Jul
8
Hand vs. Machine Appliqué: A Timed Experiment
Filed Under Articles, Freezer paper on top, Fusible web, Hand appliqué, Machine appliqué, Needleturn, Patterns | 16 Comments
I wrote this article awhile ago. I couldn’t get a magazine interested in it, so
I publish it for you here, because I think it’s quite an interesting proposition. This was before I learned back-basting.
Hand vs. Machine Appliqué: A Timed Experiment
by Kay Mackenzie
For quite a long time I was a hand appliquér only. But when I started designing appliqué patterns for publication, I turned to machine appliqué as a speedier way of creating second and third examples of the designs. After all, machine appliqué is a lot faster, right?
Somewhere along the way I became curious about how much time I was actually saving. I decided to conduct a personal timed study to compare a hand method and a machine method. I used a block from A Spin in the Garden, a pattern I was designing.
The spinning vine block in the middle
is the one I used.
I’ll begin by briefly describing the two methods I compared:
| HAND Traditional needle-turn using bias tape maker, freezer-paper templates, and a tracing-paper placement overlay. |
MACHINE Raw edge, small machine blanket stitch using paper-backed fusible web and a tracing-paper placement overlay. |
I used the same block and the same fabrics for both methods. I did not time the initial steps that were common to both methods, including selecting fabrics, cutting background squares, finding my glasses, gathering all materials, supplies, and notions, numbering the shapes in placement sequence, and assigning the colors on the pattern.
After organizing my thoughts and the projects, I set to work, watching the clock and recording the time for each step. I did one method all the way through, then the other. Here are my results.
| HAND | Minutes | MACHINE | Minutes |
| Trace pattern quickly onto tracing paper to make placement overlay. | 2 | Trace pattern carefully onto tracing paper with a heavy marker to make placement overlay, also serves as reversed pattern. | 5 |
| Using front of pattern, trace a freezer-paper template for each shape except vine. Cut out templates precisely on drawn lines. | 8 | Using reversed pattern, trace a fusible-web template for each shape, including vine. Cut out templates roughly outside drawn lines. Cut away centers of flower and leaf templates. | 14 |
| Iron templates onto right side of assigned fabrics. | 4 | Iron templates onto wrong side of assigned fabrics. | 7 |
| Cut out shapes, leaving a turn-under margin outside template. Clip notches. | 6 | Cut out shapes on drawn line. | 8 |
| Make vine using bias tape maker. Apply thin strip of fusible to back of vine. Trace vine placement onto background fabric. | 6 | ||
| Clean and oil sewing machine, change presser foot, insert new needle. Wind bobbin for each thread color. Adjust blanket-stitch setting, test stitching. | 8 | ||
| PREPARATION SUBTOTAL | 26 | 42 | |
| Fuse vine in place. Stitch vine. Then, one shape at a time, using placement overlay, remove templates and place, baste, stitch using thread to match each shape. | 160 | All at once, using placement overlay, remove paper backing and place, fuse, stitch using thread to match each shape (all of one color is stitched before changing thread). Pull thread tails to the back, knot, and bury. | 91 |
| TOTAL | 3 hours 6 min | 2 hours 13 min | |
Hand
Machine
Click either block for a close-up.
It was interesting to note that the pre-stitching phase took longer for machine appliqué than for hand appliqué. Cutting out the centers of the fusible web templates is not applicable for freezer-paper templates, and ironing time for fusible web templates is longer than for freezer-paper templates. For hand appliqué, I didn’t need to set up my machine, and I could trace the overlay quickly and with less care, since it was for placement purposes only.
The time savings for machine appliqué showed up in the last stage, where the shapes were placed, secured, and stitched. The grand total difference in time represented about a 30% overall time savings for machine appliqué.
There’s a lot to think about when looking at these time results. You may be faster or slower at any of these steps than I am. There are many ways to appliqué, and you may use differing techniques that are slower or faster within either hand or machine methods.
Also worth noting is that when I first took up machine appliqué, I don’t think I saved any time at all, because I made a lot of mistakes. Forgetting to reverse the pattern, neglecting to remove the centers of the templates, having the fusible come apart from the paper backing before I had a chance to use it, fusing to the right side of the fabric (force of habit from hand appliqué), and probably a few other embarrassing ways to get things wrong — mistakes in machine appliqué are not a time saver! Now I am comfortable and practiced at both methods, and the times noted in this experiment refer to a “clean run.”
Time, of course, is not the only factor for choosing one method over another. Personal enjoyment, skill level, preference for appearance, portability, appropriateness for the chosen project, type of sewing machine, these things and more can come into play when choosing an appliqué method.
I’m so glad I decided to conduct this personal timed study. Now I have learned that when either method is equally appropriate for my project, and time is the deciding factor, I’ll be saving almost a third by using machine appliqué.
I’d love to hear what you think about this! Did I save as much time as you thought I would?
Kay
Quilt Puppy Publications & Designs
Subscribe
