One "Last" Question

[jesselee]

Joel

In my 40 od years of making boots and being a last maker, I do all measurements at full weight on the foot. I have a 'general' rule of thumb, last must be 3/4 to 1 inch smaller than instep and ball. Short heel takes care of itself. And for boney feet it's more 3/4in, and for fleshy fat feet more 1in.Hope this helps.
JesseLee

[j1a2g3]

I meant the low instep was off 1/2" not the short heel. Thanks Joel

[dw]

Joel,

Why would you cut the last if the foot is a half inch bigger than the last?


Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[j1a2g3]

DW,

I meant to say the last is a 1/2" bigger than the foot measurements.

Shouldn't try an write that early in the morning.

Joel

[dw]

Joel,

Gee, I hate to see you cut the last. Do you have a foot print/pedographic imprint? There are feet out there like that but not many. Maybe you should call him back in and remeasure. Where, on the last, are you finding the SH?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[j1a2g3]

DW

I'm presuming that SH is the short heel. I measured 1" up from the featherline on the heel to the top of the cone. I have the Pedograghic imprint and the last fits dead on in the ball to heel length. The width on the last when set on the pedogragh is about 3/4" insided my pencil tracing of the foot. It's the girth at the ball, wiast and low instep that is off on the last. I have remeasured the foot twice and came up with the same numbers.

The last cost me very little. I bought this last just to practice, measuring, adding buildups and taking off material. I really don't care if I wreck the last. This is part of my learning experience.

I thought if I measured form the bottom of the foot to the top ever inch or so with a compass I could see better where to take material off. That's my thoughts, Joel

[dw]

Joel,

If the featherline in the forepart of the last is the same width as the footprint/pedograph (you said "the width on the last when set on the pedogragh is about 3/4" insided my pencil tracing of the foot." --that's a very different thing especially if you are looking at the tracing and not the print), then it might be reasonable to take the excess girth off the top of the last. Not the sides. I have seen feet like this. But it is important to bear in mind that the weight bearing print needs to be respected almost as much as the girth measurements.

Also, just by way of clarification...did you measure the foot with weight on or off?

Finally...just covering all bases, SH is measured differently on the foot than it is measured on the last...if you are using my methods--outside corner of the heel to inside corner of the ankle.

So...if, and when, all these possible discrepancies have been addressed, yes, you may have no other alternative but to go ahead and cut the last.

And good on you for having the nerve to experiment.

A man need a motto...today, mine is: "Never be afraid of your materials." Yesterday it was "Sleep neat."

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[j1a2g3]

DW,

Just so you know these last are for my feet. My daughter is going to get the first pair of boots I truely try and make.

I measured the foot with the weight off.

I also measured the SH on the foot and last like you describe in your book and last post.

I just made a fitter shoe. Which I glued together to see where I needed to modify the last.

1st the toe needs a little build up, maybe 1/2" longer.

2nd the ball is okay but I would like to see it a little tighter.

3nd the waist and low instep have too much room in those areas. Especially in the instep area.

Also, looking through "Shoes For Men" he takes a tracing of the foot in profile. Is that something I should be during? Wouldn't that give a better idea what the top of the last should look like?

When modify the last how will it change when you remove material form the sides or tops? Will this change the bottom pattern on the last specially when you take off material on the sides and closer to the featherline?

Thanks Joel

[dw]

Joel,

Again, if the last is wider than the print, cutting on the sides (always extremely problematic) may be the only way to bring the last bottom (and the insole) into line with the print. Otherwise, if the last bottom is as wide, but no wider than the print...any material you need to remove should be taken off so that it leaves the last bottom the same width as the print--usually that means on top.

Profile tracing...I am of the opinion that the more data collected the better. That said, I don't do a profile tracing. I think I can fit the profile just as well by combining girth with print. The exception to that would be over the toes where girth is is not obtained and which can sometimes be a problem.


Thick toes, hammer toes, etc.,might very well be better addressed by a profile tracing.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[romango]

I am a new member. I have been searching the forum archive for various tidbits on lastmaking. I will continue poking around but, in the mean time, I'll jump right in. Here is a picture of my first pair of lasts made using the geometric method described by George Koleff.

