Originally Posted by Slewfoot
Pliny - thanks for comparing the two! I find the calf leathers used by Vass and the English makers to be quite different as Forex mentioned. The Vass seems smoother while the English seems a bit more grainy. Tough to say which is better although the grains of the English leather definitely seems to lend itself for more antiquing.
I'd say this pair of AS Handgrade is the best example of their calf leather I've seen in pictures. It looks very refined. I think they've only gotten better in this regard which is good to see they are constantly looking to improve.
I too am not a construction expert although I'm sure they're both on a very high level.
cheers Slew, I'm a bit confused about who uses what leather. Some say Vass uses Aniline, English makers use crust. But according to Manton in an earlier post some English makers use crust or semi-crust and some use aniline. In any case I wonder if there really is any relationship between treatment (aniline or crust) and thickness, as forex sugests. Chay told me my HGs are semi-crust.
Manton: 'One of the reasons for that, John Lobb does not like to work with crust leather (as far as I know, they do not use at all. Actually, apart from EG, nobody in England likes to work with the stuff, not even bespoke makers. Unless you know exactly what you'r doing and do it day-in, day-out like EG or Berluti, it is extremely unpredictable. You can make an entire shoe and when you start dying the finished shoe, some fault in the leather, which you had not seen beforehand, suddenly jumps out and your shoe becomes a reject. At G&G they developed a method to pre-dye or pre-wax (can't remember) the uncut skins, hoping that it will show up the irregularities; but, according to Tony: "It's not perfect".
Perhaps Chay and co have been slowly perfecting their work with semi-crust.