**The Official Shoe Care Thread: Tutorials, Photos, etc.**

[DWFII]



It's horrible, thinking of the kind of work shoemakers must go through to make a pair of wholecut, yet they look so simple and elegant. 

A whole cut is not any harder than any other shoe...maybe less so. In fact, it is the style I teach students with. But because it is such a blank canvas every aspect must be approached with a somewhat higher degree of accuracy and finesse.

Many many whole cuts I see posted on SF look to me as if the maker didn't have a clue as to what to do with...how to handle...the stitching at the bottom of the facings. Such awkwardness gets lost or covered when a shoe is pieced but it stands stark on a full cut.

One line of stitching...worse, two...around the topline is going to draw the eye because there's nothing else to look at. If it "wobbles" it's going to be seen. The eye is going to be drawn to that deviation...even if the conscious mind doesn't register it, the subconscious mind will. And it's going to detract from the shoe.

That's the challenge of a whole cut.

 

[Beach Bum]

So maybe not harder since possibly not as time consuming as other styles but does require another level of perfection and attention to detail, hence could be argued to be more difficult?

 

[DWFII]



So maybe not harder since possibly not as time consuming as other styles but does require another level of perfection and attention to detail, hence could be argued to be more difficult?

It certainly requires a somewhat...slightly...better than average skill in clicking and stitching. But, more importantly it requires the eye and judgement that comes with years of experience.

That said, even conceptually the whole cut (not seamless whole cut) is simplicity itself. That's what makes it so elegant.

 

[DWFII]



Agree. Also, the manufacturer must take a lot more time in lasting(my assumption) as you don't have seams to bend around the waist and vamp.  Alfred Sargent Milton in 99 last.

A manufacturer might. But a bespoke maker not so much.

As a bespoke maker, I am not alone in "crimping" a "blocker" that is "pre-shaped" roughly like the last. This avoids the problems, and the "surplus army goods," that build up in the joint and waist when you try to make a whole cut from a flat pattern. Whole cut chelseas are crimped; jodhpurs too if you believe Patrick (Modern Pattern Cutting and Design)....and I do and have done. And seamless wholecuts are blocked right on the last. So it's an old...very old...and revered technique.

But presumably crimping is too much time and trouble for many manufacturers.

 

[mry8s]

I must say I've had a blast reading the last few months of post in this thread. It gave me a (tenuous!) grasp on some of the personalities and levels of experience and knowledge here. It also gave me some insight as to how seriously to take many of you--and how seriously some take themselves.

But you've lived through that already, I am only here to ask a question that wasn't readily answered previously.

I get that the consensus points roughly at:

1. brush often to remove crap from daily wearings
2. condition rarely if and when the shoes need it (annually?)
3. polish if you like a shine.
4. always use shoe trees after wearing
5. rotate shoes

I can get behind that. It means I really only need a brush to start out. But I do have some leather shoes that could use a good cleaning that a brush probably won't accomplish. There were about 20 different cleaning options thrown out and I was curious what most of you use for general cleaning when a brush isn't enough. I've seen a lot of mention of Renovateur, Lexol, and Glenkaren's delicious marinade as well as some others. Can I go wrong with any of them for non-shell, black leathers?

Similar for post-cleaning conditioning, is something like Lexol conditioner adequate to reinvigorate a shoe on the rare occasion it needs it?

I won't even both you all with polish. Nothing I have shines or needs to--yet. I can come back for more info later.

For what it's worth, I'm also waiting on some Tan Dublin Long Branch boots from AE. I suspect since it is a waxed leather, it wont need much either. I saw a post suggesting Renovateur was recommended by Horween. Incidentally I noticed there was a short discussion between DWFII and patricBOOTH about this leather. From Horween's site, they say it is a cow hide processed as if it were a shell cordovan, using the same liquor. The unwaxed is their Essex product. The waxed is the Dublin. The boots will be my frequent cool weather casual wear. I fully expect them to develop a hearty patina.

Thanks all.

 

[DWFII]



I suspect since it is a waxed leather, it wont need much either. I saw a post suggesting Renovateur was recommended by Horween. Incidentally I noticed there was a short discussion between DWFII and patricBOOTH about this leather. From Horween's site, they say it is a cow hide processed as if it were a shell cordovan, using the same liquor.

Not sure what leather that is but the significant difference is that shell is not really part of the hide--it is a membrane / muscle sheath that lies under the hide. Makes all the difference in the world...on so many levels.

And the fact that shell is horse not cow.

The less significant difference is the fact, that it is cow not calf.

AFAIK, the liquor is of no significance...at least not in this context.

 

[mry8s]

Not sure what leather that is but the significant difference is that shell is not really part of the hide--it is a membrane / muscle sheath that lies under the hide. Makes all the difference in the world...on so many levels.

And the fact that shell is horse not cow.

The less significant difference is the fact, that it is cow not calf.

AFAIK, the liquor is of no significance...at least not in this context.

I understand the distinction between bovine skin and equine muscle (ok, not muscle exactly) fiber with respect to leather/shell, I'm just repeating what their site description of the product states. The fact that they started with the "same liquor" as used in their shell process may mean only that it's where they started and that the final product bears little resemblence to shell. And yes, they use cowhide for the Dublin. Anecdotal reports suggest it is both very supple and yet does not stretch much.

