Shoemaking Techniques and Traditions--"...these foolish things..."

[GasparddeColigny]



Talking about quality control, would a scuff like this be acceptable on brand new 4 figure bespoke? How would you have handled this @DWFII if a customer brought this to your attention? Would a shoe like this ever leave your workshop in the first place?

These kinds of issues are what the 'seconds' category is created for: anyone remember the Levi's irregulars? You have to discount such an obvious defect, I can't imagine any self respecting brand letting this go out as a grade A product.

 

[DWFII]



Talking about quality control, would a scuff like this be acceptable on brand new 4 figure bespoke? How would you have handled this @DWFII if a customer brought this to your attention? Would a shoe like this ever leave your workshop in the first place?

If you know me, you already know the answer to that one--"No, hell no!"

No customer would bring that to my attention simply because I would throw the shoes away before delivering them. And have done.

No one is perfect and everybody makes mistakes. And some very minor things that do not affect structural integrity get a pass or a price break. But for anyone who puts his name on a product, a line has to be drawn. And that's one that wouldn't get past my scrap barrel.

PS...I can almost guarantee that that happened in the final stages of making--after the shoes were lasted and probably after they were inseamed. The scratches could have happened, of course, before the leather was even cut but in that case the problem is even more egregious.

 

[C&A]



These kinds of issues are what the 'seconds' category is created for: anyone remember the Levi's irregulars? You have to discount such an obvious defect, I can't imagine any self respecting brand letting this go out as a grade A product.

If you know me, you already know the answer to that one--"No, hell no!"

No customer would bring that to my attention simply because I would throw the shoes away before delivering them. And have done.

No one is perfect and everybody makes mistakes. And some very minor things that do not affect structural integrity get a pass or a price break. But for anyone who puts his name on a product, a line has to be drawn. And that's one that wouldn't get past my scrap barrel.

PS...I can almost guarantee that that happened in the final stages of making--after the shoes were lasted and probably after they were inseamed. The scratches could have happened, of course, before the leather was even cut but in that case the problem is even more egregious.

Would you believe that initially the shoe maker was saying it was only excess wax? Offended me quite a bit that after buying 4 or 5 pairs he didn't accept an honest concern I had with these shoes. I informed him of the scuff immediately after receiving the shoes and sent him, a few pictures of the damaged area. Only after a friend of mine - and another client of this shoe maker - confirmed to him that the leather was indeed scuffed, he said we would work something out. This summer, when pressed to resolve, the best offer he made me was a €100 discount on a future pair.

 

[jerrybrowne]



Would you believe that initially the shoe maker was saying it was only excess wax? Offended me quite a bit that after buying 4 or 5 pairs he didn't accept an honest concern I had with these shoes. I informed him of the scuff immediately after receiving the shoes and sent him, a few pictures of the damaged area. Only after a friend of mine - and another client of this shoe maker - confirmed to him that the leather was indeed scuffed, he said we would work something out. This summer, when pressed to resolve, the best offer he made me was a €100 discount on a future pair.

Sounds like it is time to switch makers. Unfortunate given the commitment you showed by ordering several pair, and the requisite tweaking of fit that occurs with each order.

 

[DWFII]



Would you believe that initially the shoe maker was saying it was only excess wax? Offended me quite a bit that after buying 4 or 5 pairs he didn't accept an honest concern I had with these shoes. I informed him of the scuff immediately after receiving the shoes and sent him, a few pictures of the damaged area. Only after a friend of mine - and another client of this shoe maker - confirmed to him that the leather was indeed scuffed, he said we would work something out. This summer, when pressed to resolve, the best offer he made me was a €100 discount on a future pair.

I don't know who this is and I don't want to know...but he's a fool. If a maker can't be honest with his customers and willing to do what it takes to make it right with someone who has trusted him, he soon won't have any customers.

And rightfully so.

[And just for the record, I've been there...I've been that guy. Maybe not as bad (I hope not) but nevertheless.... I don't want to think of the number of boots I've re-made, completely from scratch, over the years. Even when the problems weren't explicitly my fault.]

--

 

[poorsod]



Talking about quality control, would a scuff like this be acceptable on brand new 4 figure bespoke? How would you have handled this @DWFII if a customer brought this to your attention? Would a shoe like this ever leave your workshop in the first place?

What leather is it?

I had a similar issue with my bespoke kudu wholecuts. There was a scar on the toe but I let it go because it was a textured leather and I figured a wild animal is going to have scars. Also, I get cuts on the toe of my shoes through normal wear anyway so I didn't bother.

 

[DWFII]



What leather is it?