4923.jpg

They are made from laminated hemlock and finished with Watco Clear Lacquer. I'm going hunting for some better wood for the next pair (maybe maple?). Not sure if the Watco lacquer is a good idea. It is a little daunting how much 'good eye' is required to take the last from the rough state (that the geometric method gets you to) and the finished last.

I'd love to hear from other members who have made lasts by this method if you have advise about wood, finishes or final eyeball steps.

(Message edited by romango on April 18, 2007)

[dw]

Rick,

Welcome! Gald to have you aboard.

I'm impressed. I think you did a very credible job. almost makes me want to give it a shot...almost...nah...I got enough on my plate.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[relferink]

Rick,

Welcome to the colloquy, those are some very impressive looking lasts. Are you sure this is the first set you made? They just seem to nicely shaped to be first timers.
I don't have Koleff's book (yet, I keep forgetting to give Larry Waller a call to get it) Did you also get the DVD? I wonder how the DVD is in relation to the book.
I was taught the AKA64 system, it's also geometric based and I would be really surprised if it varied widely from Koleff. I have made lasts based on AKA64 and you'll end up with a nice all round last that has a lot of the fitting features expected from stock lasts.

Nice to have another shoemaker here. Hope you won't be intimidated by the large percentage of boot makers here. They sometimes bark but won't bite. The best way to benefit from all the knowledge collectively represented here is by simply asking questions. The only bad question is the one not asked so don't be shy.

I never worked with hemlock but I know that you can't go wrong with maple. What type of glue did you use to laminate?

One point of caution, depending on the shoes you plan to make on these, test the lacquer's response to solvents in press cement or the solvent you may use for celastic if that's what you use. It may be fine but it's much easier to find out before you end up with a shoe glued to the lats.
Short of that getting the last finished nice and smooth the lacquer will only makes it easier to get the last out of the shoe. Personally I do not lacquer my lasts, a generous amount of talcum power during lasting works just fine for me and if you get the scented type your shoes will smell like a baby's bud.
It also makes it easier to add to the last without having to take off the finish first.

The final eyeball steps are mostly a matter of practice. I find using the laminated lasts somewhat distracting since the glue joints between the boards do not run with the model lines in the last. If you can convince a local fire wood supplier to let you pick some good blocks out of his pile and make last out of those your last will be one piece. Depending on the grade of the wood it may not be the best last to make shoes on but great to practice the eye on.

Keep up the good work and I'm looking forward to seeing more of your work.

Rob

[jesselee]

Rick

Those lasts are abso,utely beautiful. Works of art I say. I also make lasts, and you have given me new inspiration. Welcome aboard.
JesseLee

[tomo]

Hey Rick pretty impressive alright. A keen eye is 80% of the job - well done

More power to y'awl
Tomo

[chuck_deats]

Rick,

Very,very Nice. Been there, done that and did not look nearly as good. Looks like you may have a unique system of separating the last for removal. I use spar varnish for finish and leather buildups. Welcome!

Chuck

[romango]

Thanks for all the great comments! Feels like I just got a whole bunch of new buddies.

This is my first pair by the Koleff method. Here is a less flattering angle to prove my novice-ness.

4933.jpg

I have made several pairs of lasts by a casting method. These were made using STS Casting Socks, Smooth-Cast 300Q from Smooth-On and Apoxie Sculpt from Aves

4934.jpg

I did get the DVD that goes with the Koleff book and it is quite helpful in showing how to execute the process. I used Gorilla Glue to laminate the hemlock. I would rather use a block of wood. It would save me the steps to laminate. Besides, it seems readily available hardwood board is for furniture and finish carpentry and so tends to be quite expensive. Also, the laminations are distracting, as Robert points out.

Georgene - As to why... Partly, I have a primal need to control the whole process of shoemaking. Custom fitting is also part of the equation. Also cost, availability and lead time of commercial lasts factors in.

Also, I just have to answer the question for myself of just how hard it is to make lasts? Using the casting method, I can make a pair in about 5 hours total time, ($55 material cost). Seems the Koleff might be similar time but that depends on how fast a (hypothetically well-developed) keen-eye can work.

