Pattern making

[gaid]

Rob,
There are seldom that I am casting a client for making lasts. (If so am I using plaster) The only time is when it is about heavy deformed feet. I am doing lasts the same way either it is bespoke or orthopedie i.e. I trace the clients feet and measure them. The only different is that I add some measurements, depending on the grade of deformity, and use the foam box when it is about orthopeadic clients.

Healing shoes! Interesting name. I guess they are mostly for diabetic clients. We call them treatment shoes over here.

Right, it is not easy to put into words what we are doing automatically. I'm glad to hear you appreciated my try.

JEM

[shoestring]

Question,
What type of paper,card board,etc. is best to use as a template to keep patterns useable longer.
Ed

[dw]

Ed,

I use manila folders for most of my variable, "one time" patterns--top patterns, etc. They won't last forever but they're stiffer than paper; and can, with care, be cut around with some ease; and, naturally, they're cheap.

I use formica to make static (permanent) patterns such as vamp patterns, cutting templates, etc.. Formica is hard, and unlike Lexan or plexiglass, you can cut around the perimeter, over and over again, with very little risk of nicking or "paring" the edge; and it usually has a bit of a concave chartacter to it which, if you take into consideration, can help to hold the pattern down on the leather with little or no slippage.

It's also cheap--many countertop/cabinetmaking shops will give you scrap pieces as large as 3'x4'. Can't beat free.

The only drawback is that it's a bear to cut and shape. I use a coping saw and a sharp knife. And a chainsaw file. But the same characteristics that make it hard to shape, make it hard to mis-shape when you're cutting out a piece of leather and aren't holding your knife perfectly flat tot he edge. Try that with any other patternmaking material that I know of and you'll be making a new pattern.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[shoestring]

DW,
Thanks for the info on "formica" I will now seek the Free at our local cabinet shops.
Ed

[das]

Frank,

Now here's a question:

One of my staff recently acquired a bunch of old [1950s?] men's shoe patterns out of Canada. They are hand-cut one-offs, nicely made in heavy cardboard. On most of them there's a cut-out triangle hole, perhaps 3/4" on each side. These seem to be oriented all in one direction. I wasn't sure what to tell him they were. For orienting the pattern with the grain of the leather, or cloth lining? Seems you could do that without the hole, or little "window".

Any clues?

[das]

Just thought ya'all might like to see these. They kind of redefine the meaning of "whole-cut". Looks like the entire foot and leg is one-piece, back-seamed. I guess smooth crimping is right out in that case? Anybody have any insights?

http://www.collectrussia.com/DISPITEMWINDOW.HTM?ITEM=9920

[danfreeman]

Al & All--
I've met one bootmaker who makes truly "whole-cut" boots, that is boots with only a single seam, up the back. As you suggest, crimping is the big problem, and is of course insurmountable under normal circumstances.
I've seen photographs of his boots, however, which seem to back up his claim.
This bootmaker freely reveals his "cran:" the upper must be most carefully cut, diagonally, in the extreme flank, or "armpit," of the side--in other words, out of the very worst part of the leather.
Need I say more?

[tomo]

Hey Al,
those long boots interest me 'cause that's where I'm heading.
The flutes look very similar to those put in the concertina leggings worn by Australian stockmen. The creases were put in on a grooved board very reminiscent of a washing board. The leggings were worn over the top of the elastic sided riding (Jodphur) boots to keep dirt and stuff out.
Interesting.
The heels on those Russian boots are a hoot. Would those be original heels I wonder?
Thanks for the link.

More power to y'awl.
Tom.

[das]

Dan,

Who is this bootmaker? Can you share pix?

[das]

Tom,

Weird how styles move around, eh? Those accordion-wrinkled ankles are characteristic of/local to central Europe. I've seen the boot trees used to block them in the Czech Republic, where they are still regional folk dress. I think it's 'Art de la Chaussure' [Paris, 1823/4?] that first shows them in any detail, the wrinkle-blocks to form them, and they called them "Austrian" boots [as distinct from the "Hussar", and "Hessian" boots]--the ankles are unlined and crushed into wrinkles, and the leg above the ankle is lined with stiff leather, but they have side-seams.