I had a similar issue with my bespoke kudu wholecuts. There was a scar on the toe but I let it go because it was a textured leather and I figured a wild animal is going to have scars. Also, I get cuts on the toe of my shoes through normal wear anyway so I didn't bother.

This is what I was referring to when I said that if it didn't happen during making, the issue becomes far more serious. Simply because the maker has the responsibility to inspect the leather and avoid cutting where there are problems like scars and damage.

What if it was a hole? Would it be just as acceptable?

And if the vamp is cut with a scar over the toe area there is plenty of opportunity to re-cut the vamp from an area where there is no scar....miles before the shoe is delivered to the customer.

--

 

[C&A]



What leather is it?

I had a similar issue with my bespoke kudu wholecuts. There was a scar on the toe but I let it go because it was a textured leather and I figured a wild animal is going to have scars. Also, I get cuts on the toe of my shoes through normal wear anyway so I didn't bother.

It's pigskin.

I see where you are coming from, still I think this shouldn't pass quality control in the first place. Not at this level.

Sounds like it is time to switch makers. Unfortunate given the commitment you showed by ordering several pair, and the requisite tweaking of fit that occurs with each order.

Yes I think you are right. On top of the issue with the scuffed pigskin, I had another issue with a derby boot by the same maker that developed a rip where the facing is stitched to the vamp. I'll take a picture later.

I have indeed turned to another maker.

 

[bengal-stripe]



Simply because the maker has the responsibility to inspect the leather and avoid cutting where there are problems like scars and damage.

Before a clicker places the pattern pieces and cuts into the hide he will inspect the leather and mark all the imperfections he can find with a silver pen. Based on this initial assessment, he will decide on the way the pattern pieces get laid and cut.

The first rule that needs to be observed is stretch: calf leather stretches more in on direction than in the other. The English rule is “tight to toe”, so all the pieces get laid onto the leather with the least stretch lengthwise. Other schools of shoemaking have different rules, in Central Europe the rule is tightness lengthwise in the vamp, but crosswise in the quarters. The second rule is using the most immaculate parts of the leather on the most exposed sections of the shoe: which is toe or toe cap and vamp. When you come to the quarters (particular the inside ones) you can be a bit less fussy and coming to the tongue you can be even more generous. Nevertheless, gross imperfections shouldn't be found in any part of the shoe. (Some firms cut their fitting shoes from the same hide as the final shoe; using the peripheral sections for the trial shoe and reserving the best parts of the leather for the end product.)

Every producer of shoe (be they factory or bespoke) will have to decide whether they cut for economy or quality. (Depending on the size of the hide, you might get three pairs or only a single one from a particular hide.)

 

[DWFII]

The only thing I would say...for what it's worth...is that I (and I don't think I'm alone) cut vamps tight side to side. I know this is contrary to English standards but there are good reasons: We last shoes "seats up" and when the maker goes to "hoist" the upper, he wants the vamp to give a little lengthwise. Additionally, we feel that the shoe (and the customer) is better served if it is tight across the joint--it prevents the shoe from walking out or over the welts.

Another example--take a full cut: If the pattern for the full cut (which includes vamp and quarters all in one piece) is cut tight to toe, that means the stretch is across the facings. Which, in turn means that as the shoe is repeatedly laced up the "quarters and the facing will stretch until, ultimately, the facings come tight together and the shoe cannot be laced-up to secure the foot.

As someone who has to deal with this issue on pull-on boots that have no lacing to adjust, it quickly becomes apparent that stretch across the instep, as well as across the joint, is begging for long term fit problems. At least that's the way I see it. Parenthetically, I have never heard a rationale for cutting tight to the toe, much less one I could believe in.

And back on point, there are so many ways to avoid putting a scar (if it is indeed a scar and not a post lasting scuff) right over the toe. For just one instance, if the vamp pattern had been cocked 20 degrees, that "scar" would have ended up in the lasting margin and ultimately been trimmed off...unseen and unregretted.

--

 

[T4phage]



Before a clicker places the pattern pieces and cuts into the hide he will inspect the leather and mark all the imperfections he can find with a silver pen. Based on this initial assessment, he will decide on the way the pattern pieces get laid and cut.

...... The second rule is using the most immaculate parts of the leather on the most exposed sections of the shoe: which is toe or toe cap and vamp. When you come to the quarters (particular the inside ones) you can be a bit less fussy and coming to the tongue you can be even more generous. Nevertheless, gross imperfections shouldn't be found in any part of the shoe. (Some firms cut their fitting shoes from the same hide as the final shoe; using the peripheral sections for the trial shoe and reserving the best parts of the leather for the end product.)

