Interesting. Maybe it's the size too, but I have a technical question. Is "Son of Saphir" out there somewhere in the ether? I think he might be the man to help.
I say that because some time ago, he made a comment about the 2>1 "haf" sole arrangement. SoS pointed out that Vass have a certain heel height that doesn't change. It makes sense for either the single or double sole, because it means both sole and heel are raise by the same amount and the shoe is balanced whether single or double: when you add a full extra sole, it automatically adds a layer to the heel too as it runs the length of the shoe
But SoS went on to say that with the "haf" sole, Vass make a perennial error: they put on the double sole and skive it away into the waist. Fine; I love the way that looks and I'd order it. But then, because it doesn't continue all the way into the heel, the heel is now as if it were a single sole, while the sole on the forefoot is double. SoS said they need to add one more sole-thickness layer to the heel when they make a "haf" sole. He also claimed to have corrected this for some customers of his (whoever "he" is; I've no idea).
Son of Saphir, if you're out there, come back and explain better than this if you can. And also, tell me, is this an example of exactly what you said?
It looks to me from the picture that the shoe is too low in the heel - the sole is pointing upwards not just because of the toe, but right from the waist, because the balance of the sole no longer reflects the geometry of the last.
Someone please set me straight if I've got this wrong...won't be the first time or the last*, but I'm fixated on this stuff!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
chogall 
Size is off. Too long or too narrow, metatarsal joint doesnt line up with shoes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
aon 
Vass Old English II Oxblood F Last

(*no pun intended)