miscellaneous tips, advice, and cautions

[tmattimore]

Until I bought a toe lasting machine I found pre forming a leather toe box quite helpfull especialy with heavy leather. I let the box dry and timmmed the bottom then when lasting I popped it in and lasted over it It makes lasting out the wrinkles in the toe easier as I did not have to wipe three layers. I never preformed heel stiffiners but if you are going to do one you might as well do both. Too bad I never thought of it before.
Tom Mattimore

[gaid]

Ed,
Generally speaking, I don't think it is the norm to pre-form the toe/heel stiffners, it slows down the process to much. However, in the orthopeadic trade, due to tricky lasts, it is sometimes necessary. But one thing you could do which will be of help regarding lasting is to pre-last the uppers without any stiffners (test-lasting as we call it). Doing this it will be easier to last the shoe/boot. During the period of apprenticeship we where not allowed to last a pair before we had made the test-lasting!
These days am I still pre-lasting many of my uppers, mostly an unnecessary habit.
JEM

[das]

Janne,

Don't feel bad, I "test last" uppers too, especially a new style/pattern, just to be sure they'll settle on the particular last, and to take any excess stretch out of them. If I've pre-formed my stiffeners separately, then they just pop right into position in the quarters dry, with minimum wetting, so it's easier to get a good paste/cement bond, and they go back onto the last faster before the paste/cement has had a chance to dry and set up. But, remember I'm of the "wet school"--lasting all uppers wet--and mostly heavier work.

Too much additional time? *Phiffle* What, an extra 10 minutes to last an upper? I consider any time spent on making the insole carefully, and lasting the uppers, time well spent. Heck, I'm even beginning to think that leaving the uppers on the last for a week might better be stretched to two weeks or more, just to get a good set. If I rush them off the last, ten to one there'll be a "bad" spot, a wrinkle, or even some loss of shape, especially with chrome-tanned uppers...the most lifeless material, closest to synthetic I've seen made out of leather

[cmw]

I've thought about the pre-forming of stiffeners.

There are several reasons that I like the idea of pre-forming. In some period type shoes(that I'm making) it makes it easier to get a good result inside, which is important in this case because there is no liner. ( BTW there is only a heel stiffener) In the ladies pump it is still possible to use leather toe-stiffeners(/box if the word fits here). The others are using the ussual synthetic toe stiffener. I think the pump is going to have a better finish look because of it.

CW

[gaid]

Al,
Well, I don't feel bad about "test-lasting". To me it has become a kind of habit. After 25 years in the trade, like me, the uppers should pop right into position without test-lasting. And they do, everytime I forget to "test-last".

Ok, I'm from the "dry-school". To me that is; my heel stiffeners, mostly Bakers heavy belly, stays in the water a minute or two. Then I do the skiving. Before I put them into the shoes they have to stay another minute or two in the water and then a coupple of hours in a plastic bag to be damp. That is about it regarding water when I last a pair. Except, I spray some lukewarm water on the flesh side when it is about stiff or fragile stuff.

I don't have the same bad experience from chrome-tanned leather like what you are describing. I use to "rush" them off the last without any problems after 3-4 days! Maybe the reason for that is that the uppers where not wet from the beginning?
JEM

[das]

Janne,

Well, I only "test-last" the upper for one-offs, or bespoke, *if* the last or pattern looks extreme or suspicious. If I'm making a tried and true style that I know, on familiar stock lasts, I just live dangerously, last the one time, and it usually pulls down just fine. What's the old adage: "measure twice--cut once"? Call me "cautious".

I'm going to have to get brave and try this "dry school" lasting. But it's so seldom I make anything out of that light a leather...*sigh*.

I'm using Baker's for heel stiffeners too, but wetting it, and pre-molding it on the last with pincers and tacks, hammering it to harden/stiffen, skive it, and letting it dry. They come out rock-solid this way. I'd be reluctant to slip a soggy oak-bark heel stiffener in between the quarters and linings, especially if they're bone dry. Doesn't it at least stain the lining [I use russet veg. lining], or leave a water-mark on the quarter itself, with that wet oak-bark leather going in there?

