or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Saint Crispin shoes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Saint Crispin shoes - Page 2

post #16 of 47
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimelessRider,08 Nov. 2004, 7:02
Did they include any kind of sizing chart?  If so, would you mind sharing?  
I also sent e-mail to Herr Rollig to ask a bunch of my typical pesky questions and to point him to this topic (his response: "Now it becomes clear why we have so many requests from individuals lately."). Here's the sizing chart:
Quote:
US\tEUROPE\tU.K. 3\t35\t   3.5\t36\t   4\t36.5\t   4.5\t37\t   5\t38\t   5.5\t38.5\t   6\t39\t5.5 6.5\t39.5\t6 7\t40\t6.5 7.5\t41\t7 8\t41.5\t7.5 8.5\t42\t8 9\t43\t8.5 9.5\t43.5\t9 10\t44\t9.5 10.5\t44.5\t10 11\t45\t10.5 11.5\t46\t11 12\t46.5\t11.5 12.5\t47\t12 13\t48\t12.5 14\t49\t13.5 15\t50\t14.5 S.C. Fit. E ½ \t= approx.\tEngl. Fit. D\t\t(rather narrow to standard) S.C. Fit. F ½ \t= approx.\tEngl. Fit. E\t\t(standard) S.C. Fit. G ½ \t= approx.\tEngl. Fit. E - EE\t(standard to rather wide) S.C. Fit. E ½ \t= approx.\tEngl. Fit. F - \t\t(really wide)
Quote:
Other interesting things that he revealed: The only last available for RTW shoes is the 1746, which appears to be a rather bulbous, deep round-toe last. Some of the pictures in the RTW section are of bespoke samples, which accounts for some of the different toe shapes apparent there. Saint Crispin's has four different sole constructions available for their RTW shoes. One, the GE8, is particularly interesting. It has breast-to-breast welting, but sole-stitching only goes from the top of the waist to the top of the waist. The waist of the shoe is pegged, similar to the waist of an American cowboy boot (although Herr Rollig points out that cowboy boots aren't welted through the waist while his shoes are). The result is a very fiddled fiddle-back waist.
I received these Saint Crispin's wholecuts from Ian yesterday: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws....MEWN:IT They really are quite beautiful in person--unfortunately I don't have a digital camera yet, but I intend to purchase one, maybe this week, and post some pix.   A few fun facts regarding Saint Crispin's: Size is 7 F, and it seems fairly true to 7.5 D  U.S., if slightly roomy in both the toe (yes, it is rounded and slightly "bulbous", though not at all unattractive) and heel. Actually, my orthotic insert fits in quite nicely and really snugs them up, the one caveat being I am then unable to completely close the laces. Comfort vs. vanity--which would you pick? The color is listed on the box as VND 074, which is described above as a light tan, though I would  describe it more as a medium tan w/ darker shadings ("tamponing" is apparently how they describe the process whereby darker color is applied on top of the original, lighter color. I'm not sure if this process is in addition to antiquing, or if they are one & the same). Depending on the light, the shoes can actually take on a reddish, mid-brown tone. They have quite a high lustre. The sole construction is listed as GE8, the very one mentioned here in jcusey's post. As suggested, it is indeed a very fiddled fiddle-back waist, and I think I can see where the cowboy boot analogy comes into play. I admit to being somewhat at a loss in terms of what constitutes a "pegged" waist, though I can see tiny, subtle plugs along either side of the waist that could perhaps be construed as pegs (?). This is my first foray into anything more exotic than a Grenson Masterpiece or C&J handgrade, and I haven't the grasp that some of our more knowledgable brethren here have regarding the subtler aspects of shoemaking, so I can't add much more at the moment regarding construction. Perhaps some ensuing photos may provide more clues to those who are interested. A few additional details: The shoe's lining is extremely soft, like a very fine nubuck suede. The trees that came with the shoes are indeed works of art; hand carved and hinged, with a hollow bore through the heel for easy removal, they fit like a hand in glove (or tree in shoe as it were). Even the bags supplied with the shoes are substantial, constructed from a fairly heavyweight flannel-like fabric with a shimmering, satiny lining. It is obvious herr Rollig pays attention to details. One last item of curiosity. On the box's label, to the right of the calligraphic size & color information, is written the name "Grasso". Since the shoes appear to be designated by model number rather than name (in this case Mod. 114) would this then suggest the possibility that the shoes are bespoke, made