The heels? Your guess is as good as mine

[marc]

Admittedly, this is way outside my area, but I'm wondering if those wrinkles, in the case of these boots, aren't more than mere decoration. Since blocking those would be a real trick apparently, The "accordion wrinkles" could be used to obscure extra leather left in front of the throat. OTOH, the maker is using really thin leather and stiffening with with liners (see color altered picture and arrows below) this may not have been as much of an issue.

Marc

3139.jpg

[das]

I think you're right, and your red lines are spot-on. BTW, that "green light" effect is nice.

Rees says the wrinkles were an inherent "problem" that they [Slavs, Europeans] turned into a purposeful decorative element; and then goes on to claim that the Brits were the first to be able to crimp whole fronts smooth, with zero wrinkles. I can't think of any art history or antique boots that contradict this claim--the Brits seem from what I've seen, to be the first to get them [whole-fronts w/ side-seams] crimped without wrinkles. Holme shows his "Dutch Boots" with side seams, but I think they have a separate vamp. By the 1790s, and on into the 1800s, the French and Germans seemed to like them fine wrinkled, and just kept making them that way--"Austrians" with the heavier stiffened legs, and pleated ankles; and the "Hessians" softer legs with only pleats at the front.

The Russian boot is the first time I'd seen one whole-front, one-piece leg and foot, back-seamed. Seems that type would have to have wrinkles, and as Dan observes, you make it out of flanky cheesy leather just to crimp it at all.

What an extravagant boot that would be to cut--what a huge piece of leather.

[danfreeman]

Al, etc.:
The one-piece boot is made by Robert Land, a re-enactment bootmaker in Toronto whom I met at a local Civil war event. He has a brochure, I'll seek address if you wish.

[peter monahan]

Dan and Al

Robert Land (of Guelph, Ontario, Canada) makes what I believe are technically "full Wellingtons" - 19th century British officers' "Hessians", with a 1 piece front and side seams.
He also does jackboots, Cavalier style etc, or at least I've seen examples of such in his shop. Much of his period work, though, is CW brogans for US re-enactors. Machine work but very nice.

His e-mail is: rlandfootwear@rogers.com. Hope this helps!

Yours,
Peter Monahan

[danfreeman]

A good description of the development of blocking boot fronts in Europe in the 18th/19th century is written of by Devlin, early in Vol. 2, in his "Art of the Trade." He describes the earliest attempts through to the final success in great detail. He acknowledges: it's never been easy.
Let me add that I've met Robert Land, and know him for a very good bootmaker. He uses a variety of techniques to produce practical, accurate footwear for reenactors, at a better price than many.

[Chuck Deats]

Help--I just ruined a nice pair of french calf full Wellingtons and I think the mistake was in my patterns. The break point on the fronts ended up too low with respect to the counter on the backs. After lasting the tops leaned back at about a 30 degree angle. I am a self taught beginner using DW's book---fourth pair. Second pair was about right but not sure what I did. Third pair had the break point too high and did not last tightly enough even leaning forward slightly and the counter as low a possible. Are there any rules of thumb for locating the break point on the front with respect to the throat line (i.e. top of the counter)? I call the break point as the top beginning of the curve in the fronts after crimping. Does this change with the size of the boot? If this has been discussed before maybe someone can tell me where to go. Maybe I am just not understanding what I am reading. Any help would appreciated. Thanks!

E-Mail is chasdeats@yahoo.com

[dw]

Chuck,

Lots of room for misstep here...

First, *full* wellingtons (two piece boots) don't necessarily work the same way as the dress wellingtons. The patterns are similar in concept and theory but different in application if only because of the strains put on the leather when the front blockers are crimped.

Second, if it's really dress wellingtons (four piece boots) that you're talking about, one cannot over-emphasize the need for precision and precise control of as many factors as is humanly possible. For instance, if you do not crimp your vamps high enough on the boards, or in a roughly consistent position on the boards, then the patterns as they are designed cannot work as designed. Then too, if you rip the base of the tongues a little when you crimp the vamps, you will not be able to cut the quarters or quarter curves...high enough, tight enough, in the same place as every other time...that will greatly affect where and how you mount your vamps on the tops.

Third, if you are changing the width of your tongue--the distance between the quarter curves on either side of the tongue--deliberately or because you are not controlling that factor, that too will affect the where and how.

