One "Last" Question

[dw]

Rob,

As far as I know there is no copyright on lasts. Certainly no "formal" means of registration or origin.

A lastmaker will usually respect the "owner" of a model and not sell it to other makers without the first guy's permission. But it doesn't take much for the lastmaker (or the boot/shoemaker) to "renumber" the prototype and voila! a whole new model is created.

This has been going on for years and years and two different lasts from two different last companies may be identical in every significant way (may even have been turned off the same prototype) but be stamped with different model numbers and have, perhaps, a different toe style and suddenly they are two different lines.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[jenny_fleishman]

Topline tape, etc.---the tape in the photo I think is tape I bought from Georgene (in photo she posted above), 1/4" wide, not sure how thick. I cut it in half to make it 1/8".

Here is a picture of my foot against an earlier pair of shoes made on my lasts.

5285.jpg

Jenny

[artzend]

Jenny,

It is difficult to get an accurate foot placement like that, but it does look from that photo that your ball is behind the treadline and more to the waist. What do you reckon Rob?

Ok with the tape, dont worry about wrinkling, as long as the tape has no stretch you are laughing.

Sorry to be seeming to get you to do a lot of tricky work, and I know that I am too far away for you to come over and throw rocks on my roof, but so far, I reckon I would reduce the length based on what I see. I would need to see the last with a line at the joint.

Am I right assuming that Rob is familiar with these lasts? You mentioned something about moving the treadline forward. Is that right? Has it affected anything?

Sorry it's a lot of questions.


Tim

[btippit]

DW/Rob,

I've never heard of a copyright for a last although I do know of some rare cases where a shoe company actually patented a last because of some technical features they had built in. This seems like a shaky patent to me but then I generally avoid any subjects that are connected to attorneys or dangling live wires and barefoot wading, so I'm not much of an expert on the legal issues of last patents.

As for the common practice among last makers when guarding a customer's proprietary rights, the unwritten code of ethics on the subject for production lasts was generally that a proprietary model would never be used for someone else without prior permission from the original owner until the shoe style was easily available in the stores. However, after the shoes were at retail you could not be expected to refuse to make a new model that was very similar if someone brought you a shoe they had purchased and said they wanted to "knock it off". Generally however, the new customer would want the style features put on their own backpart to maintain their company's "fit profile" (or lack thereof). If they wanted the last to be as exact a copy as possible of the original, the last maker would have to do the "dance of ethics" as to whether to just make a copy and give it a different number or use a similar backpart and copy the toe onto it.

For the most part, if the original last did not have any significant fit features in the backpart (from the ball back) that the original owner had specifically developed a copy might be turned and a slightly different heel curve used with a new number. Most fit features in production lasts were developed from standard templates and measurements that were public domain. However, if the original owners had actually requested distinct fit features such as unique arch shapes, etc., then typically a different backpart was used and the original toe was added for the second customer.

With very few exceptions, shoe companies used a don't ask don't tell approach to this unless they truly had very specific features in their lasts that they did not want the competition to have access to. The reason? Next season THEY might be the ones wanting to knock off the competition.

No one ever complained about a toe shape being copied after the shoes hit retail because it's easy to buy a shoe and pour a mold of the toe and copy it. Copying the exact fit features of a last by purchasing a shoe is virtually impossible however.

When it comes to custom lasts, the vast majority of my styles are generic styles that I have acquired over the years by getting used lasts from shuttered factories or developed by using a backpart and making a new toe or some other feature combo.

If someone wants me to develop a new style for them I offer two alternatives. For a relatively significant development fee I will develop the new last model and not sell pairs on it to anyone without the original owner's permission.

For a MUCH lower price I will charge a one time fee to develop the last with the understanding that after the work is finished that customer or anyone else can buy additional sizes at the standard price per pair. Of course for the second option it has to be something I think someone else might be interested in down the road because it's really not usually worth it to me to make the new model at the reduced price for only one custom maker.

The same two tier fee system is true for copying your existing lasts. There's one fee if I am not to sell that style to anyone else and a lower fee if I can put it on the open market. Several of you who frequent this forum have such lasts with me now, either copied or developed.

