Pattern making

[artzend]

Marlene

It looks like you are talking about the lasting allowance and that can be standard at 20mm/ 3/4". That is what it looks like you are referring to in your drawing.

Tim
www.shoemakingbook.com

[marleneg]

Tim, thank you for your answer but I guess is not really what I meant. Sure the lasting allowance is affected consequently but I was really referring to the slope of the line between the (higher) heel and the front part of the sole where the forefoot touches the ground. I guess my question is more a question on a measurement which needs to be known when a last is made but I really wanted to know what the curve has to look like which comes down from the heel to the ground.
I am sure If one uses a wide lasting allowance one hasn't to
care about te curve because one just cuts off the leftover anyway but If I really want to create an even pattern with an even lasting allowance everywhere I think I have to know what the curve / slope has to look like..
Thank you in advance!
Marlene

[artzend]

Marlene

You said you used the covered last method to do the patterns. That means you should have a mean forme, and the last shape is incorporated in that.

Tim

[marleneg]

Tim, yes I did use the taping method before on a last.

But now I wanted to draw the pattern completely in CAD and then cut out the leather without using the taping method. That's when I ran into the problem of not knowing if there is a rule for the curve concerning the slope of the curve etc

[artzend]

Marlene

Sorry, I can't help you there, I have never used a program for that. Why not take it from the mean forme you have? If that worked then it seems logical to continue to use it. If you have a mean forme you can use it for ever, as it relates to the last, not necessarily to the patterns.

Tim

[kemosabi]

Folks,
The term "orange peel effect" keeps popping up on various threads with no real description of what it is... Just everyone dreading it's existence!

What is this and how to avoid it?

Thx,
-Nat

"There's more than one way to skin a cat, but the sound is always the same".

[lancepryor]

Nat:

What it refers to is the fact that the thickness of the leather will affect the interior and exterior circumference of the finished product, and this must be accounted for in some steps of the shoemaking process.

For example, in a boot top, if the interior circumference of the boot must be (say) 15 inches, you need to use a piece of leather longer than 15 inches, even excluding seam allowances, since that length will end up being the outside circumference, and the inside circumference will thus be less.

Likewise, this is the reason that the pattern for the lining must be made a bit smaller than the pattern for an upper.

This may also have relevance when calculating lasting allowances, the location of seams on patterns, etc.

Hope that helps.

Lance

(Message edited by lancepryor on October 01, 2012)

[kemosabi]

OK> Makes sense now.
Thanks for the explanation Lance.

[zach]

To all who gave advice on the chukka boot patterns,
A belated thanks. I used the basic derby boot pattern in Patrick as a base. I made blocking boards, I ended up making 2, one for the lining and one for the outer leather. He likes them and wears them all of the time. Unfortunately I didn't get a picture before they left.

[dhovel]

Hello Everyone,
I am seeking information on a sTandard Last Length chart for Men's shoes. I have one for women, but not for men. Does anyone know where I could find one?
Thanks, Debra

[dw]

In which sizing system? British or American? French?

Classically styled lasts or contemporary lasts?

Narrow toed lasts or wide toed lasts?

In the overall scheme of things, unless you're manufacturing, there is no such thing as a standard last length...although we use the term to describe a relationship of foot to last somewhat indiscriminately.

Fundamentally, any real SLL has to be related to a real foot. Simply because aside from the international differences in sizing, some lasts have long foreparts and some have short. For example, many contemporary men's lasts are deliberately "extended" to create a longer sleeker look.

Beyond that, narrow toed lasts will be longer than wide toed lasts (as a general rule) regardless of the size stamped on the last.

Standard last length is really a relationship between the heel to ball length vis the "stick" of the last. It all works when all your lasts are the same model and you're making MTO shoes. Creating a chart is simply a matter of measuring the lasts and recording the data.

But once you start making bespoke, you have to refocus...from the last to the foot.

So...if you know what the heel to ball measurement on your customer's foot is and you have an idea of what that relationship is to the length of the foot, you can usually figure out what the correct SLL is for that foot. From there you can choose a last (based on the H-B) and modify the last to create the SLL you want/need...or ignore it altogether.

But as a bespoke maker, finding SLL must always start with the foot, not a chart that relates only to lasts and probably not even to the last you're using.

I use Sabbage's approach: Sabbage says that the H-B on the foot will be 8/11 of the foot length (again this can vary according to length of toes, etc.) so, if I know what the H-B measurement is I know what the "ideal" foot length is...and from there I know what the ideal standard last length will be.

It doesn't make any difference what the actual foot length is or what the actual length of the last will eventually be, simply because in practice the only functional usage of SLL is to create pleasing proportions for the shoe...regardless of how long the toe of the last ends up being.

For example, if the H-B on the foot, is 19.2cm the ideal foot length will be 26.4cm (19.2/8=2.4; 2.4*11=26.4).

Sabbage says that once you've determined the ideal foot length you must add 1/11 of that figure to itself to determine the (S)tandard/ideal (L)ast (L)ength.

So...SLL in this instance would be 26.4 + 2.4=28.8=28.8cm.

One fifth SLL (28.8) = 5.76 = (C)ounter (P)oint. One fourth SLL=7.2. Etc..

Start with the foot...always. Don't rely on charts that may or may not (probably not) have any bearing on the lasts you're working with or the foot you're trying to fit.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[center]Little Jack Dandiprat in a white petticoat,
The longer he lives, the shorter he grows.[/center]



(Message edited by dw on December 01, 2012)

[dw]

PS...the key concept here...in the idea of (S)tandard (L)ast (L)ength...is not "last length" but "standard" last length.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[center]Little Jack Dandiprat in a white petticoat,
The longer he lives, the shorter he grows.[/center]

[frank_jones]

All

We have a five-day Pattern Cutting course from 4th to 8th March in Ashland, Oregon.

The course tutor, Tim Wragg, will be flying in from England. He is a much better pattern cutter than I am.

If anybody would like a detailed course brochure, just email your postal address to the address below with any other questions you might have

Frank Jones
frank.jones@noblefootwear.com

[farmerfalconer]

To All,
So far I have just made shoes or low lace up boots. Im interested in making a pair of midcalf pull ons (wellingtons maybe) for my everyday farm chores and hunting. I would do the 2 peice vamp. Do I need to block anything if the vamp/front is in two pieces? like this

15138.jpg

instead of a one piece front like this

15139.jpg

Thanks,
Cody

PS I hope no one minds me using these old pics from the crispin. Nice boots!!!

(Message edited by farmerfalconer on January 30, 2013)

[farmerfalconer]

Also does anyone have a pic of their uppers for the first type of boot b4 stitching?
Can I use a shoe last for a boot?

[romango]

Cody,

Yes, both those boot styles will require blocking and crimping. The later is a Full Wellington and is the more difficult of the two.

You can do a seam down the front of a boot which avoids blocking and crimping. Something like this:

15141.jpg

[poorboy]

i dont block and crimp ever. never have. dont know how. build a pair bout every two days plain brown and black. i never crimp. from lightweight leather to heavy weight leather. the pair i posted this morning was not crimped. the man brought them in for resole and heel and ordered another pair on the spot. also brought his cousin who ordered a pair. if you figure out what steps you can eliminate you can make more boots. the more boots you make the better off you are.

[dlskidmore]

"if you figure out what steps you can eliminate you can make more boots. the more boots you make the better off you are."

Unless
A) the step you skip makes another step harder or (you don't always get to make more boots by skipping steps)

B) the step you skip changes the quality of the end product significantly. (Making more boots at lower quality does not always net more income than making fewer boots at higher quality.)

As far as B goes, there's always room for both the high quality and the lower price makers in the market. Not everyone can afford top dollar for the very best.

I'm no expert on the process, and I don't crimp myself, I make very low quality shoes just for myself.

[poorboy]

it is true that low quality is no excuse. even if there are short term gains. in the long run your business suffers dramatically. there are no repeats and referals if your quality is poor.

[dlskidmore]

Low quality has its place if the customer feels they got a good value, but usually there's enough hand work in custom shoes that cutting a few corners isn't going to save the customer a significant percentage.

[poorboy]

dont confuse efficiency with cutting corners. when one cuts corners the product will all but promise to fail. if one can be dilligent and efficient then there is less turn around time. you can do more work. and if you lower your overhead then there is a significant savings to the one doing the work. if you decide to pay yourself what your acctually worth instead of what the market demands then you can pass the savings to your client. only if you are efficient. cutting corners creates fewer clients in the long run. especcially if you product fails. if the client feels that they got a good value but you as the maker feels that you didnt do the very best job that you could do then there is a problem. i suppose thats why theres shoemakers and then there are cobblers.

[dw]

If you are a tyro or a new shoemaker, or if you have yet to achieve the kind of refinement in your work that you admire and possibly aspire to, the last thing you should be concerned with is efficiency. IMO, "efficiency" is just another word for expediency.

When you get to that place where you are satisfied with every aspect of your work--the way it functions, wears/lasts/endures, and presents--that is the time to think about being efficient. Ironically, the chances are high that at that point, it will be obvious to you how superficial and absolutely moot such considerations really are.

Everyone's looking for a quick and easy path to heaven (read "enlightenment" ), but at some point in time a person has to decide...whether to make boots or whether to make money. You can't do both. There can only be a single, all consuming, primary "job one" in your shop...in your mind. It's either quality or quantity.

Once that decision is made, it informs every other decision you will ever make.

I have never seen any example, from the workshop to the factory, where that was not true.

That's my

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[center]Little Jack Dandiprat in a white petticoat,
The longer he lives, the shorter he grows.[/center]


(Message edited by dw on January 30, 2013)

[poorboy]

well said sir. as a crafstman the primary consideration. should be quality first and foremost. you must go thru the period of BootFu where it just seems hopeless for you. then you play thru the pain and something just clicks. the one area you where having trouble with suddenly makes sense. you can say "I Got This" but only so quietly that the good lord only hears it loud enough to not become offended entirely. if that happens your pack to square one in a heart beat. head in your hands at the post machine or in front of the finisher, wondering why you spent so much sleepless hours dreaming about boots and invested your life savings in equipment necessary to do the job. you have to take the plunge to the vow of poverty if you want to stay at it. if you realize though that you would do the work for exchange of only room and board then any amount of money for your product is enough to tickle you. i have bought countless tools and equipment from people who simply wont do a pair for less than a thousand dollars. their heart wasnt in the trade and so eventually they werent either. because an old man taught me how to be patient and efficient i was able to stay with it and make a living. i have found though by increasing my efficiency i was not only able to afford room and board but i was also able to afford, and maintain, a used truck. im good with it. it is true that this is the humbling trade. it is also the poor mans trade. at the end of the day though you figure out that you cant eat money. about all it is relly usefull for is fire starter and something to use when nature calls.

[farmerfalconer]

Mr. Frommer,
I agree completely. personally my inspiration comes from many of your boots and others in the gallery. I make shoes for myself (or atleast Im still trying to) and never have to cut corners. im homeschooled and live on a farm so time is something I have a lot of!

Cody

[poorboy]

you will always keep trying. you have to or give up. i read a proverb once:
Man works on house
Man finishes house
Man dies next day
perfection is a pursuit. if your shoes are comfortable and they hold up then that is all that really matters. beauty only lasts so long.