or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Gaziano & Girling Appreciation & Shoe Appreciation Thread (including reviews, purchases, pictures, etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gaziano & Girling Appreciation & Shoe Appreciation Thread (including reviews, purchases, pictures, etc...) - Page 144

post #2146 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son Of Saphir View Post

Why you say that,
why not worth the money?
You regret goiser whole cut you have?

i would never regret my three pair of goyserer stitched shoes. actually, they are "single" in the sense of that goiser is a double stitch per se.

i never liked triple or more rows. especially, when they are wonky in the unfortunate case of luk-cha.

i used three different makers and all did a formidable job in keeping it discreet and also distinctive in the same event.

dinks are of poor quality. at least the ones in the shoe shop in my town. all of their displayed models look cheap and not up to the standards of a handmade product. i doubt that they have the same level of craftmanship than e.g. vass.
post #2147 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpooPoker View Post

Everytime I see Dinkelackers I want a bratwust. confused.gif

this is a very good reflex.

also the schnitzel and sacher torte. enjoy
post #2148 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by NAMOR View Post

392
Wigmores fit perfectly now

interesting. i didnt know you could just yank those off. what exactly is underneath? pics?
post #2149 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

interesting. i didnt know you could just yank those off. what exactly is underneath? pics?

Should be nothing but the footbed. I have yet to run into a heel pad that wasn't removable.

Those Norvagese welt shoes look fucking awful. Especially that tan contrast one.
post #2150 of 21778
yes, but are they not glued or even stitched down? doesnt that make a mess of the heel area, and possibly make it uncomfortable to walk on? also, i find the pad, especially on my better shoes, to add a great deal of comfort to the shoe, which is extra important if you are wearing the shoes all day.
post #2151 of 21778
Rambo be correct but I give Stitch what he like:

392
post #2152 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by fritzl View Post

i would never regret my three pair of goyserer stitched shoes. actually, they are "single" in the sense of that goiser is a double stitch per se.
i never liked triple or more rows. especially, when they are wonky in the unfortunate case of luk-cha.
i used three different makers and all did a formidable job in keeping it discreet and also distinctive in the same event.
dinks are of poor quality. at least the ones in the shoe shop in my town. all of their displayed models look cheap and not up to the standards of a handmade product. i doubt that they have the same level of craftmanship than e.g. vass.

Why craftsmanship cheap?
How is calf they use?

Dink have good shell,
dink have good construction craftsmanship.
Patterns is very basic,
not good traditional pattern like vass.

Me get off topic,
me sorry.
post #2153 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by NAMOR View Post

Rambo be correct but I give Stitch what he like:
392

this looks... strangely sexual
post #2154 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son Of Saphir View Post

Why craftsmanship cheap?
How is calf they use?

calf cheap

craftmanship half assed and shoddy.

why. i dunno.
post #2155 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

I make no claims to being a 'stylish' dresser...the only thing I own that is bespoke is shoes.
But if I might offer this opinion..."style" isn't about ostentatiousness. It isn't about florid or large gestures.
It is about refinement. Subtlety. Nuance. Just coincidentally (or maybe not), those are some of the hallmarks of "elegance" as well.
Anyone can deviate from those standards a little...just as an expression of personality.
But there's a saying in shoemaking that applies here too, I suspect--"enough of these deviations and it adds up to ugly."
[sigh]

I agree in many contexts, but i would also refer you to a post you yourself made a while ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

...
A good deal of this is idiosyncratic...meaning it differs by maker.
Yes, it is largely cosmetic, if that's what you mean. That said, so is a folded edge along the topline, or even a bead. So is a toe cap. So is small, tight neat stitching. So is broguing and gimping. So is antique finishing. Wheeling around the heel seat. "Pricking up" of the welt. None of that has any real functional purpose (although once upon a time there might have been, in some instances).
But just as importantly, it is also an indicator of how skilled and how passionate/committed about shoemaking the maker is.

Personally I find the goyser and bentivegna constructions to be very attractive from photos when done subtly on a casual shoe. Or even ostentatiously.

As long as the proportions match up and the stitching is even and the styling is right, many things can work.

I love those dinkelackers.
post #2156 of 21778
I suppose these goyser and bentivegna constructions arouse the same emotional reactions as tattoos, some people see them as decoration other as mutilation. I can only ever warm to them on work boots myself
post #2157 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by culverwood View Post

Quote:
One stitch go into feather,
two stitch go into side of insole using hook awl (it rare) and take 4 year to learn the skill,
one stitch go through welt to midsole,
one stitch go through welt to midsole to outsole.
Dinkelaker maker very very skilled man and well paid.
They still look horrible though don't they.

Quote:
Originally Posted by culverwood View Post

I suppose these goyser and bentivegna constructions arouse the same emotional reactions as tattoos, some people see them as decoration other as mutilation. I can only ever warm to them on work boots myself


Different strokes for different folks...better than some boring pair of EGs for instance. You need to reach out to a different world methinks FWIW
post #2158 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by culverwood View Post

Quote:
One stitch go into feather,
two stitch go into side of insole using hook awl (it rare) and take 4 year to learn the skill,
one stitch go through welt to midsole,
one stitch go through welt to midsole to outsole.
Dinkelaker maker very very skilled man and well paid.
They still look horrible though don't they.

Quote:
Originally Posted by culverwood View Post

I suppose these goyser and bentivegna constructions arouse the same emotional reactions as tattoos, some people see them as decoration other as mutilation. I can only ever warm to them on work boots myself


Different strokes for different folks...better than some boring pair of EGs for instance. You need to reach out to a different world methinks FWIW

This is a G & G thread so I suspect that the more refined aesthetic is appropriate here.
post #2159 of 21778
Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

I agree in many contexts, but i would also refer you to a post you yourself made a while ago.
Personally I find the goyser and bentivegna constructions to be very attractive from photos when done subtly on a casual shoe. Or even ostentatiously.
As long as the proportions match up and the stitching is even and the styling is right, many things can work.
I love those dinkelackers.

I understand your reservations..and if you like the shoes, so be it. But if you think about it, all the examples I offered in the earlier post are nuanced. Are subtle. There is no contradiction.

To fold the edge...like along the topline rather than expose the raw edge of the leather, is not, strictly speaking, functional--the very same shoe could be made without folding. But it is a refinement. An almost critical one in high end footwear.

Similarly broguing and gimping--the gimping finishes the edge so that the the eye is not confounded by a crudely cut edge. Broguing adds a visual distraction that is marginally attractive. That said, a full brogued shoe would not be considered especially "elegant" or refined by most people.

Pricking up of the welt had a real purpose in another age when leathers were of a different temper. It separated and defined the stitches. Pricking up of the welt still does that, but a shoe could very well be made without pricking up....or more likely just by "fudging" the welt.

But all these techniques are more or less subtle in their effects. Subdued, if you will. They do not draw your eye. You have to look for them. They draw the observant viewer in. They do not scream for attention and make you see them to the exclusion of the shoe itself...as a whole, as a "gestalt," if you like.

Consider how goiser is done...it is comprised of two threads--one closes the inseam, the other is just "woven" in for no apparent reason other than ornamentation. In a sense, it's masquerading as something it's not simply because it's not any more rugged than one thread. It's really just macrame on shoes.

Having said all that, there's a time and a place for even ugly shoes. But I wouldn't call them "stylish."
Edited by DWFII - 12/13/11 at 7:10am
post #2160 of 21778
......
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Gaziano & Girling Appreciation & Shoe Appreciation Thread (including reviews, purchases, pictures, etc...)