Neckline shaping (filet crochet)

I’m working on a cardi. My gauge sts are spot on, but not my rows (patt calls for 8 rows/4 in and I have 11!). Thus, my neckline shaping is working up over a shorter distance. How best to maintain the nice slope but extend the slope over more inches? I thought about doing a row in patt in between the dec row but worry that’ll start looking a bit 'step-py. (If this were knitting it’d be a no brainer…)



Here’s how it currently looks. Just need for that slope to be more gradual.


BTW, if it helps, here are the dec instr:

(Dec Row): Ch1, sk first dc and ch (dec made at neckline), (sc, 2ch) in next dc (count as dc)…then reg mesh patt to end

(Next Row): Work across in mesh patt…end with working last dc in 2nd ch of tch.

Repeat these two rows.


[FONT=“Comic Sans MS”][COLOR="#300090"]What is the pattern and the gauge? You didn’t give the stitches just the rows at 8 row = 4".

If your pattern repeat is ch 2 skip 2, tr in next tr of previous row (or perhaps dc in the dc and ch2 between?) then for a smaller decrease you can add a chain on your turning chain making it a ch 5 turn (ch 4 turn) on your decrease edge. Then at the end of your next row you tr (dc) 2tog first in to the last tr (dc) and then into second chain from last tr (dc) at the end of the prev. row to make a two row dec of one pattern.

Here is a drawing I made using crochet symbols. It shows how the decrease would look over two rows.

Edit to add:

I’ll sketch out the Dec you gave from the pattern. Is the regular mesh * dc, 2ch * across?
Or perhaps it is * 2ch, dc * across? :think:

I can’t seem to sketch the Dec as you gave it… maybe the mesh is * dc, 1ch * repeated? :??


The chain is just dc, ch1 (so a smaller mesh).

Gauge calls for 12 chain sp per 4", and as I noted, that’s exactly what I’m getting. In order to get 8 rows/4" I’d have to have probably done tr instead of the dc.

Per your drawing that’s essentially how the existing decs are being worked but the smaller row gauge is the problem. Being my new row gauge is almost 50% again (reduction) over what the orig called for, inserting the add’l non-dec row seemed like it’d be a possible solution seeing as I don’t know if there’s a way to reduce the physical dec. I’m just skipping the first chain sp. (If I could dec by 1/2 the ch sp that’d help.) Is there a diff dec that’d be preferable?

Jack, thanks for your reply and I appreciate any add’l info. I had to rip back not only for the neckline dec but also for one funky st a few more rows back so I’m in ‘trial and error’ mode.

BTW, my orig shaping left me with 7" of working in filet patt, after decs, to reach shoulder height to match the front. The schematic shows the angle all the way to the shoulder so I have lots of inches to include in the new dec config.

Attached is pic of cardi from the book. The orig calls for a HUGE amt of oversize ease…16-17"…so I’m making a smaller sz…but you can perhaps see that the neckline has a softer slope than mine.

[FONT=“Comic Sans MS”][COLOR="#300090"]Cam,

Here is what I think the dec in the pattern plots out as about one less mesh pattern each dec row.

Here is a plot of my suggestion.

Hope this helps. Crossed Fingers I plotted them out with windows paint brush. Only graphic tool I had at the moment (on this PC).

You may want to go with three row dec. or alternate between the two row dec. that I show above and a three row dec.

– Jack[/COLOR][/FONT]

Here is what I think the dec in the pattern plots out as about one less mesh pattern each dec row.

Yes. In wandering the web, most crochet sites have me just removing an entire ‘block’ of the mesh but that leaves the proverbial step. :frowning:

If I read your suggestion correctly (I do most of my crochet by appearance rather than charts/diagrams) you’d have the return row worked all the way to the dec edge (rather than the last dc worked at an angle into the dec of the prev row?)? Trying to make sense of your depiction. The way I was working it it visually ended up looking like I was losing nearly 2 sqs for each ‘dec’ (altho the sq count didn’t reflect that).

I’ve ripped back and am ready to tackle the decs again so will play around, see if I can get the results I want.

I appreciate all your help. If easier for you to PM, feel free to do so.

Jack, thanks again.