for someone named, duh, Grasso? Add that the two pairs Ian was offering were both 7.5's....hmmm. If the shoes were custom made however, would the standard sizing information still be written on the box, and stamped into the bottom of the sole (7F)? There is no information written inside the shoes, other than a "Saint Crispin's" imprint on the insert. To be honest, when I first tried them on last night before I'd even considered any "bespoke" angle, I got the impression that the 2 shoes appeared slightly different, though I could not quantify it other than to say I like the overall look of the right shoe better. Though the width and length of the outsoles appear identical, there seems to be something in the line of the uppers that differs slightly in each. Not that I desire bespoke in this case, since it would be based on someone else's foot measurements, and the RTW's are said to be handmade as well. Perhaps the answer lies in the variables of a truly handmade shoe, that the lines of the left may differ slightly from the right (though this doesn't seem right, particularly at this price point and level of artisanship)? Perhaps it is just a testament to my obsession that I have written so much about so little, as well to yours, for having read it all: Saint Crispin's novella.
post #17 of 47
AJL - These would be close to Dick Grasso's size, but I could never see him ordering such shoes.
post #18 of 47
Quote:
AJL - These would be close to Dick Grasso's size, but I could never see him in them.
Does he have crooked feet? Update: after a bit of amateur sleuthing (gumshoe-ing... ), I began to consider the trees themselves. Since they are handcarved, could they not have some variations of their own? And since they are so snug in the shoes, and having been inside the shoes for an indeterminate amount of time, could they have temporarily changed the shape of them? Of course, this would seem to run counter to the purpose of a custom made tree, i.e. to maintain the shape of the shoes exactly as intended? The aforementioned is perhaps all moot, because when I fold the trees into themselves so that the heel folds over onto the top of the vamp, or tongue (remember, they're hinged), the heel of the left tree is cocked fully 1/2" off center, while the right tree's heel folds over neatly across the middle of the tongue (now is when I really need that camera). So either a) someone f'ed up the left shoe tree, which when inserted into the shoe causes it to become misshapen, or b) these shoes are in fact bespoke, and were made for someone who's got a pretty out of whack left foot. As I sight a line from the heel of the shoe across the vamp to the toe, the right shoe follows pretty much in a straight line, and the left--surprise, looks to be about 1/2" off. Sounds like its time for an email to Ian. Damn, I really like these shoes, but it would always bother me if they weren't quite right. At least I wasn't imagining it. Was my novella all for naught?
post #19 of 47
Quote:
I admit to being somewhat at a loss in terms of what constitutes a "pegged" waist, though I can see tiny, subtle plugs along either side of the waist that could perhaps be construed as pegs (?).
Those tiny, subtle plugs are in fact little beechwood pegs, hence the term "pegged." They help to attach the outsole to the insole of the shoe, although I don't know the technical reason why they would be used rather than regular stitching.
Quote:
If the shoes were custom made however, would the standard sizing information still be written on the box, and stamped into the bottom of the sole (7F)? There is no information written inside the shoes, other than a "Saint Crispin's" imprint on the insert.
I have no idea. However, if Saint Crispin's modifies stock lasts to make their bespoke shoes rather than making the lasts de novo, then it would be plausible. I have no idea whether this is their process or not, though. The lack of marking inside the shoes is not that unusual. Vass RTW shoes, for example, have no markings at all inside the shoe except for the name of the man who lasted the shoes on the right shoe.
post #20 of 47
Quote:
Update: after a bit of amateur sleuthing (gumshoe-ing... ), I began to consider the trees themselves. Since they are handcarved, could they not have some variations of their own? And since they are so snug in the shoes, and having been inside the shoes for an indeterminate amount of time, could they have temporarily changed the shape of them? Of course, this would seem to run counter to the purpose of a custom made tree, i.e. to maintain the shape of the shoes exactly as intended?
