ABoK#1019, and ABoK#1019 "doubled"

[X1]

   See the attached pictures for a loop that "looks" like the Double Dragon, but it is a very different animal ! In its "Single" form, where the double coil around its neck is replaced by a single turn, it is identical to the ABoK#1019 - an "Eskimo" bowstring loop, also called "Weaver s loop", because the size of the eye on the loom can easily be adjusted. Of course, the "doubled" version loses this function, so I do not know if it has any other useful property that is not already included in the " Double Dragon". However, the original single ABoK#1019 may be more stable than the Single Dragon (?).The issue demands a further study.
   The Double ABoK1019 can also considered as a doubled ABoK#1045. Both, the ABoK#1019 and the ABoK1045, as many other loops presented by Ashley, are based on a nipping overhand knot ( or a nipping fig.8 knot ) tied on the Standing part, so, just like the Perfection Loop, they are not post-eye-tiable (PET), but they are tiable-in-the-bight (TIB). However, the Doubled version of them shown at the attached pictures is not - because the TIB doubled versions of the ABoK#1019 and the ABoK#1045 are either unstable or ugly knots ! 

[roo]

... image of a tightened knot is always preferable from a set of instructions that describe a sequence of (local) moves you have to follow to tie it[/u].

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it before, but you have tons of images of knots that are snugged so tight that it is impossible to tell what is going on. 

EDIT:  I see that you've updated your images.

[SS369]

... image of a tightened knot is always preferable from a set of instructions that describe a sequence of (local) moves you have to follow to tie it[/u].

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it before, but you have tons of images of knots that are snugged so tight that it is impossible to tell what is going on.

To date I have had no challenges with any of X1's pictures. I welcome them and more.
I feel reasonably sure that if you or anyone else makes the effort to request a looser view of some knot, there might just come one available, by someone.

With the multiple views offered I can plainly see the path of the rope taken.

SS

[X1]

   If we have a "back" and a "front" view of a simple knot ( and all the practical knots are simple, by definition ), we can follow the paths of the segments of the rope inside the knot s nub quite easily.  Also, the tightened knot is a more accurate representation of the real thing : it reveals rather than hides many important things about the structure of the knot and the distribution of tensile forces inside it, that are concealed in the image of a loose knot !
   In most pictures of the "new" knots I had presented in this Forum I have used two different ropes, of about the same diameter and stiffness, but of different colour. I have also shown more than two views, B&W or pencil-sketch pictures, inverted colour pictures, exploded knots, tying diagrams, and even KnotMaker diagrams, but I have not noticed any difference in the interest of people - which is almost null...   This lack of interest should be due to the low quality of the pictures, or the low quality of the knots shown in the pictures. I do not believe that the pictures are of such a low quality, therefore I have to conclude that....    
   Anyway, I think that an interested knot tyer would enjoy the game of "deciphering" a picture of a knot - and  even if he would tie it wrongly, there is always the possibility he will discover a new knot, better than the one he missed !     

[Dan_Lehman]

... it reveals rather than hides many important things about the structure of the knot and
the distribution of tensile forces inside it, that are concealed in the image of a loose knot !

It might reveal that, and lose the other; of course, one
can do both.  And in seeing THIS knot loosened, one might
begin to conceive of methods of formation, using or not,
the tail, and so on.

... enjoy the game of "deciphering" a picture of a knot
--and  even if he would tie it wrongly, there is always the possibility
he will discover a new knot, better than the one he missed ! 

This is my recipe for being overwhelmed with novelty :
make one initial complicated knot, and then go *wrong*
repeated on trying to replicate it!

More seriously : one sometimes can get to interesting
places even being aware of going astray from the actual
knot viewed, thinking "What if that part were to join
here instead of there ...?"  I discovered a single bowline
in the bight with a novel both-eye-legs-make-loops form,
this way, from a bowline w/extended tail tucking.


--dl*
====

[X1]

being overwhelmed with novelty

   Even is, initially, it seems that, this way, any initial complexity will be multiplied, the opposite is true : At the end, novelty will make anything that was existing only in the world of (unknown) ideas, to materialize, and when this happens, all the new things are been sorted out according to their inherent truth. Novelty is never overwhelming, it is revealing the truth, and revelation helps us discard the redundant multiplicity in favour of the essential (but seldom self-evident)underlying unity.
  In sort : the more new knots I tie, the KnotLand of all the possible knots seems smaller than I had anticipated !    Rather than be lost by/into novelty, one can find his way through it, leading to the ever sought deeper unity.
 

one sometimes can get to interesting places even being aware of going astray from the actual knot viewed, thinking "What if that part were to join here instead of there ...?"  I discovered a single bowline in the bight with a novel both-eye-legs-make-loops form,

   I am afraid that I, for one, would need to have more hints to decipher that riddle !