The Crispin Colloquy

@nickb1 I suspect that here are any number of ways to approach that problem. I know I've done it several ways. I've used tape...still do for certain parts of the procedure...but mainly it's a little cut work and real careful brush work.

I have a template I made out of a piece of zinc sheeting that defines the shape of the edge of the waist. In fact, I have several--different shapes. But the templates could be made of paperboard just as easy--they're just shapes and just edges. So I lay the shape on the unfinished out sole and use an awl to scribe the edge. then I take a swivel knife and cut real shallow along that line. If the template is made of zinc, theoretically you could use a bench knife and cut along the edge of the template.

Next I moisten and open that cut up using ...anything handy--a stitch prick, the tip of a burnishing bone, etc.-- then, using a French skive, I take one side of the cut off. So now I have a real shallow ditch like, kind of like this: |/ That's the 'border' you want. You can dye right up to the edge of the cut from either direction and the dye or ink will not bleed or wander. You can also use the last 1/16" of a fudge wheel to make a series of tiny ornamental indents right up next to the cut edge of the 'border.'

Next, I use the zinc template to cut a piece of masking tape exactly the same size and shape as the border I've just created and i affix that to the unfinished waist just at border edge. Then I finish off the forepart--burnishing and waxing. The masking tape keeps the wax, etc., from straying into/onto the unfinished leather of the waist. I put a fairly heavy coat of wax on the forepart--I even 'bull' the forepart...to protect it from errant droplets of ink or dye. That said, although nothing will ruin a natural forepart faster than careless brush work--let the dye 'flow' don't brush it on like some antsy Tom Sawyer whitwashing a fence.

Finally, I remove the masking tape, revealing a clean unfinished waist ready for whatever crowing or ornamentation (at the breast of the heel, for instance) you want. At which point I proceed to dye and ink and burnish/wax it.

Just one approach...hope it's helpful.

dw wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 5:48 am Just one approach...hope it's helpful.

Very helpful, thanks. I actually used a metal template to make the cut here to rebate the topy into the sole so I could get a nice curve the same on both soles. It was a section of the lid of a biscuit tin!

That's the idea. Sometimes I cut off the sides of one gallon cement cans--lots of flat tin/steel to make whatever shape you want. I do use zinc sheet for cutting patterns for tops and so forth--it's thin, stiff enough and cuts a little easier than steel--you could cut through it with a clicker knife if you had to/wanted to. And it's a Traditional pattern making material.

@nickb1 @dw
Hi Nick, nice pair of shoes!

Good question you asked about the breast – I have faced the same issues. Until now I had always copied the final rubber heel pattern onto the sole and scratched the first couple of mm into the heel regions with a knife before I started sanding. This way I got a well-defined edge, but so far, I always ran into problems dying the breast. DW gave some great tips how to handle this. Thanks for that!

One question: I have always wondered what is that half circular lip at the point where the both quarters join the vamp. I don´t find that part in the books that I have. In Oxfords I have seen that the quarters are secured by an additional thread between both quarters just where they meet the vamp. I assume that this lip is supposed to cover that part. But I don´t see where this part comes from. It is not part of the vamp, is it? Is it an extra part that is attached between quarters and vamp?

Carsten

carsten wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2020 11:33 pm One question: I have always wondered what is that half circular lip at the point where the both quarters join the vamp. I don´t find that part in the books that I have. In Oxfords I have seen that the quarters are secured by an additional thread between both quarters just where they meet the vamp. I assume that this lip is supposed to cover that part. But I don´t see where this part comes from. It is not part of the vamp, is it? Is it an extra part that is attached between quarters and vamp?

Someone else may have another take on this but IMO, yes it's an extra piece and again, IMO, near-as-nevermind useless unless you have chronic problems keeping the facings closed at the vamp / quarter junction. At which point, it's just a 'cover-up.'

In shoes that I've seen that are done this way the facings are seldom "secured by an additional thread".

We used to call that stitching which pulls the quarters together a 'frog' simply because it jumps back and forth between the facings. I don't know or suggest that's legitimate terminology, but that's neither here nor there. Nowadays it is done by hand and often with a fancy 'macrame' braid. At which point the half moon 'tab is not needed, if only because the braid (or jump stitch) looks so much cleaner(and holds the facing together very tightly).

IMO, YMMV...

FWIW I did the drawing for the closer on the first Oxfords I made without the semi-circular "tab", but was advised by my teacher that it's generally put it in as a "strengthener". So I've added it since then. I guess the conventional wisdom is that compared to a Derby the Oxford patterns have a structural weakness at that point. It's certainly an extra piece, I don't recall how far it extends under what is visible, or know how much it's actually needed / how much it strengthens things.
Nick

I don't know if you follow any of the top tier shoemakers...like Daniel Wegan or Nicholas Templeman or Yohei Fukuda or Antonio Meccariello...on Instagram (well worth following) but none of them use the 'tab.' I don't know any really well known bespoke maker that does. Maybe out of Eastern Europe?