To just turn a last from an existing, proprietary model and stamp a new number on it without the original owner's permission has been done but that doesn't make it right.

Like most things, this boils down to communication with both parties knowing up front what they are expected to be able to do and what they explicitly can't do. If that's taken care of at the beginning, it will lead to a "lasting" relationship. Good grief! See why I don't post often. The demons take over.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

[jenny_fleishman]

Hmm, my photo appears darker than the original. I'll try to lighten it later tonight and repost. I was thinking the shoe matched up pretty well with my foot. Perhaps when I lighten the photo it will miraculously look perfect!

Jenny

[artzend]

Jenny,

I did that before my comments. It is very difficult to use that to work out fit. It never seem to be accurate because you can't be sure that the foot is actually in the place it sits inside the shoe.

Tim

[jenny_fleishman]

Tim, I can understand that, but similarly, wouldn't setting a last on a foot tracing be just as unreliable?

At this point I'm thinking a large part of the problem may have been the way I made the wedge sole. I'll probably make one more pair without changing the treadline, do a stacked heel so it is easier to evaluate the fit, and bring the shoes, the lasts and my feet to the HCC meeting!

Incidentally, one of the adjustments I have just made to the lasts is to widen the heel at the featherline to make more room for the orthotics and to improve the contour. They curved in too much so that when I added depth for the orthotic it created a funny contour.

When I made the most recent pair of shoes I also added more depth (with removable layers of leather) at the heel vs the forefoot (I know, I know--not advisable), but I compensated by reducing the heel height by the difference between extra depth at the forefoot and the heel.

Jenny

(Message edited by Jenny Fleishman on August 07, 2007)

[artzend]

jenny,

No the foot tracing and last placing on that drawing does work. I used it for a lot of years once I was told of it and it seems to be accurate.

The stuff below is from my book "Bespoke Shoemaking..." it may help you line up your orthotics.

"The width of an orthotic device and it’s relationship to the last may be viewed by looking down the sides of the last while it is placed on an outline drawn round the orthosis which has been upturned.

If the outline of the orthosis is seen outside the profile of the back of the last when looking down, then it will probably need the length or sides of the last to be increased.

Remember that the orthoses sit in the bottom of the finished shoe, which means the bottom of the orthosis will be where the last bottom is now, so the top edge of the orthosis will be at a correspondingly higher part of the inside of the finished shoe. This is the area which must be built up on the side or back of the last, or when the orthosis is placed into the finished shoe it will sit forward of the area you measured it for, pushing the foot forward, thus upsetting the fit of the foot in the shoe.

Tracing the side profile of the device, and then measuring up from the bottom of the last can help you ascertain the point on the last at which there may be a problem. Do not add material to the bottom of the last to accommodate the orthosis, as this will affect the toe spring and heel height of the last. Always add material to the cone of the last if an orthosis is being inserted, as the foot often seems to move forward in the shoe.

The width of the bottom of the orthosis should be traced and fitted to the bottom of the last to check that it will fit into the bottom of the shoe.

If you have to fit up the side of the last for this, then once this last step has been finished, lever the glued buildup off the side of the last and replace it again using 2-3 tacks, not nails, to hold it in position. This is to enable the build up to be removed with the shoe when it is time to remove the last. It is very difficult to remove the shoe and leave this build up in place, as the topline may not be able to fit over it because of the width, and a lot of extra strain would otherwise be placed on the topline."

What you have done sounds fairly complicated. When you get the shoes done we can see what it looks like again.

Tim

[djulan]

Jenny,

Yes, this is "fairly complicated" as Tim said. And wish I could offer more, but after all these years self-teaching I am still sorting out many issues, as are you. Your persistence is admirable and your questions (and their responses) offer a lot to many of us also questioning similar problems. Thanks for that, and what you give of your efforts.

But I am posting an observation and comment about your above pic of your foot with shoe balanced on it. The foot is NWB (non-weight bearing in this pic). The fit of a shoe is most important for weight bearing. When the foot bears weight, it often elongates extending the location of the tread line across the ball joints furthur from the heel. In other words the heel to ball length lengthens. So I think a non-weight bearing comparison of foot to a finished shoe may not be useful to correct a fit problem.

