[sweater.alpaca]

[wispfox]

I am immensely fond of the alpaca sweater I'm currently wearing, even if it does still have the itchy aspect I associate with all animal fur clothing.

Warm and soft and snuggly, yes.

And it has a very mild scent which apparently reminds me of my aunt on my mother's side of the family. But from a while ago, when I was a kid.

I wonder if I can manage to find _non_ itchy alpaca sweathers? My alpaca bunny isn't itchy... (but has sharp pointy teeth, courtesy of aelisdeliria.

Comments

[signsoflife.livejournal.com]

baby alpaca and undyed alpaca yarn are both less "itchy" than regular alpaca (which as I assume you've noticed is less itchy than lambswool.) Alpaca is actually a hair, not a wool, and so doesn't have the microscopic scales that sheepswool has to hold it together. . . and abrade the skin. It's also lanolin-free. Sheepswool has superior tensile strength and elasticity, and water-repellent properties, but alpaca is warmer.

The treatments the fiber is put through to make it take dye rough up the surface of the fiber somewhat. I've only seen it sold in the yarn (or in pre-yarn stages), not in finished garments -- but I don't know if you or someone who really likes you knits.

[wispfox.livejournal.com]

The treatments the fiber is put through to make it take dye rough up the surface of the fiber somewhat.

Ooooooh. That might be why! Noted.

I've got both a baby alpaca sweater and a couple non, and I don't remember there being a major difference in feel. But I don't have any _nondyed_ baby alpaca sweaters. Thank you!

I do not knit, but I know some people who do. Not sure if I know any people who do well enough to get them to make me something, though. ;)

Nifty bits of information, thank you!

I've also had cashmere suggested to me as less itchy (or perhaps not itchy), but have not yet investigated it. Any thoughts on that?

[signsoflife.livejournal.com]

I know very little about cashmere.

[sarahshevett.livejournal.com]

Actually, alpaca is considered wool. If you are using the microscopic qualities to define "wool",
here's (http://www.gateway-alpacas.com/images/fiberstrand.jpg)a microscopic drawing of alpaca

The differences between what is considered "hair" and what is considered "wool" are not defined.

"Basically terms such as 'wool' are all just types of hair which differ in
their feel, density, length and so on, but are still all hairs. The whole
hairy coat or 'pelage' of a mammal (like the term 'plumage' in birds)
therefore usually consists of two main layers and is known as fur. The
bottom layer (underfur) consists of wool hairs which tend to be shorter,
more numerous, flattened and curly. The top layer is made of 'guard hairs'
which are longer with cylindrical straight shafts and stick out through
the woolly underfur. These are what you see in most mammals and bear most
of the pigmentation.

So, there are physical differences, but no real scientific difference
between them as such as 'hair' is the catch-all term. However, there are
of course also specialised hairs which serve particular functions such as
vibrissae (whiskers) which are sensory."


Also, a good description, from Encarta, can be found <"a href="http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761560402/Wool.html#p1"> here.