or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Bespoke Shoes Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Bespoke Shoes Thread - Page 40

post #586 of 625
^Why is the saddle designed that way?
post #587 of 625

Is only for design, there aren't others motivations! :)

post #588 of 625

 

 

 

 

 

For infos, please contact me at: calzoleria.borella@virgilio.it

post #589 of 625
Thread Starter 
Just got these Templemans. The make and finish on these is exceptional.

F0349076-E779-467B-AA71-DD6929424912_zps0njqtbjx.jpg

3067E0A9-6CA5-45E1-9EB1-DDD920B3DC49_zpszuuvq21g.jpg

BEE369C1-BDC9-4977-93FF-81B804165CEF_zpskhxfnfat.jpg

3067E0A9-6CA5-45E1-9EB1-DDD920B3DC49_zpszuuvq21g.jpg

22688574-4E18-4C24-BFB0-B9FECC20162F_zpsbfgb2xuy.jpg
post #590 of 625

Beautiful finish on the welt into the waist on the Templeman's!  I love seeing those, thanks @jerrybrowne

 

I just received these Gravati's I had made, perfect for the casual days. My Camera and lights made the navy suede look much lighter. 

post #591 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntempleman View Post

If you want to make a whole cut Derby for whatever reason - usually to eliminate seams at the waist for waterproofing - then you've got a problem when it comes to cutting the pattern. These pictures should make it easy to see why:
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)


Pretend the split isn't there for a second, and this pattern is all one piece. You'd need a pretty rare breed of calf with a hide that overlaps like that on the facings. The solution is to cut the toe and stitch two bits together.
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)


Then you've got the tongue which offers other problems on styles without a lake
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)


You get around that by attaching extra leather to extend the facings, but that's a story for another time.

Generally a derby is more waterproof than an Oxford, because the tongue that lays under the facings is an extension of the vamp and water can't get inside the shoe as easily as on an Oxford. When the shoemakers of the past wanted to make it more waterproof and remove seams at the shoe/welt junction, they had to get creative and put them on top of the shoe - creating the lake/apron design.

This waterproof element was desirable for work shoes worn outdoors, no one wants their labourers taking time off for trench foot. The canal and railway workers at the time were referred to as "navigational engineers", or "navvies" informally, hence the Lobb term "navvy cut". The perfect fashion statement for the man casually digging 100 mile long trenches across the spine of the country to be filled with water later.

 

Nicholas, my apologies for quoting this post as I know numerous months have elapsed. 

This post I think is really informative and useful. 

I've recently given it some thought though, and pertaining to this design of apron derby. I do notice that there are models in essentially the same design, no seams from the toe / waist down to the heel, made without a split toe. 

How then is this possible, without running into the problem of overlapping facings?

Thanks in advance. 

post #592 of 625
I'd have to see the shoe to know how they did it, there would be a seam somewhere or other.
post #593 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunderMarch View Post

I do notice that there are models in essentially the same design, no seams from the toe / waist down to the heel, made without a split toe. 
How then is this possible, without running into the problem of overlapping facings?

You might be able to overcome the problem by using a very large blocking (crimping) board, which means the leather gets pre shaped and you start cutting the pattern into a three-dimensional piece of leather (not a flat piece on your workbench).
post #594 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengal-stripe View Post

You might be able to overcome the problem by using a very large blocking (crimping) board, which means the leather gets pre shaped and you start cutting the pattern into a three-dimensional piece of leather (not a flat piece on your workbench).

Lots of example of this...such as on some high heeled oxfords or whole cuts...where because of overlapping patterns or simply because it makes sense, blocking can be a good solution.

When we derive a pattern from a last, the whole point is to create a three dimensional construct from a three dimensional form. Blocking may come closer to achieving that than any other method.
post #595 of 625
Thanks guys. @bengal-stripe@DWFII
Not sure if I'm picturing it correctly in my mind, but it does seem like an endeavor like that would require quite a but of effort and skill in itself, and make the process of cutting out the pattern, somewhat more complicated!
post #596 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunderMarch View Post

Thanks guys. @bengal-stripe@DWFII
Not sure if I'm picturing it correctly in my mind, but it does seem like an endeavor like that would require quite a but of effort and skill in itself, and make the process of cutting out the pattern, somewhat more complicated!

In many ways, less complicated.

Maybe some of these will help:


Simplest kind of blocking--backseam full cut and problematic oxfords (from 2007):



Blocked vamp and vamp liner for Jodhpur:



For backseam chelseas:



Good quality, firm English lining kip--for long work (full wellingtons):



Blocking can also be done to facilitate George boots, Derbies with built-in tongues and perhaps the most difficult form of blocking-- for seamless wholecut:



edited for punctuation and clarity
Edited by DWFII - 9/30/16 at 7:48am
post #597 of 625

Thanks @DWFII

Those pictures are very useful.

I'd initially imagined that blocking itself, was a fairly difficult thing to do. 

But if as you mentioned it's significantly less complicated compared to splitting the toe and then round closing it, would the decision to do a split toe and then stitching it together, be primarily (or exclusively) be to cut the leather more "economically" ? 

post #598 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunderMarch View Post

Thanks @DWFII

Those pictures are very useful.
I'd initially imagined that blocking itself, was a fairly difficult thing to do. 
But if as you mentioned it's significantly less complicated compared to splitting the toe and then round closing it, would the decision to do a split toe and then stitching it together, be primarily (or exclusively) be to cut the leather more "economically" ? 

It's a different way of doing things and not necessarily applicable to split-toes. I was commenting on the usefulness of blocking techniques when patterns and situations become problematic. That said, it is an ancient and Traditional approach...not something that is seen much in contemporary shoemaking but not unique to me either.

As for "difficult," I didn't say it wasn't difficult--blocking a front for a full wellington esp. with firm, quality shoe leather (as opposed to soft, drapey garment leather as so many use) is very difficult. Always fraught with danger. And blocking for a seamless full cut oxford is not only difficult, sometimes, with some leathers, it simply cannot be done with any real finesse.

What I said (or meant) in response to your comments, was that the "process of cutting out the pattern" was perhaps less "complicated."
post #599 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post


It's a different way of doing things and not necessarily applicable to split-toes. I was commenting on the usefulness of blocking techniques when patterns and situations become problematic. That said, it is an ancient and Traditional approach...not something that is seen much in contemporary shoemaking but not unique to me either.

As for "difficult," I didn't say it wasn't difficult--blocking a front for a full wellington esp. with firm, quality shoe leather (as opposed to soft, drapey garment leather as so many use) is very difficult. Always fraught with danger. And blocking for a seamless full cut oxford is not only difficult, sometimes, with some leathers, it simply cannot be done with any real finesse.

What I said (or meant) in response to your comments, was that the "process of cutting out the pattern" was perhaps less "complicated."

 

I understand now. Sorry for somewhat mis-interpreting your comments. And once again, thanks for taking the time to explain.

post #600 of 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunderMarch View Post

I understand now. Sorry for somewhat mis-interpreting your comments. And once again, thanks for taking the time to explain.

Yr. Hmb. Svt.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Bespoke Shoes Thread