Another cross post from the CAL

Isn't the difference in color in these photos wild? The middle photo is WAY too blue and the others are too gray. Anyway, first a little background: I did decide to use increases along the front to shape the bust area, rather than short rows or increases along the sides. But what then to do with the extra stitches above the bust? I could just leave them; the front of the top would then be slightly wider than the back. I could take the extra stitches into account when I decreased to shape the armholes and/or neck edge, especially if the neckline was a deep U or V--but I was concerned this might give those edges an odd line. Or, I could place decreases directly above the bust, giving what I felt to be the most, how to put it, anatomical shaping possible. The first photo shows my initial attempt at this; unfortunately, I didn't like the way the decreases looked--to my mind, as if someone had snagged a stitch and then yanked on it. (I noticed that Hattie mentioned a similar problem, but with increases, in this post. I had luckily realized that the corded edge at the top of the Dayflower Lace--visible in the left lower corner of the above photo--hid my bust-shaping increases pretty nicely.) Then I thought I would try a different way of decreasing, along several rows instead of one, and also try using some columns of faggoting to hide or camouflage the decreases: see the photo at left. This proved to be difficult to place so that the columns didn't look odd next to the faggoting along the neck and armhole; if I tried to center the decreases over the bust, the faggoting was off center, and the angled neckline made centering the faggoting difficult. In the end, I decided that too much going on in the upper front just detracted from the lace...but I still thought that some vertical openwork columns lined up with the Dayflower repeats might dress up the upper top, so I tried putting them on the back instead. Hmmm...that corded edge is looking a little wavy...do I like it? Or not? (Hint: RIBBIT.)