I'll certainly defer to just about anybody when it comes to getting good results lasting chrome uppers--I'm such a "veg.-tanned" kind of guy. You must take my remarks on this with a grain of salt, as I'm ever and always comparing chrome to veg., not chrome to chrome. Some chrome uppers are better than others I find [probably because they have some veg. in them?], but *none* of them behave as nicely, or wet-mold to the lasts as slick as 100% veg-tanned uppers. Maybe when chrome uppers took over completely--what, around the 1920s-30s?--the lasting technique changed from wet to dry? Maybe chrome uppers simply do better dry-lasted? Perhaps I'm trying to force one type of material to perform like another dissimilar type, and blaming it [the material] when it doesn't behave "right"?

Heck, if shoemaking were as dead-simple as woodworking, we'd all be "masters" by now, eh ?

[dw]

I have limited experience with veg tans --although there are veg tan leathers such as kangaroo that I like immensely--but in some respects I also have limited experience with chrome tans simply by virtue of never having tried many of the top tier European chromes (most are not available stateside). In any case, I think it a little misleading to say that chromes won't wet mold to the last.

I make almost all my full wellingtons out of chrome(by choice as much as by necessity). If they wouldn't wet mold they couldn't be crimped. Or perhaps they could be crimped but wouldn't hold their shape. Neither is true for the best of those that I have tried. In fact, I have let crimped blockers (chrome) sit off the boards (and under no pressure at all) literally for months and subsequently gone ahead and made successful boots from the blockers. All in all, considering the choices, I have had much more success with bovine chrome tans, as a whole, than with bovine veg tans. I even had some Kellet rip out on me...and forget crimping good English lining kip.

But that whole business brings me around to a question: why does anyone dry last? What is gained besides time?

If I tried to dry crimp a piece of chrome *or* veg, for that matter--for dress or for full wellingtons--the process would come to a screeching halt almost immediately. And if by some stretch of the imagination you got the leather on the boards, what good would it do? The leather would not retain its shape. It would collapse towards, if not all the way to, flat almost the minute you took it of the board. The shape that it takes from the crimping board is wholly dependant on the leather being wet when the crimping takes place. The fibers of the leather stretch, shift, move...and then "set" in the new configuration.

It seems to me that the same logic would hold as true for lasting as for crimping. The result almost has to be that when the leather is on the last, it is under tension--a tension that is never eased or mitigated by the shifting of the fibers--so that when the last was removed, the leather would want to draw (back) up to relieve that tension. I've seen that in boots that were not crimped, or were crimped and lasted with an inadequate application of steam--the vamp does not hold its shape, it collapses in on itself. Many of the cheaper commercial boots show evidence of this (although not as many as twenty years ago). Perhaps it is not necessary for the leather of a low quartered shoe to take a set...I don't know. But I cannot figure out what is gained by doing it this way...???

BTW, for what it is worth...the FDA, or OSHA, or whoever it is that requires a company to send out a spec sheet on chemicals they sell, classifies lanolin as a wax. I know this because when I was fooling with "making it yourself" I went to a lot of trouble to acquire 10 pounds or so of lanolin...from various sources...and I talked to the owners/sales reps and such, about the quality and consistency (and other errata), of the varying grades of lanolin. I was told point blank by the CEO of one company that lanolin was classified as a wax. What makes it a wax and tallow not a wax...I don't know, but from what I've gatheres...*technically*, lanolin *is* a wax.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[tmattimore]

I agree with you on wet lasting. Since I only use veg I can only speak to it. For boots I use a milled leatger that is considerably softer and wet for only 10 to 15 minutes to crimp but any less and it would never lay down to the board. For low shoes I use double shoulders and have tried sides but most tanneries these days "toggle" or stretch them to the point where there is no give left. With these many strange things happen, such as leather that appears tight grain gets real "pipey" or loose grained after the shoe dries. The hide needs to have some give to it that you can last out and then the fibers will relax to the shape of the last.
Tom Mattimore

[gaid]

Al,
Aha! I'm glad to hear that I have made you at least a little interested of the "dry-school" method. About the water-marks; well, since this is the "dry-school", no soggy heel stiffeners is used. They are in between damp and dry. If soggy, there is a risk that it could be water-marks, not on black or dark brown leather but on light brown and tan. On the lining side it is the same, to wet heel-stiffener and there could be water-marks. Ok, your method of pre-molding the heel stiffeners on the last seems to me very time consuming. I don't doubt that the result is very good but I use a "shortcut" here, a layer Hirschkleber on each side of a flat stiffener and it ends up rock-solid too.

