Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Oyaji, Feb 20, 2010.
Should be like this?
Love those shoes. Was thinking about those the other day!
This is personal opinion...
I don't think a toe cap should ever be used on a pair of alligator or croc shoes unless there is another leather used for the vamp. I think it diminishes the alligator. Not only because it breaks up the tile pattern but because it is an indication that the shoes are being made with scraps.
The whole point of having crocodile or alligator shoes is to let the leather make a statement. Which it will do--a statement of money and a bit of elegant extravagance (if such a thing is possible). Using cut-offs and scraps that don't match up, give the lie to that statement and actually make the shoe look a bit tawdry. One might as well use faux croc, at that point.
I'm even a little cautious about broguing and gimping on crocodile...for much the same reason. Let the leather speak for itself. It doesn't need further ornamentation or ostentation.
If a suede or calf shoe were combined with a brogued crocodile toe cap, I think it would work. But otherwise, croc shoes need to be kept simple...just because the leather is already complex.
+10000 could not have said it better myself.
i so aggree, bet they were made with sccraps hahaha
As always DWF.
DWF - I disagree - some captoe exotics can look nice, and are not necessarily made with scraps.
yea perhaps like pig skin, kudu, russian reindeer, snake and anything with a smaller grain/ texture/ patten
I wasn't speaking about other exotics...never mentioned anything but alligator and croc.
This is snake leather?
Sorry, I got called away.
So let me start where I left off...my comments were with regard to alligator and croc only. And they expressed my own personal aesthetic sensibilities...only.
As it happens I have worked with alligator and croc for many years and I like it. I really like it. I consider it one of the premier leathers for shoe making...and it costs as if it were the premier leather.
But it is that experience that leads me to say "of course they're scraps."
Look at the photo above...why is it that the tile patterns, the size, the shapes so mis-matched--within each shoe between the pair? Why put those huge tiles up in the facings and smaller tiles in the vamp? If you have a hid that its large enough to have tiles that big, you've got plenty of room to cut all those patterns in close proximity to each other. And large tiles are not really considered prime anyway.
The right shoe looks like the cap was taken near or even adjacent to the vamp. But the left shoe not only doesn't match the right but the cap and the vamp are not all that close.
The only logical reason for this kind of thing is that a pair of shoes was cut from the hide prior to these being cut. So the first pair of shoes paid for the skin and the second pair of shoes was made from the left-overs.
That's the definition of scraps.
That said, even with scraps, the match-ups deserved more attention.
ThinkDerm...no worries about disagreeing with me. As I said, it's just a personal bias. You know what they say--if we were to agree on everything, one of us would be superfluous.
meister's shoes match up nicely. the other croc/gator shoes don't.
Nice shoes. Are those after-market toe plates?
DWF surely you are referring to the first pair and fritzl's comment on which I elaborated by posting a picture of some vintage Nettletons which are pattern matched right??
actually it's the style the customer wanted. pity, it interupts the scale/tile pattern. sometimes, the maker should have a word to prevent such a "disaster", though.
Separate names with a comma.