[dw]

Rick,

Just a tip...looks like you may even have already heard it, judging by the photo.

Take some cardboard, or what some call poster board, and sandwich it in-between the faces of your cuts. This will allow you to preserve the accuracy of your measurements and you won't have that gap. It makes up for the lost substance that results from sawing.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[paul]

Rick,

I think those are beautiful!

That must have been a real satisfying experience for you at the sander.

Thank you for sharing that.

I got the Koleff book a year or two ago, and have yet to give it a try.

Your lead is encouraging.

PK

[relferink]

Jenny

The slipping you described may also have to do with the width of the cone on your last. I'm not sure how this new last is, I don't seem to be able to get the search to come up with a picture of your current lasts. If I remember correctly you posted some pictures of them. The last you brought to the HCC meeting in Williamsburg this past October for “show and tell” were very wide at the cone. I know made them this way on purpose since you were afraid it would otherwise hurt your heel. Keeping the cone that wide will cause the shoe to have no lock on your foot and make the heel slip.
My suggestion would be to build out the area of the pump bump on the last (Tim, you may know this also as a haglund's exostosis) but take in the cone. I like to see a cone no wider than ¾ to 1” depending on the size of the last. Occasionally I like to go even narrower. This way the shoe has the ability to “lock” on to the sides of your heel bone without putting a lot of pressure on the back.

Be careful not to make the bottom to narrow or the foot will fit in to tight and force out the counters still not giving you a secure fit. In fact the picture of the lasts Rick made a little higher up on the page shows the proportions nicely, wide at the bottom of the heel, narrow cone.

Rob

[jenny_fleishman]

Rob, vocabulary question. Does "cone" refer to the upper part of the last all the way back to the heel, or just the part that slants up toward the front of the ankle?

re adjustments--each time I revise my lasts I am indeed narrowing them from the topline down about an inch, although I am doing it more so back toward the heel. Does narrowing the last along the topline all the way to the front also help with heel slippage? I have narrowed the lasts somewhat in that area, but not as narrow as toward the heels.

Jenny

[relferink]

Jenny,

Yes, the cone goes from the instep all the way to the back of the heel. The main reason to adjust the last evenly is so you can get a good "lock" on the top line of your upper. If the front is much wider you will have a hard time pulling the top line securely against the last. Make sure you do not start narrowing the cone too low on your lasts or the width of your foot will force out the counter and make the shoe slip again.
Also make sure you keep an eye on your measurements. By making the cone narrower you may have to add a little on the instep to maintain your fit.

Rob

[dw]

Robert,

Somewhere along the line, I ran across a reference to lasts that made a distinction: the cone was the instep area only and the heel area was the "comb." Have you (or anyone else) run across this terminology?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[relferink]

DW,

I have not come across that distinction but it would make sense to have terms that would narrow down the fore part and rear part of the area we're talking about.
I don't have my shoemaking dictionary handy but will look at it when I get back home, I wouldn't be surprised to find an answer in there.
So to add to my prior post you want to make the width of the cone and comb nearly the same. I have seen many cones that at the instep come to a narrower point compared to the rounding at the heel but the basic width should be close or the same.
Of course that's just my opinion. One more thing, as much as I think it goes without saying I'll state again that I'm very interested in other opinions that have a good reasoning behind them.

Rob

(Message edited by relferink on June 11, 2007)

[relferink]

DW,

From my new shoemaking dictionary (second edition)

cone of the last as the narrow top part of a last (an image shows a shaded area running from the instep to the back of the heel): sometimes it refers to only the part which is in front of the last hinge.

There is not mention of "comb" or at least not one I can find in the dictionary.

Rob

[btippit]

DW & Rob,

Rob's quote is what I was always taught was the "cone" of the last and I also adhered to the second part, referring to the cone only being that part in front of the hinge.

I had never heard of the "comB" until I spent a few days with Al Saguto about 10 years ago. I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong Al) he also referred to a type of last as being a "comb" last in that you could remove the "cone" area (though it was cut further down than the definition....to the ball, like a scoop block hinge). You could then add larger or smaller "combs" to get different fittings. At least I think that's what I recall but that was a LONG time ago.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€