D.W,
Well, the only reason why I am lasting dry is that it works! It is an improved method and it is usuable for both veg. and chrome and on shoes and high boots. We have talked about this before and yes, I do last wet sometimes. Mostly when the uppers don't fit the last as it should. A wet upper is easy to correct because it behave like a dish-cloth. But it is a risk that you stretch it beyond where it would ment to be, i.e. stretching it away from the pattern. That is one of the reasons why I try to avoid it if I can. Another is that it is a risk for discoloration from bleeding leather which you will not have when lasting dry. The gain will be those two reasons and a third one, your apron will stay dry ;-)
However, lasting side-seamed boots dry seems to be hard. I have just made a handful and I have had some problems with them. The last pair was in between damp and wet before I was close to the wood. Like you and the rest of the gang, I do crimp the vamp wet.
JEM

[shoestring]

When mentioned wet lasting is that ment that the upper is lasted damp using a spray bottle or diped in water or sprayed after lasting and left to mold for the amount of time needed.One other question is plain water used or a special soultion or what when I worked in a shoe repair shop the owner would sometimes mix a small amount of rubbing alcohol with water to spray on footware that needed stretching.
Ed

[das]

Janne,

I'm not doubting your method works. From the time I spent in Lobb's basement, and at other West End shops, I never saw anybody wet shoe uppers pre-lasting either. The man who trained me, however, worked with waxed-calf uppers only, and we did mostly boots together, and some stout shoes, so I got "hooked" on dunking uppers. I love expanding my horizons, and I fully intend to try the "dry-school" lasting as soon as I have a light-weight, chrome upper job come across the bench. I'm afraid my heel-stiffeners are so thick, that if I put them in merely damp, they'd never last in, but then I'm of the "the-heel-stiffener-can't-be too-thick-school" too

Whether we admit it or not, I think we're running bung up to the old divisions, or branches, in our trade: bootmaking, versus shoemaking, versus heavy/stout work and light work, etc. We each seem to develop a preference, and try to force those techniques to work in entirely different classes of footwear. Since I can't envision wetting a cream silk lady's pump upper, or inserting a 9 iron oak-bark stiffener into one, I just don't do them.

Considering I usually have several pairs in-process at any one time, I block the heel-stiffeners first thing, then go on to prepare my bottom stuff, fit-up the uppers, etc. In other words, having the heel-stiffeners setting on the last over night or so doesn't slow the process. I gives me time to do other phases, like start laying out the patterns for the next few pair, clean up the shop, clean a machine, un-pack leather, etc.--there's no end to it as you know, so it's hardly "down time".

[das]

DW,

Like I alluded to with Janne, maybe we're just pushing the envelope, teetering on the brink of our respective backgrounds/schools of 'making, and trying to understand our techniques in relation to other, entirely different types of shoes and boots for which they may or may not be suitable.

Like you, I'm a "wet-guy". A little water never hurt anything--who'd want a shoe or boot that can't get wet?--"and if a little [water] does a little good...."; but this comes from a stout bootmaking tradition, waxed-calf, or veg.-tanned uppers. Seems to me that a dry-lasted upper might well perform okay, but what will happen if that shoe or boot is totally soaked in wear?

If as some have pointed out, and I'm not arguing, a chrome upper can be deformed and stretched out of its pattern-shape too easily when lasted wet, then what does this suggest if the wearer gets these dry-lasted shoes or boots soaked and wears them wet? Won't the likelihood be increased that they'll deform dramatically, or stretch out of shape if only lasted dry? If this occurs, the pattern's lost too, as well as the last-shape.

Even if it means going gingerly and carefully, I'd still want to take out that deformity, or surplus stretch, by "reaching" out [pre-stretching] the pieces wet before final pattern cutting, and certainly before lasting, wet or dry. A few minutes vigorously pulling the vamp-pieces is all directions ["reaching"] between two pair of pincers, so "they won't reach in the lasting" is a hoary technique even from the days of nothing but veg.-tanned uppers [Martin of Taunton, 1745]. Seems it would help the problem of chrome stretching too much.

I know you've gotten some disappointing results with Kellett, as I have. I chalk this up to the inconsistency of the skins he used--he only bought them and curried them, he didn't tan them--and getting good base skins was always a crap-shoot. But don't let that color your opinion of all veg. uppers now, or in the historical past. As they are largely a thing of the past anymore, developing a preference for them today is admittedly not very practical. Just try some chrome-veg. "retans" from Horween for instance, and see if they don't out-perform the 100% chromes.