If the Vass book doesn't lie to me, trees are made using a lathe duplicator to copy the lasts that the shoes were made on. The trees would, of course, be finished by hand, but I would expect them to be pretty accurate copies of the lasts. Unless, of course, somebody royally screwed them up.
post #21 of 47
Quote:
If the Vass book doesn't lie to me, trees are made using a lathe duplicator to copy the lasts that the shoes were made on. The trees would, of course, be finished by hand, but I would expect them to be pretty accurate copies of the lasts. Unless, of course, somebody royally screwed them up.
I was not sure of the process used to make the trees, but your description makes sense. The more I study the trees, the more clearly I see the differences between the two. Its interesting how a subtle shift here and there can alter the overall look of the shoe, even though to the casual observer they would appear to match. Because of the cutaway in the tree just in back of the vamp (essentially the shoe's opening), I am able to see the front upper half of the shoe in profile and see just what it was that made the right shoe seem shapelier, and the left more linear and static. Very interesting indeed. I'm still bummed out, but at least I am edified in being able to articulate what it was I thought I was seeing.
post #22 of 47
Thread Starter 
Does anyone know of a NYC source for these shoes?
post #23 of 47
Quote:
Does anyone know of a NYC source for these shoes?
According to their website, there isn't one.
post #24 of 47
Quote:
I have no idea. However, if Saint Crispin's modifies stock lasts to make their bespoke shoes rather than making the lasts de novo, then it would be plausible. I have no idea whether this is their process or not, though.
I went back and re-read the e-mail that I got from Herr Rollig. Here's what he said about the lastmaking process for the bespoke shoes:
Quote:
Bespoke lasts are not fitted up stock lasts but we use a similar version of our PRET last as "roughs" to build the bespoke lasts. Crucial in bespoke last making (besides fit) is to keep the proportion of length and width has close as possible to the ideal. So it's not done by adding some fitting pieces. Mostly the bespoke have to be elongated which is the most time-consuming part.
What this means about the liklihood of a bespoke shoe having Last 1746 written on the box, I can't say.
post #25 of 47
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcusey,18 Dec. 2004, 12:20
Quote:
I have no idea. However, if Saint Crispin's modifies stock lasts to make their bespoke shoes rather than making the lasts de novo, then it would be plausible. I have no idea whether this is their process or not, though.
I went back and re-read the e-mail that I got from Herr Rollig. Here's what he said about the lastmaking process for the bespoke shoes:
Quote:
Bespoke lasts are not fitted up stock lasts but we use a similar version of our PRET last as "roughs" to build the bespoke lasts. Crucial in bespoke last making (besides fit) is to keep the proportion of length and width has close as possible to the ideal. So it's not done by adding some fitting pieces. Mostly the bespoke have to be elongated which is the most time-consuming part.
Quote:
What this means about the liklihood of a bespoke shoe having Last 1746 written on the box, I can't say.
The box does not have last 1746 written on it (not that I would imagine their RTW shoes would , anyway, particularly if its the only last used). The more I study these shoes, the more I am absolutely convinced they are bespoke. There is no way a shoemaker could make a mistake this egregious on a pair of standard-fitting RTW shoes. In regards to M. Rollig's assertion that "Crucial in bespoke last making (besides fit) is to keep the proportion of length and width as close as possible to the ideal", that ideal in this case appears to have failed. I think the shoemaker was too intent on following the actual contours of the fellow's foot, at the expense of balance, symetry and aesthetics. I suppose if the fellow had some serious orthopedic concerns regarding the  fitting of the left shoe it might explain it in part, though the fact that they were apparently not accepted by the client also says something. I have asked Ian about this, and he is making an inquiry into whether these shoes are in fact bespoke. As I say, personally I have no doubt this is the case.
post #26 of 47
Quote:
In regards to M. Rollig's assertion that "Crucial in bespoke last making (besides fit) is to keep the proportion of length and width as close as possible to the ideal", that ideal in this case appears to have failed.
