Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by luk-cha, Apr 7, 2011.
the fit is not arresting, imo. a touch up will not solve this.
Not much i can do about it tho
I hope you have adjusted the fit for your new MTOs? Four pairs at a time is a pretty hefty investment. At least in my world.
I found that simply sizing down 1/2 size made an amazing difference in creasing/rolling for me.
buy the correct size? get measured in person? see a cobbler/g&g associate and have them fitted..., etc., etc.
How can you see that those dont fit him? And what's wrong with them? Trying to learn little here
crippling is an indicator. it looks like the foot doesn't fill in the middle foot and toe section. they look too long, either. understood, this assessment is based on a picture from an unfortunate angle and a long distance observation.
actually, i would show this picture to the person, who sells the shoes to him and ask about his opinion.
if they give green light, i stand corrected, of course.
The amount of the creasing/rolling in the leather is indicative of too much overall volume for the foot. In a RTW shoe your option would be to size down and/or to select a last that is better suited to your particular foot.
More specifically a bespoke shoe in which the actual shape of the wearers foot is precisely matched will usually crease minimally.
When you've had your EGs and Lobbs recrafted have these included a shaped fiddle waist, etc. etc.? The undercarriage on a G&G shoe is a pretty time consuming thing to produce. To completely replace it as is done in a recraft will certainly not be inexpensive.
They where fitting by a G&G seller. I tried the next size down and i couldn't even get them on. I think it has maybe happened from wearing them for 2 years very often as my "Kents" haven't done this but only warn them a handful of times so far. Im already 1/2 a size down from usual.
Whats your thought? TBH is person its not as bad and I've seen loads of peoples warn shoes looking the same
me too. imo, there's room for improvement. i would check back with the seller and see what they say. they have the first hand experience and can guide you. good luck
I might try the E fitting as I have F but i have wide feed to think the E would just be painful
I see and noticed (funny to watch once again) you guys sure know about shoes, I learn something new here everyday
I've got Nick sending me a 6.5 E fit so will give that a try and let you guys know how it feels compared to my 6.5 F
My problem with all of that is that sometimes people spend too much time looking at other people's plates. I respect Janne Melkerssohn although I disagree with him strongly for reasons I have articulated to him and more generally here. I respect Anthony Delos despite the fact that he is wrong and short-sighted, in my opinion, about using nails.
But both Delos and Melkerssohn have an objective basis upon which to make decisions. It is not idiot savant repetition of something they have read or heard. They have an intimate personal knowledge of the mechanics of any technique and how it will affect shoe longevity, fit, function, etc.. For someone with no such experience or knowledge to be somewhat disingenuously asserting that the use of equipment such as a bank of sanding wheels is the mark of an inferior technique simply, again, betrays an ignorance that can never command respect. It is akin to "loose lips sink ships."
Whether West End makers eschew sanding wheels or not is almost beside the point if not wholly specious. They do use sandpaper...wrapped around wooden dowels and free form and in all manner of applications. Bottom line is that, again, when you get done sweeping up the scraps...or in this case, the dust...the results are identical.
I admire the West End standard immensely. But it is not the "be all and end all" you seem to think it is. Far more admirable, in my opinion, is any standard that both does and knows the work from beginning to end...personally.
In other words, as I alluded to in my previous post...I suspect it is easy to claim to work to a "no machine" standard, when someone else is doing the upper work. Or the bottoming work or any of it. This is what makes the factory mentality so reprehensible. All can claim credit (or disavow it) but no one claims responsibility.
I can, have, and am willing to articulate why I hold certain techniques in low regard. (and BTW, wooden pegs are not a bete noire of mine...I like pegs, use them every day). But I know...know, in the gut, in the hands, in the heart...the mechanics and the consequences of those techniques. I challenge you or anyone else to similarly articulate a rationale for GY or for iron nails or even for hand sanding as opposed to power sanding. Aside from expediency, aside from profit.
And until you can and do I think you are talking through your...ahem...backside.
Unfortunately...sadly...one cannot "steal the thunder" of the gods by simply assuming their mantle. To speak with authority about shoemaking, you have to be a shoemaker.
I respect greatly both your views DWFII and Bengal Stripe but must take issue with or at least debate your last sentence DWFII. "To speak with authority about a subject you must practice that subject."
Such a view denies teachers and lecturers and also critics and curators any authority. They may not be professions you have any respect for but the greatest authority on Rembrant paintings need not be a painter and so on..
Separate names with a comma.