[das]

Tom,

Interesting observations. Let me ask you, are you having any trouble with the un-reinforced lace holes on the 1860s bootees tearing out, using shoulder-leather, or this loose-grained "pipey" stuff? The Civil War army-contract boots/bootees were never the best stuff anyway, but we know how demanding the reinactor market can be. Have you tried "firm" tannage, 5-5 1/2 oz. English sides from M. Siegel? I had pretty good luck with those for uppers years ago, and I rarely cut any uppers up in the shoulders, because it's too loose in the fibers. Shoulders are okay for counters [stiffener inserted], bottom filling, pieced-tongues, etc., but I wouldn't trust them for vamps, and maybe for quarters only if the eyelet portion was good and firm.

[dw]

I don't doubt that some even very prestigious firms dry last. I don't doubt that it is faster and more convenient. I don't doubt that it works. What I don't understand--and I need to understand it before I can muster the confidence to try it--is what exactly is being gained?

Is the finish less vulnerable when dry lasting? Is the leather, itself, less fragile when dry? I have heard of (and experienced) the toes of vamps cracking when drying --especially in the hot weather of Texas. I've always chalked that up to poor quality leather but maybe not wetting your vamps would correct that...???

What are the pros and cons??

For myself, I don't worry too much about water staining even on light coloured leather. And I don't worry about over stretching the leather, either. Experience has taught me when the leather is being overworked and I have developed techniques to prevent water staining. Among those is simply to commit or not to commit to the water. Too little water, in other words, risks water stains more than too much.

I'm willing to try new things--if I can get my head around the concepts (and that's part of the reason the Crispin Colloquy exists...to learn and share other approaches to shoemaking)--but it's just as hard to try a technique that has no apparent rationale as it is to accept an assertion, in conversation, that has no justification or explanation.

Some of my favourite leathers have been retans. But, except for their horse strips--which I use for welting--I've never seen any Horween that has excited me. It's all oil stuffed and that's not what's critical, in my mind. There's lots of suitable oil stuffed leather out there. What's really missing, what's becoming increasingly rare, is good dress leathers--chrome, veg or retan--that are reliable...and readily available. Frankly, I am alarmed at the state of the leather supply in this country, at least. In the last five years or so, I've seen sources dry up, leathers that were constants become too thin, too soft, too fragile, too poorly finished...and what's left, in terms of being able to rely on consistency and quality, is marginal and shrinking on an almost daily basis.

What are others using for dress leathers?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[das]

Deedub,

Being a "wet-laster", I'm interested in whatever the outcome of this might be too. But in the mean time, as Janne said, I'll suffer my damp apron and veg.-tanned uppers.

On Horween, however, call them and ask to speak with Skip H., the CEO. He's a friendly young[?][seemingly] guy, and ask for a complete swatch set of their "dress" leathers. They do a lot more than that greasy old "Chrome-exel Huntsman" faux-waxed-calf. I've gotten some nice looking horse front from them, plus other types including calf.

Also try Tony Crack in Northampton [UK], who has a huge selection--all the West End 'makers seem to rely on him. There was a firm on Queen's Parade [London] called Pangbourne & Sons, but I don't know if they're even still in business.

Our biggest problem is here, like with most our stuff, top-quality bespoke footwear makers do not a viable customer-base make. We have to pick and chose from the general runs and classes of leathers mass-produced for the manufacturing end of our trade, and then just cherry-pick the "best" of the mediocre. Even the fabled, and now defunct, Freudenberg chrome calfskins were tanned for the top-box manufacturers--it's just that it was so nice it was still suitable for hand-sewn bespoke.