Every producer of shoe (be they factory or bespoke) will have to decide whether they cut for economy or quality. (Depending on the size of the hide, you might get three pairs or only a single one from a particular hide.)

......
And back on point, there are so many ways to avoid putting a scar (if it is indeed a scar and not a post lasting scuff) right over the toe. For just one instance, if the vamp pattern had been cocked 20 degrees, that "scar" would have ended up in the lasting margin and ultimately been trimmed off...unseen and unregretted.

--

i have seen the process
as described by bengal
and usually the maker
knows enough not to
use teh worst parts
.....

but why would it
be utililzed (seemingly)
in a fourfigure shoe?

granted the maker
later changed teh
leather but reused
the gator parts...

question:
why was it cut and
stitched together in
the first place since
the maker is teh one
who cut the pieces
?

would reusing the
same croc pieces
not weaken these
pieces since it
has to be restitched
in the same place
and thus creating
a 'stamp edge, ticket'
effect
?

 

[DWFII]



i have seen the process
as described by bengal
and usually the maker
knows enough not to
use teh worst parts
.....

but why would it
be utililzed (seemingly)
in a fourfigure shoe?

At the risk of assuming something I don't have the right, or the desire, to assume (about this maker you're referring to), it goes back to what BS said about cutting for economy or for quality. And underscores what I have always said--that anyone interested in making shoes has to decide, right at the outset, whether to make shoes (cut for quality) or make money (cut for economy). Because you cannot do both...you cannot serve two masters simultaneously or walk two divergent (and they are divergent) paths at the same time.

would reusing the
same croc pieces
not weaken these
pieces since it
has to be restitched
in the same place
and thus creating
a 'stamp edge, ticket'
effect
?

I'm not sure what the "croc pieces" you're referring to are but reusing a piece may not automatically weaken it if the leather piece is on top and a great deal of diligence and care is taken in restitching--believe it or not you can hit the old holes near-as-nevermind perfectly.

But if the leather piece you're reusing sits under another piece, those old holes will be covered, and the chances of making new holes in that leather approach unity (certainty).

Then the postage stamp effect is indeed a problem.

 

[C&A]



On top of the issue with the scuffed pigskin, I had another issue with a derby boot by the same maker that developed a rip where the facing is stitched to the vamp. I'll take a picture later.

Two quick iphone pictures. I hope they are good enough to show the issue. The maker says I have caused it by putting in the shoe trees wrong. Would you say that's realistic @DWFII?

He also says that there is no way that this can be repaired, and there is even nothing he can do to avoid the rip getting bigger over time. Is he right there?

 

[T4phage]

thank you for the reply

At the risk of assuming something I don't have the right, or the desire, to assume (about this maker you're referring to), it goes back to what BS said about cutting for economy or for quality. And underscores what I have always said--that anyone interested in making shoes has to decide, right at the outset, whether to make shoes (cut for quality) or make money (cut for economy). Because you cannot do both...you cannot serve two masters simultaneously or walk two divergent (and they are divergent) paths at the same time......

this is exactly
what one shoemaker
i know told me
to make shoes
(bespoke or otherwise)
to the best possible
level
one does for 'fun' and 'passion'
because you will
never become wealthy

the 'better' money lies
in simplifying the process
and mechanise it
so that anyone with
a modicum of training
can operate the
machines

..... But if the leather piece you're reusing sits under another piece, those old holes will be covered, and the chances of making new holes in that leather approach unity (certainty).

Then the postage stamp effect is indeed a problem.

^
this is what i
was wondering about
since the previous holes
are hidden when
restitching...

does this have any
implications for teh
lifespan of the
finished shoe?

...... but what I think the customer needs to appreciate is not "imperfection" itself but how hard a maker has worked to achieve perfection and how close he's come. I look at some of the Japanese makers and I'm struck,once again, by how much better their work is than any manufactured, machine controlled shoes...or a good many bespoke makers, for that matter.

But in the end, there's one big and overwhelmingly significant reason why the customer should not appreciate imperfection--because the artisan himself doesn't appreciate it.

i don't understand
how some can say
that defects
give teh shoe
'life'/'soul'/'je ne sais quoi'
when these defects
are basic errors
or worse, not errors
but inability...


the shiny/precious has
blinded even those who
have some modicum
of knowledge

 

[T4phage]



Two quick iphone pictures. I hope they are good enough to show the issue. The maker says I have caused it by putting in the shoe trees wrong. Would you say that's realistic @DWFII?

He also says that there is no way that this can be repaired, and there is even nothing he can do to avoid the rip getting bigger over time. Is he right there?

eww..
looks like
teh pattern of
teh vamp
was not designed properly
and placement
of stitches was
not placed well