The reason why the thinner 150 den Argentina silk and the thicker 70/2 Colcotton are both listed as 32 w/cm is because when the Argentina was wrapped it flattened and therefore spread out more than the Colcoton did. This happens with any loosely spun thread and will have happened to a lesser extent with the Colcoton too. Another thread which I've listed as 32 w/cm is DMC Cordonnet 100.
Theoretically the Cordonnet 100/6 is much thicker than the Colcoton 70/2 (100/6 = 16.7cc - 70/2 = 35 cc) but the double plying of the Cordonnet means that it's a much firmer and rounder thread which doesn't spread when the wrappings are done as the Colcoton did. The loosely spun threads which spread when they are wrapped will also spread when they are made into lace and so the system of comparing wraps/cm works across all types of thread. Samples of BL made using those three threads on the same pricking should end up much the same size in area but the thickness/depth of the lace will vary. Interesting project; I'm pretty sure I can find some Cordonnet 100 and some of the B&F Argentina silk in my stash but I don't think I have any Colcoton 70/2 now. Brenda On 28 May 2010, at 06:19, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: > My first attempt didn't work well. The thread ("Argentina") is listed in > Brenda's book as the same thickness as Venne Colcotton and I tried it with > Rosalibre. It's actually *much* thinner than the Colcotton. I think it's > too thin for what you want. It's like silk floss (not silk embroidery floss) > in being many (extremely fine) filaments loosely twisted, but it's not as > difficult as other silk flosses I've used. When sewing, a crochet hook can > fail to grab all the filaments with Argentina and with floss. However, I > usually use an "eyes out" or "lazy kate", so that wasn't a big problem. Brenda in Allhallows www.brendapaternoster.me.uk - To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to [email protected]