Also, we shouldn't over-look that going to Europe once in a while on buying trips, to hand select, and search out who's making what, is not an unreasonable task for any 'maker, and can be a lot of fun. At least going to the leather trade shows in the US should be expected, instead of relying on the Charlie Hardtke's and that other guy...your buddy in TX... Garlin Newman[?], to do all the picking for the entire trade. I don't think we'll find the quality of leather we want from jobbers and dealers anyway, because, 1) it's so expensive they can't handle it and put much of a mark-up on it, and 2) I'm sure the little mom-n-pop tanneries high up in the Alps, or in remote villages in Italy, etc., are not exactly geared up to produce enough of their leather to bother bringing it into the mass-market, so much of that leather is never "discovered" by the jobbers/dealers. Like the "Juchten" Janne spoke of the other week, it's probably--correct me if I'm wrong--some obscure tiny family tannery in po-dunk, on their last legs, and they can't supply 25,000 sq. feet at a go, so the exporters/importers, jobbers/dealers aren't even interested.

There's still great leather out there, it's just getting harder and harder to get to it to buy it. As for US leather these days, burn it and use the ashes to fertilize your rose bushes. With all the G-Mods in the cattle, hormones, and funny feed, the US hides aren't fit for much more but corrected-grain bar stool upholstery or leather-board in my opinion. If we want good calfskins for uppers, we're going to have to promote the hell out of veal-eating, which is declining even in Europe, and boy will that make us popular with the Greenie-weenies. If we want good veg.-tanned E.I. kips again for making waxed calf, we'll have to overthrow the UN and the O.E.C.D., so we can once more "rape" India and Pakistan for their crust skins to finish ourselves, instead of being forced to buy "finished" skins from them, which usually get chromed and have a cellulose spray-on finish.

[tmattimore]

D.A.
I have not tried any thing from siegel in the last five years so I don't know if they still supply that. The double shoulders I use are from howes and have little done to them except being split and rolled. I have never had a lace hole tear out from this leather but it has done from the side leather I have bought from various suppliers. On the side leather I think except for wickett and craig most all that is left is mystery leather tanned in mexico or South America and they split the hides down to the quick. This leaves no substance or strength left.
For the future I have heard that the E.U. is cogitating banning chrome tan leather for Uphosltery. This may encourage more and better veg tan product. The problem with most leather (veg) in the u.s. is that it is geared for the saddle, belt and harness trade. not for we few shoe and boot people so the technology and process has been skewed that way.
Tom

[dw]

Well, I know there are leather tanners abroad that still do good quality but, for all intents and purposes, it doesn't do any of us in this country any good. I can't rely on the selection nor the timing of products coming in from Europe anymore than I can rely on the quality or consistency of finish from products coming from the US. Just trying to get ahold of Baker's insoling is like pulling teeth and even though you expect to pay a premium for the "good stuff" the customs and shipping often makes the bill more cardiac than comfortable.

I'd buy...I'd pay a premium for...European leathers if they were available in the US. But I can't afford to travel to Switzerland and climb into the high Alps looking for Heidi and her uncle who tans the hides of select "milch" cows. I'm a bootmaker, not a jet setter.

I will give Skip a call though...maybe today. Thanks for the lead. I wish others would chime in on this...

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[cmw]

A question for the orthopedic makers out there.

My group/class got into a discussion about why we have to start German classes next time we are in school. It revolved around the idea that all/most of the advances are made there. I could not see how this is possible when there are so many good people in the branch in England and in the states.

I know that the german went ape sh.. many years ago when they trained and schooled shoemakers. Was it really that much?

CW

[relferink]

Chris

I don’t know why you would have to take German classes but in the orthopedic trade most of the new innovations and advances originate in Germany and Holland. I’m personally not all that familiar with the situation in the UK but here in the US the orthopedic shoe making trade is mostly in it’s infancy.
I say this knowing I will offend some people but those who think I’m way off have simply no idea how orthopedic shoes are engineered in W. Europe or they have to much pride to admit that they aren’t the best thing since sliced bread. (in which case they probably are not on this forum)

Don’t simply take my word for it but start by comparing suppliers. Everybody in the world that makes custom shoes knows about the German firms Gotz, Rendenbach, Minke, Shein, Freudenberg. These companies are out there to make a living. If the market not supports their high quality of products they would be out of business in no time at all. Here in the US there are some decent suppliers but I find I have to get one thing here, find something else there etc.