How you spread your tongues on the tops affects the position of the break. How wide you cut your tongues affects how wide you spread the tongue on the tops--a wider spread will choke the throat of the boot, less spread will open it up. One way may lead to lean-back the other to leaning forward.

Also controlling the width of the top pattern in the throat area is critical. And that, in turn relies on a very close congruency between the short heel measurement on the foot and the short heel measurement on the last. The maker is wholly in control in that regard--how you transfer measurements from the foot to the last; the initial choice of last; the modification of the last to bring the short heel of the last into line with the short heel of the foot--all these things directly affect how you design your top pattern and what measurement you plug in along the throat line. For instance, I find that many of these problems arise from choosing a last that is too wide in the heel for the foot--which then has a larger short heel girth than the foot actually has. Typically, in such instances, one does all the forepart build-ups, more or less ignoring the short heel, and then come to find out the top pattern ends up being a little small for the last. But it can work the other way as well.

The patterns in the book are intended to be transferred to some highly stable medium--such as lexan or formica--with absolute precision. They are designed to be used as carefully and as precisely as possible. AND, used according to that philosophy, they are designed to eliminate as much of the guesswork as possible.

None of this may relate to you or to what you are doing...but, as I see it, these are the critical factors that need to be controlled...and not only are they numerous but they are all interdependent. A problem with one can, and does, lead to a problem with another. The fact that you seem to be going back and forth--leaning forward with one pair of boots (too far down the cone), too high on the cone on the next pair, and getting it more or less right on another, leads me to believe that you are not doing some part of the process consistently the same every time.

See if you can eliminate the uncontrolled factors, one by one, and then establish a consistent way of using the templates...so that they produce consistent results, no matter how thick the leather or how large (or small) the boot. Your vamps should be crimped on the boards at the same place every time (as high as possible without ripping the tongues). The tongues should always be the same width from the center of the quarter curve to the center of the other quarter curve. The vamps should be mounted on the top in exactly the same way with the same spread and the break should always end up at the same spot relative to the front top panel.

If you're still having problems once you've eliminated all the "wild cards" it will be easier to isolate the problem...if it still exists.


Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[Chuck Deats]

Thanks very much for the reply. Everything you said is correct and has given me a lot to think about, but I am still not sure I have found the answer. I am trying to make two piece Full Wellington boots. Don't have a sewing machine yet so much less hand stitching. Will try to restate the question based on what I think I am doing.

Front and back patterns are made on folded thin poster board similar to the manila folder technique (pass line, bell line, throat line, etc. based on the short heel measurement). The patterns are then extended straight down from the throat line the width of the counter (about 3 inches) using the throat line width. Aligned triangular tabs are added on both patterns to aid in aligning fronts and backs. They get cut off after side seaming. The back pattern is used as is. On the front pattern the break point is located. I now know this is not at the throat line. A cutout is made on the front pattern from the break point down so the pattern will fit over the crimped front blocker. The break point on the blocker is matched with the break point on the pattern, then marked and cut out. Long crimp boards are used so the top is crimped. The bottom of the blocker is not cut off until lasting to allow plenty of material. To keep this brief many details are left out....the backs are slightly crimped, the counters are finger formed, seam allowances are added for liners, trimming counters, etc.

The question is: Where should the break point on the fronts be located be located with respect to the throat line (top of the counter) to make the boot stand up nice and straight?? Maybe the question is: How do you make patterns for two piece Full Wellington boots?? Like most people, I think what I am doing is right and everyone else is wrong (Ha). Any comments on what I am doing or a better way of doing it would be appreciated.

Thanks for this forum. Writing this down and reading what DW said has helped me identify several things I can improve. Thanks to all of you.

[dw]

Chuck,

I think you're kind of on the right track...but I don't think anyone has all the answers for full wellingtons. I can usually (99.9% of the time) get my boots to sit on the last correctly. What I worry about and sometimes have problems with, is locating the toe bug accurately on full cuts.

I use pretty much the same formulae and the same patterning system for my Full Wellingtons as for my dress wellingtons. That also means that I have a side draft...which many who make the FW, omit. A side draft may not have been used much in historical work either, although Golding patterns out wellingtons with a side draft. But if you look at Golding, his side draft is in the form of an arc that extends from the pass line (roughly) to the depth of the counter (two plus inches below the throat line). So that means that neither his counter nor his "vamp" are trimmed straight at the sides but with a "flare."

