Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by longhorns74, Sep 7, 2014.
Anyone know the fee for first time bespoke to John Lobb Paris, not including the desired shoe
Right around $8000 all in if you are in NYC.
I do not want to start a new thread, however I came across these pictures today of a bespoke fitting at John Lobb Paris.
Do anyone that know more care to comment on the practice of cutting off part of the shoe???
Lobb Paris does that as does G&G. They are trying to get a better view of where various parts of your foot hit in order to get a better fit. At both Lobb and G&G, my shoes where hacked up pretty good. The trial shoe is leather and the same model as your bespoke shoe and has a heel attached.
Thanks, I guess that, but if they remove the part all together, they have a less refernce on the exact points that could have been simply indicated by marks..., at least that is how I immagine it.
It's not only these two firms (G&G has taken up that method quite recently) but also a number of Japanese firms do fittings that way.
Here is a photo essay showing over some 100 photographs, JLP's method of fitting:
It can be argued, whether this procedure makes a significant contribution to the fit or is just a bit of show business. (Particular as the photographs I have seen, showed in every case quite a roomy pair of trial shoes.
If a maker uses a pedograph to acquire a footprint (or some similar device/method) it may have less importance than if they just rely on measurements and a tracing of the foot.
Cutting away portions of the shoe allows the maker to examine how the foot fits vis-a-vis the insole in the heel seat, for instance. Or the across the treadline. Or whether the medial ball joint is where it is supposed to be.
If the maker does use a pedograph it is somewhat easier simply because the ink footprint can be used as a rough template for the insole. And then the girths and the stick pretty much determine everything else.
that is exactly the link I thought I had attached
G&G does not always cut shoes open.
For my fitting done last October, my trial shoes were not cut open.
Bottom line is that it doesn't matter, really, how the maker determines if you've got a got fit or not...as long as they're mindful of the need to meet certain criteria and as long as you're happy with the fit.
I admire the makers that cut the shoe open. I think it's conscientious and analytical. I don't cut the shoe open.
Cutting the shoes open does offer a rare glimpse of how the shoes fit visually inside. The effectiveness of which can be debated as last adjustments is not immediate and can be lost in translation/recording.
I personally much prefer an actual mock-up shoes instead of the old semi-finished shoes without outsoles and with mock heels.
No idea why you are quoting me. "Always" doesn't appear in my post and I haven't implied that that always did it. They did it to my shoes. I assume yours didn't need it.
Dont know if that practice is implemented across the board. Dean didn't cut my shoes open.
I think cutting shoes open is a good practice; it offer both the client and the fitter a glimpse of the internals similar to how hardware ODMs provide 3D CAD models for clients to verify the internals before prototyping or production run.
Separate names with a comma.