For orthopedic shoes in the US the “custom molded” method is mostly used. What this comes down to is basically a plaster mold used as a last with a lot of Plastazote padding and some leather “folded” around it, held together with some stitches. The “shoe” you end up with is a not very functional accommodative “space boot” that look more like a box than the shoe. It’s relatively cheap and does not require much expertise or training.
Those who know how to make shoes and boots are involved in custom work but mostly not orthopedic. I’m not sure why that is. Different parts of the country may approach orthopedic shoes somewhat different but a few big molded shoe companies operate nation wide and seem to supply most of the market with their space boots”

Getting back to the German and Dutch orthopedists. Personally I believe one of the main reasons the standards are so high is the level of health care and more specifically the health insurance payment policy and rates. This has created a market were custom orthopedic shoes have been available to nearly everybody with any type of foot deformity. An other important point is that early on from within the branch a very well regulated and disciplined group has come forward that emphasized the need for excellent training and a high standard of certification.
In the US the situation is nearly opposite. Health insurance companies are prohibited by law to pay for shoes (a few exceptions when metal braces are involved or the customer is diabetic). People with handicaps often end up without insurance and there is no national certification program for orthopedic shoemakers so everybody can do what they want regardless of their knowledge or background.

OK, enough preaching for one day and it’s not even Sunday. I do feel obligated to let you know that I’m more than just an objective bystander but what would this discussion board be without personal opinions. As you may have guessed I’m a Dutch trained orthopedic shoemaker who came to the US to study the medical side of the profession and is now trying to make a living starting my own shop.

[dw]

Ed,

I make boots, so what I am about to say may not apply or even make sense to shoemakers. I wet last. I was taught that way and there is plenty of history and tradition behind the method. After all the "old guys" of a hundred years ago didn't live in a perpetual rainstorm. If they had wanted to dry last there was nothing to prevent them from doing so--certainly dry lasting was tried--yet dry lasting is not what has come down to us. Wet lasting was the standard and the technique that epitomized literally a thousand years of shoemaking evolution.

I let my boots soak in a bucket of water for at least an hour. I am mostly concerned with the counters. Like Al, I use an 11 iron counter. And it goes into the boot essentially flat. It needs to be thoroughly wet to take on the shape of the back of the last.

But I also believe that unless you are wholly committed to wet lasting you will run a greater risk of water staining than if your are simply dipping the boot. In this circumstance there is no middle ground--either thoroughly wet the boot or dry last--or lightly spritz the vamp (which is, in effect, nearly the same as dry lasting. So I get the leather wet enough...top and bottom...so that it changes colour (looks wet) and will dry out evenly. *That's* the only sure-fire way i know to utilize the advantages of moisture and still prevent water stains.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[admin]

Robert,

Welcome to the Crispin Colloquy. I can tell that you will be a valued contributor.

Yr. Hmb. Svt.

[cmw]

Robert

To start off with, thank you for posting a response.

It seems I've been mislead about the American orthopedic makers. It's funny that you give credit for the quality of the branch (partially) to the social system. In large I agree, but here in Denmark the branch has been stopped/held back by the fact that the state lets Sahva decide the price range/standard. The result is the falling quality of shoes. They are built to last 18 months and only that long. After that the state pays for some more.


By the way, the reason we have to take German classes is the fact that most of the mag. that the branch (in Denmark) gets are German.

While I have you here, are the cobblers there schooled in orthop.-adjustments or is it just in Europe?

gotta go, two seminars this wk-end.
A Wet Texan
CW

[cmw]

Robert
I just got back and read your post again.
from what you write the moon boots/shoes must be made for the diabetics (strange idea though). I don't see how it would help a pes cavus case or a plat foot. I remind you that I'm just a cobler with a big nose, so maybe I don't understand enough.

CW

[das]

DW,

I know it's daunting, and you have your aversions to jetting around, but going on a buying-trip is not--generally speaking--unreasonable for one in our trade, just like the couturier fashion folks. We're making top-box, top-dollar stuff, right? How can we expect to find the cool leather in a catalogue, or from a single distributor? You can still go round-trip to London for $700 in certain seasons, and the rail ticket to N'ton ain't much. A $50 B&B, cab fare to Tony Crack's...and you're all set.

As for the Swiss stuff, just e-mail Serge Volken for instructions, that is if you don't want to see the Alps, try some great wine, meet interesting people, and experience the world's most luxurious public restrooms first-hand

As hungry as some folks are, my guess is, that if custom boot and shoemakers were seen as an economically viable customer-base, some enterprising young Turk would already be factoring these leathers in the US.

[jpboots]

Just remember that when wet lasting light colored leathers or tender leather, try using distilled water. It won't leave any stains or water marks.

JP