I think that with a side draft and with my method of laying out a pattern, the break should be at two inches above the throat line. But bear in mind that you have to be super careful when locating the break. I also "over-crimp"--using two different boards. [See the CC topic "Open Forum" > "Techniques, Crans..." > "The Art and the Mysterie." There's a photo essay there which shows quit a bit of this process.] That overcrimping affects not only how open the break is (no matter where it is located) but how much leather is available to go over the cone of the last from the break, or the instep, to the bottom of the sideseam--very, very important. to control that factor.

And, you have to be very careful when trimming the sides of the front blocker...especially if trimming from the front of the blocker...to keep the "vamp" closed down tight while trimming. This can be done (or at least the idea can be illustrated) by laying a heavy, one inch steel bar on either side of the "foot" and pulling the "toe" up to capture as much of the "side" as is possible. Or put a clothes pin at the bottom of the foot to hold the foot closed. This may be where you are getting inconsistent results. Sometimes, depending on the leather, the foot may want to "unspring" a little and spread. So you cut your sides, and in the process trim off a margin that you should not. This is another critical point at which we can control the leather from the instep to the bottom of the sideseam.

Trimming the fronts from the side is a good solution but makes getting the same "line" on either side a bit more "iffy."

I intended...still intend...to write a book on making the FW. I have it about half written--most of the important stuff, at any rate. But even though I regularly sell and make them, there's enough difference and enough subtlety about making them that I'm not ready to finish the book. Something...maybe it's just ennui, for all love...is holding me back. [sigh]

I don't guess this helps much but hey! if I knew anybody who had all the answers...I'd be at his door. Don't give up...some of this you just have to work out for yourself by trial and error.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[Chuck Deats]

A little slow replying---DW, thanks for the answer. I realize there are a bunch of variables in locating the break point. Even things like the radius on the crimp board will have an effect. After looking at the boots I have made and some store bought ones, I think the two inch dimension is certainly a very good starting place. I also think I heard you say " The Devil is in the Details". I have to be more careful of those. Thanks Again.

Chuck

[dw]

Chuck,

Which I wouldn't want to discourage you or even to change your intentions, but consider this...with wider boards the blocking is easier but it is not so "set," as who should say. If you trim the blocker from the side, you will be folding it flatter than it was on the board and the result will be to "unspring" the blocker. All of which may be compensated for but perhaps need to be minded.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[erickgeer]

I have an inquiry about patternmaking that is not historical.

I am looking into vacuum forming to get quick templates to design on. Does anyone on the forum use vacuum forms? And how dificult is it to create flat patterns from the plastic?
I generaly use mean forms derived from masking tape copies of my lasts, is there a diferent set of rules going from tape to plastic?

Thanks,

Erick

[walrus]

Erick
I have used vacuum forming and I have a set up for that and ment to show that to you while you were at the meeting .I find it just as easy if not easyer than tape it is surely faster .If you want to come to the shop I can show you my set up and you can take some measurements and make one ,real easy that you can run with a vacuum cleaner .As a matter of fact, I have owned a commercial made one that used a vacuum cleaner to pull the vacuum.They are fast and cool to work with .Give me a call .1.262.882.6006 .
And thanks again for coming to the HCC meeting .
Larry Waller HCC Member

[angel]

Hi all,
Once in a while I get the courage to say something... And hoping not to seem very stupid, among all the knowledge you share.
I wonder how vacuum forming works. I can't imagine. Feel curious about it. And wondering if Larry could post a pic, just to see.
And also, is there a method for flattening a taped mask taken on the form?
I've tried some times to find a way, but can't figure how.
I'm an amateur riding boots maker. Just do them for me and my wife, and in a very small production.
Is there anyone else making riding boots?
Thanks in advance, and forgive my bad english.
Angel

[dw]

Angel,

Hey! No worries, mate...your English is fine. I can't tell you about vacuum forming or even much about flattening a masking tape pattern but I can extend a hearty "Welcome" to you and tell you that you don't need courage here...just curiousity. This forum exists as much for those trying to learn as for those who have been doing it a while...maybe more.

Again welcome...

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC