or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Hand lasted vs machine lasted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hand lasted vs machine lasted - Page 18

post #256 of 294
I too must apologize, having stayed out of this thread entirely. But Vox has done a good job playing me, arguing the very un-SF point that quality improvements and artisinal handwork are largely irrelevant if they don't have a practical, measurable impact on an item's use and lifespan.

I take DWF's point, but, in the end, conclude I still come out ahead if I must replace five $500 EGs to obtain the period of service from one entirely handmade $5,000 shoe.

Somehow, though, I doubt the gemming failure rate is that high.
post #257 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by furo View Post
+1

I love how the morality of factory shoes has popped into the mix.

By the way, here's a few pics of a local boot factory that I walked through, which typically has 20 or so workers in it:

(pics courtesy of jbhilltexas.com)













So there's your factory shoe (boot in this case).

So tell me, DW and agoelesina, what corners are being cut? ....Since of course, you've been to every shoe/boot factory, know every worker, and can speak for them, including their thoughts at any given moment.

Nice, double row of wood pegs (probably lemon). I prefer an extra layer of leather and a rubber top lift instead of the trad. 1/2 heel.
post #258 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by agoelesina View Post
...PS. (hang on to your artisans tightly in this forum)
Thanks for your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post
Quolis artifex pereo...
Being a childish jerk is an art too, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocHolliday View Post
I too must apologize, having stayed out of this thread entirely. But Vox has done a good job playing me, arguing the very un-SF point that quality improvements and artisinal handwork are largely irrelevant if they don't have a practical, measurable impact on an item's use and lifespan. I take DWF's point, but, in the end, conclude I still come out ahead if I must replace five $500 EGs to obtain the period of service from one entirely handmade $5,000 shoe. Somehow, though, I doubt the gemming failure rate is that high.
What would you say to a $1,000 handmade shoe? Or a $400 one?
post #259 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post
I've done a large variety of metal fabrication and wood working projects, I've done things strictly by hand and have also used manually operated and computer operated machinery to complete similar tasks.

With some things there is a dramatic difference between hand and machine, with others there is really no need to elongate the process simply for no other reason then to have it done by hand. In fact in many cases manually operated machinery does a much better job then doing it similarly by hand, with much better consistency.

I propose that a combination of hand performed operations and manually operated machinery is going to be more consistently accurate and produce a better product than those done completely and entirely by hand and simple tooling. When applied to shoe making I'm sure that many of the hand-grade production operations narrow down that to the tasks to those that require the operation to be performed by hand, and I dont consider it a masquerade for doing so.

This post is just sheer silliness. I am a word worker here me roar. Please entertain us with a rendition of these boots are made for walking when you get a moment.
post #260 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by furo View Post
^^^ The sarcasm is getting pretty thick in this thread.

I've seen hand lasting done in a factory now, and I'm sure that when it comes to machine vs hand lasting, it will always come down to the skill of the man and the accuracy of the machine. I'm guessing the best hand-laster out there can do just as good or better than the best lasting machine. But in all honesty, how can one judge the quality of a hand lasted shoe? Just the fact that it's been done this way does not speak anything about its quality.

The basis for these guesses is what?? Look machines build things that are really complex like Lunar excursion modules--and they did this over 50 years ago. Hand lasting is wonderful, but how many handlasters today really know what they are doing and can do it nearly as repeatable as a machine. More silliness.
post #261 of 294
[quote=George;2993960]
Also, what people forget or overlook through ignorance of manufacturing processes is that in some cases it takes skill to use a machine, they often need careful setting up by the operator. Ask any machinist or tool maker in a machine shop.

QUOTE]

8, 10, 15 whatever number of pages of silliness and so little sense. This is good. You know some folks considerred the wheel a machine, maybe that's where it all went wrong. Wooden shoes carved with boyscout knives.
post #262 of 294
This is the most inane and useless thread I have ever seen. This artiticial conflict between men and machines can only be debated by those that do not understand 1) what modern manufacturing machines are capable of and 2) how shoes are actually made. In an era where so few have ever stepped foot into a manufacturing operation, I am not suprised. The beauty of hand made shoes is that they are hand made--they are creations of the mind of the maker, the craftsmen. Those craftsmen cannot compete with the perfection that a machine can create. To discuss these things in threads likes this is to debase both the craftsman and the maker of the machine--who is also a craftsman.
post #263 of 294
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burton View Post
This is the most inane and useless thread I have ever seen.
You're probably right (although let me be clear that I cannot, am not, and will never claim to know all the threads that you, or anyone else, have ever seen. Thread-seeing is also not my profession so I don't have a legitimate perspective on it). I therefore add to the crescendo of apologies, in my case for starting the thread - I should have known better. I have learned one thing from this fabulous discussion though. I'm now fairly convinced that when anyone starts a thread about shoe construction on SF, God tears the heart out of a baby penguin.
post #264 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post
I don't know whether this will come too late or be seen as too little...