Here's a pair of Oxfords by Yohei Fukuda:

Good to know and those look amazing. I would say a cleaner look is attained than with the tab, but then again, how would the tab look in their hands? I guess as you say the tab is not needed if you have the stitch across the facings at the bottom, as here. I'd also heard that this stitch should be done by hand, so perhaps this is why in the UK at least it is less common than the tab. Looking at the well known bespoke workshops though, I don't see the tab much in evidence, and when it's there it's sometimes done less obtrusively than the semi-circle version.
Incidentally, though those are exquisitely executed as hand craft, do you find they achieve a look too much towards a cold, "machine made" aesthetic?

Here you can see that the stitch does not always look so neat: http://blueloafers.com/shoes-2/foster-s ... shed-shoe/
The examples at the top look cleaner the ones at the bottom less so. Though the making and finishing looks less accomplished in all these pairs than in the Fukuda example I think it also looks more handmade to me, in an appealing way,

In the end, I suspect it is just a 'preference' thing...I honestly don't see any downside doing it either way.

That said, I follow over 200 makers on Instagram, mostly top tier bespoke shoemakers and bootmakers with a smattering of tool makers, metalsmiths, a water colourist, a whipmaker and a cat (don't ask). From around the world--UK, France, Italy, Spain, Japan, China, Russia, Australia, etc.. Most post at least once a week, many ever day, some several times a day. I despise Facebook and the like but have never regretted my Instagram feed.

So, I spent a little while quickly scrolling through several hundred photos this morning. Every pair of oxfords had the 'jump' stitch. Every single one. Maybe FFT (food for thought)?

As for the finish work of Fukuda...I don't think he has a peer unless it is Meccariello. But I don't subscribe to the notion that it is a "machine made" finish (maybe because I know what went into them).The factories are trying their level best to emulate what the best hand makers are doing, not the other way around.

Years ago, when I first started making boots, I ran across the notion that handmade should look 'hand made'. That there was a charm in 'rough' work.

It's an interesting concept but grounded in a kind of naive sophistry, IMO. If a bespoke maker can hand sew the uppers and the welt at 20+spi...nevermind 50+...and do it near-as-nevermind perfectly, it seems kind of disrespectful to compare it to machine made; to look at it through the prism of machine made, IOW-- disrespectful to the shoes and, just as importantly, the maker. I suspect it just takes a shift in perspective to realize that human beings set (and always have) the standard for excellence, not machines.

Now that's just my opinion--but as a maker, I feel compelled to chase perfection to the best of my poor abilities--to aspire to the heights.


Beyond all that, here is a link to the 2019 World Championship of Shoemaking, where the oxford was the goal. I don't remember seeing even one of the 40 entries with a 'tab.' [BTW, this is a 2 part blog and well worth reading in it's entirety--many photos and many descriptions of the techniques and workmanship...including first place D. Wegan's 20+ spi entry ]

FWIW.

YMMV...

Yes the ones from Yohei Fukuda really do look good. Thanks for the insight. I had never thought of the tab as a coverup, but just though I was missing out on something. My only concern with the tab would have been that it might not stay in place/shape and curl at one point, but that is maybe not the case. I like how Fukuda sets the "Frog" somewhat higher. I have always put it right where the vamp meets the quarters. Here is a recent pair from me - my apologies - I never prepared the photos to be shared - so please forgive my tasteless socks... Another difference I noticed is the attachment of the tongue. I had made some pairs where I attached the tongue by sewing in front of the vamp. Here I simply sewed over the vamp again - hoping I was not committing any sin, not sure what is the golden rule here. I envy you for having a teacher - it is so hard to learn from books and youtube/internet.

Well, I've always found attaching the tongue to be awkward and thankless task on oxfords as well. If you make the lining pattern similar to the upper pattern, and sew the tongue in under the edge of the vamp lining, that edge (vamp lining) is there to 'catch' on the foot as the foot is entering the shoe. the possibility, at least is that the edge will roll forward a bit and create an annoying ridge inside the shoe...and have a tendency to stay rolled forward.

If you sew the tongue in on top of the vamp lining, the edge of the tongue (since it's skived) will turn when the foot is withdrawn and again may have a tendency to stay rolled.

I make my lining with no seams (except tine back) and sew my tongue in by hand doing a series of crossing stitches (x) over the edge of the tongue--that way there is no edge anywhere to catch and roll.

Speaking of your approach, some makers, esp. Austro-Hungarian, simply shadow the vamp edge with a post machine, catching the edge of the tongue inside the shoe at the same time.

I can't decide where the frog should be--I like Fukuda's look immensely but tend to put mine down near the vamp point and at the end of the facings--that allows you to draw the facings tight together. When you do an oxford with separate quarters, that seems to be important. A full cut or whole cut or an oxford with one piece facings (like the Fududa's above) or a saddle shoe, maybe not so much.

"If you sew the tongue in on top of the vamp lining, the edge of the tongue (since it's skived) will turn when the foot is withdrawn and again may have a tendency to stay rolled. "

Yes, that is what I did, but never encountered that problem. Once the stretcher is back in the shoe, I think most of the time that problem is gone.
I do however like the idea very much of a seamless lining, which is much easier to do than a (once piece) whole cut upper. Maybe I did it wrong but – even for Oxford- I always found the lining to be a hassle, since I sewed in the lining into the quarters first, then assembled the vamp/ including the toe cap to the quarters afterwards and eventually glued using Hirschkleber and sewed at the very end the vamp lining to the lining of the quarters. I never got nice seams for the inner this way. Great idea with the cross stitches for the tongue. Will try that next time. Sorry if this belongs to another thread of the forum.

re "handmade" look
Well, no disrespect was intended either to shoes or maker! I must confess that I think I do like seeing some form of inherent irregularity (not error exactly or rough work) in handicrafts however. I recall some of your own comments @dw concerning the look of stitch pricking versus use of the fudge wheel. Not sure how to best express this though, without it coming out that one likes "the charm of rough work", which is not what I have in mind. Perhaps that could actually be imitated by machine though I prefer to think not.

Re. Stitch pricking vs. fudging: aside from the fact that the word 'fudging' itself implies some sort of shortcut, the real problem with fudging is two-fold--First, although it is a fast and easy way to emulate stitch pricking, it doesn't do what stitch pricking evolved to do...namely tighten and separate stitches. And Second, the fudge wheel is supposed to be heated when it is applied to the welt and stitching. This results in a tool hot enough to permanently impress and mark the welt rubbing up against the vamp.

R.A.Salaman, Dictionary of Leather-working Tools c. 1700-1950, addresses all this, quoting Hasluck saying

"the stitch prick 'throws up each separate stitch, and forms them into a row like little beads' instead of making a series of raised ridges as the fudge would have done."

and

"A shoemaker (Mr. W.B. Glasgow, 1974) wrote '...some masters would not allow a Fudge to be used for their work, as when applied too hot it was said too overheat the upper in the region of the welt, They insisted on the use of a Prick Stitch instead.'"

I don't mind the looks of fudging so much as the down side as described above. It's not so much a question of any irregular 'handmade' attributes vs. machine made appearance, as it is a matter of expediency vs. 'Best Practices.'

A couple of shoes I've recently completed
These are for my wife, who wanted crepe soles. I learnt how to use crepe from reading the posts on HCC Bottoming techniques (roughly posts 70-80 - except I use a hot air gun instead of sanding to stick the layers), so special thanks to all those that contributed.
This one has tyre read outsole, primarily for off-road walking around the Surrey Hills were I live. My first go at a two piece Oxford.

Hi Philip, I like the look of these very much. When you say tyre tread, you mean actual tyres? I'm all for the upcycling, but imagine that's a killer to work with. Were you cutting up tyres by hand with a shoe knife?
N

Hi Nick, The tyre tread comes from the Leather Grindery in New Malden, UK and is tyre tread. They sell all things cobbling and quite a lot of stuff for shoe making. Ships worldwide and I understand it's one of the few such places left. It's not that far from you so well worth a visit in normal times (not sure if they welcome visitors now though). There's enough on one tread for 2-3 pairs of shoes, depending how you do them. You can get the tyre tread off of tyres yourself (Youtube videos show how) but it looked pretty tough, whereas the tread at the Leather Grindery is of a consistent quality and thickness.

HI Philip,
Thanks - I've bought some things from them online before. Would be interesting to visit at some point.
Nick

catching up here on a few a my recent pairs

3-hole Derby in a pebble grain. oxblood wrap-around counter experiment First Monks Lady's Bal boots. first time to use stitchpricker (i'm now a convert!)

^All good...real good.

Thanks @dw The bal boots seemed a big step forward. Amazing what nice leather, a nice last and a straight line of stitches can do! ...and a rand file. It just boggles my mind how much every single detail makes a difference in the overall finished product. I think we all see those little details but the non-shoemakers see the sum of the parts not realizing there are so many parts being added up.

For the cold season I just finished these wholecut slippers for my wife's cold feet. I used 3mm felt as lining and 5mm felt covering the insole. Further I tried to practice some of @dw advice regarding insole level welting, felt front filling and wiping the toe. As an experiment I did not use any toe cap but instead tried to stiffen the felt in the toe area using a starch solution. That seems to work ok. Also I tried pricking the welt, which could be probably much nicer with a much higher SPI. Any suggestions for improvement are very much welcome.

@carsten

Nice looking slippers.

Did any of the techniques you tried 'resonate'?

Thanks!
Yes all very good. I was not sure about wiping the toe though. I saw in your picture that you appear to remove the nailed shoe lace completely before welting. I assume that this is working because the hardened Hirschkleber keeps everything in place. I was not so confident taking the (leather ribbon in my case) all out at once but did it bit by bit as I was welting along the toe. I also like the the felt filling in the front, which I glued with HK onto the insole. The outsole however I did not glue to the felt section at all but only to the welt - hoping that this is the way to do it. Likewise I think pricking is much nicer. So far I did use a hand-machine for fudging. It looks somewhat like a can opener and you feed the shoe through the fudge wheel. It always frustrated me, because its like going over the nice seam with a steam roller.... Thanks again for your advice!