For your enjoyment: http://horween.com/leathers/essex-and-dublin/
And if you like charts, they list it in their tannage list with checkboxes under the processes used: http://horween.com/leathers/full-tannage-list/

Mostly I was curious what to clean it with since I suspect the boots will see some use beyond dry indoor floors.

 

[patrickBOOTH]



The only calf I've ever used that was waterproof on it's own is the Reverso veg tanned stuff from Lo Stivale near Pisa. We did a couple of models for the Japanese market where they used the grain side, which took a decent shine, although I'd hardly call it a dressy look.

This boot is the same calf using both the grain and flesh side:

Your boots that I have in the inca grain are pretty damn waterproof on their own. I think it's just because of the stamped grain, I'd imagine. The thing that bugs me about stamped grains is while they are more water resistant dirt and stuff gets into the grain making it a bit of a pain to clean vs smooth leather.

 

[patrickBOOTH]



It's dusty as **** there, and if you have any boat trip scheduled or plan to climb any of those temples, flat soled canvassed sneakers will be a good choice.

I've done all of the tourist stuff and temples already. I did it all in leather high top butteros with no issues. I'm going to have meetings and such so I will be in a suit for about a week while I'm there (im on the board of the NGO my lady works for).

 

[patrickBOOTH]



I must say I've had a blast reading the last few months of post in this thread. It gave me a (tenuous!) grasp on some of the personalities and levels of experience and knowledge here. It also gave me some insight as to how seriously to take many of you--and how seriously some take themselves.

But you've lived through that already, I am only here to ask a question that wasn't readily answered previously.

I get that the consensus points roughly at:

1. brush often to remove crap from daily wearings
2. condition rarely if and when the shoes need it (annually?)
3. polish if you like a shine.
4. always use shoe trees after wearing
5. rotate shoes

I can get behind that. It means I really only need a brush to start out. But I do have some leather shoes that could use a good cleaning that a brush probably won't accomplish. There were about 20 different cleaning options thrown out and I was curious what most of you use for general cleaning when a brush isn't enough. I've seen a lot of mention of Renovateur, Lexol, and Glenkaren's delicious marinade as well as some others. Can I go wrong with any of them for non-shell, black leathers? 

Similar for post-cleaning conditioning, is something like Lexol conditioner adequate to reinvigorate a shoe on the rare occasion it needs it? 

I won't even both you all with polish. Nothing I have shines or needs to--yet. I can come back for more info later.

For what it's worth, I'm also waiting on some Tan Dublin Long Branch boots from AE. I suspect since it is a waxed leather, it wont need much either. I saw a post suggesting Renovateur was recommended by Horween. Incidentally I noticed there was a short discussion between DWFII and patricBOOTH about this leather. From Horween's site, they say it is a cow hide processed as if it were a shell cordovan, using the same liquor. The unwaxed is their Essex product. The waxed is the Dublin. The boots will be my frequent cool weather casual wear. I fully expect them to develop a hearty patina. 

Thanks all.

The fatliquor might be the same, but it isn't tanned the same way. Cordovan doesn't see any chrome. Chrome-excel does, and is just retanned with vegetable tonnage, I'm guessing for durability.

 

[joachim92]

I have these shoes and want to take good care of them. I read some guides on hangerproject.com and concluded that I would need Saphir Renovateur and Saphir Pommadier cream (in black). I read that the pommadier cream protects the shoes. I live in a wet country and want to make sure that my shoes don't suffer from coming in contact with the rain so using the cream seems like a good idea. But I also don't want them to start to shine. I want that they look like when I bought them (matte).

 

[patrickBOOTH]

I'd say you'd be fine with the creams as they don't raise as high of a shine as the hard wax polishes. Saphir and, or GlenKaren creams would both be good choices. Make sure you don't wear them every day, use cedar shoe trees and if they get wet or you walk in wet grounds leave them with shoe trees in on their sides so the soles can dry out. I'd get a brush too and brush them to keep dirt from accumulating and raising the leather fibers after wearing.

 

[sacafotos]



I think the way shell creases is what makes it all kinds of awesome for a whole cut. The whole cut is the raw denim of shoes. A blank canvas for all things to make it something new.

"Hang on, Voltaire..."

Totally agree. Wholecuts can look super formal or casual (Norvegese stitching like the Bonafé pairs posted in that thread).

Curious if a black shell wholecut is worth it over calf for a formal shoe. I feel like the blooming would be an eyesore for a formal shoe, needing constant upkeep.

With wholecuts, though, I guess it's all about which last you want it on for the occasion.

 

[patrickBOOTH]

What's the quote from?

The blooming isn't bad, but the creases do fade, which I expressed I liked. Also crust calf will do the same.

She'll wholecuts cannot be seamless whereas calf can if that makes a difference.

 

[sacafotos]



What's the quote from?

The blooming isn't bad, but the creases do fade, which I expressed I liked. Also crust calf will do the same.

She'll wholecuts cannot be seamless whereas calf can if that makes a difference.

The movie Swingers, when Mikey gets all intellectual with the waitress and she snaps back with that line.

Yeah, a Carmina wholecut on Rain last in black or navy shell has been on my list for a while. I think navy might be more unique because it works in place of black and just isn't common, and I can always add some black polish. @RogerP has a pair that's stunning.