This seems a bit harsh, especially given your earlier comment:
Quote:
To be honest, when I first tried them on last night before I'd even considered any "bespoke" angle, I got the impression that the 2 shoes appeared slightly different, though I could not quantify it other than to say I like the overall look of the right shoe better.
When you first tried the shoes on, you "got the impression that the 2 shoes appeared slightly different." Slightly different. The goal of bespoke shoemaking is to accomodate the idiosyncrasies of a person's individual feet without appearing to do so. They're supposed to look like regular shoes on casual observation. It seems to me that they accomplished this with your shoes, if in fact they're bespoke. If there are significant irregularities in a person's feet, you'll always be able to notice slight differences between the left shoe and the right shoe when you examine them closely. The key is how they look on your feet. And how do you like the shoes? Can you wear them? Will you wear them?
post #27 of 47
[quote]
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJL,18 Dec. 2004, 11:31
In regards to M. Rollig's assertion that "Crucial in bespoke last making (besides fit) is to keep the proportion of length and width as close as possible to the ideal", that ideal in this case appears to have failed.
This seems a bit harsh, especially given your earlier comment:
Quote:
To be honest, when I first tried them on last night before I'd even considered any "bespoke" angle, I got the impression that the 2 shoes appeared slightly different, though I could not quantify it other than to say I like the overall look of the right shoe better.
When you first tried the shoes on, you "got the impression that the 2 shoes appeared slightly different." Slightly different. The goal of bespoke shoemaking is to accomodate the idiosyncrasies of a person's individual feet without appearing to do so. They're supposed to look like regular shoes on casual observation. It seems to me that they accomplished this with your shoes, if in fact they're bespoke. If there are significant irregularities in a person's feet, you'll always be able to notice slight differences between the left shoe and the right shoe when you examine them closely. The key is how they look on your feet. And how do you like the shoes? Can you wear them? Will you wear them?
Perhaps a bit harsh, nonetheless for anyone but this fellow, or someone nondiscriminating, the shoes will fall short of the mark. As with anything nuanced and aesthetic, there exists a particular language that requires a degree of learning and translation. It is true in writing, as well as music, the visual arts, etc. In this case, we are talking the art of shoemaking, and the visual language needed to properly translate what one is seeing when looking at a particular shoe. I am still at a point where I am training my eye to understand the nuances of what I am seeing , in order to identify the qualities that appeal to me (as well as those that don't).  With these shoes, I initially noticed that something was 'slightly' different, although with more careful studying, and visual acclimation to what I was seeing, I realized that the differences between the two shoes was greater than originally suspected. And not just one specific difference, but several which, taken in toto, add up to two essentially unmatched shoes ("unmatched" may admittedly be a bit strong, but I use it for illustrative purposes). Two of the most notable differences are: when looking down with the shoes on, the lacing closure on the right shoe seems balanced with the toe, while the left closure veers off towards the instep; the outer edge of the right shoe from the vamp down to the sole has a graceful flowing contour, while the left is missing part of that curve giving it an abrupt, almost clublike, orthopedic look. The fact that the foot opening of the left shoe is noticably crooked traveling from the tongue back to the heel bothers me less so (the most dramatic evidence for this can be seen in how off center the shoe tree is when folded, as mentioned in an earlier post). In addition there are a host of smaller differences between the shoes, such as a difference in heel shapes, on both uppers and the heel proper, and so on. These smaller differences are understandable and do little to harm the overall aesthetic; these I could live with, but the ones listed above make it unlikely that I will keep the shoes. It's too bad, because I really do like them, issues aside. (Damn me, for not having a digital camera )
post #28 of 47
My Saint Crispins:




Compared to Santoni


Hollowed out shoe trees, included in the sales price
post #29 of 47
Congratulations. I like the colour. However, I thought they would really be seamless, and I notice a seam on the inside of the heel. Have you tried round laces instead of the flat ones included?
post #30 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by UR003
Congratulations. I like the colour. However, I thought they would really be seamless, and I notice a seam on the inside of the heel. Have you tried round laces instead of the flat ones included?
Not yet, but i'm definitely getting round laces. I don't like the flat ones.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Saint Crispin shoes