paperclip and a safety pin as far as being this side of miraculous.

Whoever invented the automated buttonholer, thank you, thank you, thank you!

Stay tuned for Part II!

Lampshades and Buttonholes

What do these have in common?  Both are useful, both are usually ugly.

Given this, these past few days I have been on the quest for a good buttonhole.  I’ve found that the classic eyelet buttonhole is by far the easiest, and attractive.  Unfortunately it is not going to gracefully accommodate a large button if you are using fine yarn.

I have tried a number of them, and none have pleased me, though some have intrigued me.  The best one, beyond the eyelet, is the “Two Lip” or “Tulip” buttonhole by TechKnitter, a genius in the ranks of the knitting world.  It is a bit of work, but I think I can get it.  It was featured in the Summer 2010 issue of Interweave Knits, and it is presented here by Eunny Jang.

In trying out a number of buttonholes, it becomes pretty obvious what their major failing is:  to complete the buttonhole, you turn your work, creating one extra row of new stitches, over which you then work another row.  The result is lumps and holes, and uneven stitches.  Very, very ugly.

This does not occur with the eyelet, nor the Tulips buttonhole.  The eyelet is straightforward – k2tog, yo – and continue on your merry way.  The Tulips buttonhole requires some wraps, unwraps, fiddling with a crochet hook and a double-pointed needle, but it works.  The upper part of the buttonhole is continued in the same direction as you are originally knitting, adding the stitches by doing a yarn over and making a loop with the crochet hook.  Kind of messy to do initially, but it will get graceful later on.

In sewing, I hated buttonholes so much I would make loops for everything.  I have only made eyelets for sweaters because everything else was so dreadful.  As I am designing a sweater for Josh, an eyelet buttonhole will not accommodate a button an inch in diameter.  Necessity forced me into the search – I’ve ripped the sweater out twice now! – and I hope that I will get it down.  Meanwhile, I plan to practice, practice, practice!