But I want to apologize to the whole forum for my part in what has turned into a nasty discussion. I don't feel that my remarks provided the major impulse for this turn of events but I can't escape some responsibility. I don't like being attacked personally and I have been known to become somewhat intemperate when that happens. But it is a response not an assault...and in that context it is understandable, I think--anyone has the right to defend themselves.

I have tried to be objective about the issues I address. I understand that some people feel far more attached to their shoes than I can begin to understand. To me...from my point of view...this is simply incomprehensible--it's not like I'm kicking someone's dog or smacking their children. A consumer, no matter how poorly informed, is not responsible for the quality (good or bad) of their shoe. Shoes are objects, and boughten objects at that with no intrinsic emotional connection to their owners.

Enough...I don't intend to revive this debate...in fact I am, as of this moment, unsubscribed.

For those who want an apology from me...nothing is easier. Although I stand behind the observations and the POV of everything I have said, I apologize for not recognizing the attachments and the sense personal investment some have in their shoes. I apologize for any offense I might have given. I apologize for the discomfort my remarks have caused.

I am sorry to see the way a reasonable, relatively objective, and edifying discussion has degenerated. Yet I think I have learned something even in the midst of all the white-noise.

In fact, I'm going to go out and buy a bottle of blended Scotch and a poly-viscose suit just so I can get a sense of what I've been missing.

Tioraidh

Me very sorry to hear this.
You very good.
Me glad you give up here,
they suck you life out.

Quote:
I am sorry to see the way a reasonable, relatively objective, and edifying discussion has degenerated.
Yes,
me very wild with fights here.
The attack on you wild me,
alot.
post #265 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tidybeard View Post
I have learned one thing from this fabulous discussion though. I'm now fairly convinced that when anyone starts a thread about shoe construction on SF, God tears the heart out of a baby penguin.
By hand? Or with a machine?
post #266 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by emptym View Post
Being a childish jerk is an art too, no?
Hey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Son Of Saphir View Post
Me very sorry to hear this.
You very good.
Me glad you give up here,
they suck you life out.


Yes,
me very wild with fights here.
The attack on you wild me,
alot.
Son of hws/ed?
post #267 of 294
I just got an email that made me think I needed to clarify something (if someone goes to that much trouble...). I am not withdrawing from StyleForum. I unsubscribed from this thread because it was turning nasty and being dominated by people who, in all 18 pages, haven't contributed one tittle of knowledge or wisdom or germane perspective to the discussion. I've seen this before on StyleForum in almost every thread--there's a cabal of people here whose sole raison d'etre is to make themselves look good at the expense of others and for whom objectivity and truth and simple courtesy are beside-the-point. And generally speaking it is the same mob...across the board...over and over again. It doesn't bother me to the extent that I feel particularly put upon. I'm not that vain. Such people are everywhere (although admittedly the Internet and forums in particular seem to be their natural stalking grounds) but I don't have any desire to get into prolonged squabbles with them. Such discussion almost inevitably go nowhere and generally end up badly. Even when everyone else withdraws the feeding frenzy goes on simple because the whole attraction for such people is the adrenaline rush...the mud wrestling. I came on StyleForum to offer a perspective that is not common here (or among the general populace, for that matter) and insights that may or may not be unique if only because they are firsthand--not second or thirdhand...nor yet unfounded speculation. For that very reason--for those who are interested and want to know more--I intend to remain engaged here. Sorry to disappoint.
post #268 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burton View Post
This post is just sheer silliness. I am a word worker here me roar. Please entertain us with a rendition of these boots are made for walking when you get a moment.

Point taken.
post #269 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burton View Post
This is the most inane and useless thread I have ever seen. This artiticial conflict between men and machines can only be debated by those that do not understand 1) what modern manufacturing machines are capable of and 2) how shoes are actually made. In an era where so few have ever stepped foot into a manufacturing operation, I am not suprised. The beauty of hand made shoes is that they are hand made--they are creations of the mind of the maker, the craftsmen. Those craftsmen cannot compete with the perfection that a machine can create. To discuss these things in threads likes this is to debase both the craftsman and the maker of the machine--who is also a craftsman.

This is more or less what I've been saying, no?
post #270 of 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by apropos View Post
By hand? Or with a machine?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Hand lasted vs machine lasted