If the ball to toe fit is right, then the heel to ball fit is probably the issue as Tim points out. As well, once the heel to ball length is corrected adding contour to the last to accomodate and replicate in the last your heel deformity will most likely work, again as Tim (and Robert) said. But be sure that any additions to the back of the heel contour are taken into consideration for the overall heel to ball length on the last. And lastly, adjust the Long/short heel to your foot accordingly. I mean make the last agree with the measure from the base of the back of the heel around the instep above the prominent bone on the top of the foot - usually the middle cuneiform. (not yet sure of long/short heel parlance since lastmakers seem to call one the other, and one cannot be measured on the last anyway)

Just in case this is helpful.

David

[dw]

A few observations that may or may not square with what has gone before...

First, as I said previously, a tracing is not often all that accurate. It can be off for any number of reasons, not the least is that it is hard to trace your own foot. This is especially pertinent when you trace around your own heel, because it is nearly impossible to keep a pencil perpendicular to the floor if you are doing it yourself. And, since the pencil lead is in the center of the pencil, the tracing will automatically be one-eighth inch wider than the actual dimensions of the foot. If the tracing is off, then locating a last a set amount in from the edge of the tracing cannot help but be questionable--just because the tracing is questionable.

Second, there are data that we can collect from the foot that are representational--the tracing is one. And there are data that are empirical--a "stick" is one of those. Girths are another. A "measured" distance from the back of the heel to the center of the medial ball joint, is yet another. And to some extent the pedograph is another although how it is interpreted can make a world of difference as to how useful it can be. But a line drawn under the edge of the foot in an effort to define the "footprint" (I did it this way for nearly 20 years) is not, even though it is tempting to regard it as a rough substitute for a pedograph.

Third, it should be remembered that what applies to one foot may not apply to another. When we take a pedograph, for instance we cannot use the tracing of the foot for the heel-end point...for all the reasons mentioned previously...but neither can we use the anterior edge of the foot print. Why? For several reasons...first the last has a "corner" at the back of the heel at the featherline that is not on the foot. And secondly, some feet are muscular and will print very tight and "short." Other feet are "loose" and will print further back under the foot than the muscular foot. And even disregarding these two very simplistic classifications, we have no way to measure or judge which is which or how wide and long a foot will print relative to its actual mass/substance.

This makes all representational data suspect...admittedly, sometimes it is useful, but it's still suspect. Only measurements from known points and with reliable and consistent measuring devices can yield reliable and consistent data. Until we have or collect that kind of empirical data to compare the foot to, we are guessing...guessing...whether it be in trying to evaluate your foot or the feet of customers we deal with.


Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[jenny_fleishman]

I would not make a good attorney. I am going to present some visual evidence of my own misdeeds!

The odd contours of the heel after adding depth to the last:

5292.jpg

What I used to add depth to the shoe during lasting:

5293.jpg

The altered last--wider at the featherline:

5294.jpg

And just for kicks, a lightened version of the picture posted earlier:

5295.jpg

I'm having a hard time comprehending that adding depth by building up the top of the last is preferable. It would seem to me that it would alter the fit of the shoe. For instance the narrowing of the cone to grip the heel would change position, hitting the heel lower down than intended in the design of the last, because the orthotic would raise the foot inside the shoe.

As a matter of fact that is one reason I haven't been able to wear orthotics in the past--they raised my foot within the shoe, and the top of the heel counter would hurt my heel even more.

What I'm trying to do by adding depth on the bottom is maintain the position of the foot in relation to last. Since I'm decreasing the heel height (I'm talking about the heel you walk on, not the height to the topline) in proportion to the extra depth added at the heel, I can't say that I understand why it would change the performance of the shoe. (Tim, I'm going to have to find time to read your book!)


Rob, as for building the orthotic right into the shoe vs making an insert--I figure if I don't get it right the first time I can keep remaking the orthotics until I do, rather than making new shoes.

Jenny

(Message edited by Jenny Fleishman on August 07, 2007)

(Message edited by Jenny Fleishman on August 07, 2007)

[dw]

I think adding depth by adding to the cone is possible. It requires, however, a pretty good understanding of the relationships between angles and girths as well as the various components of the shoe and where on the last they are positioned. One of the most compelling reasons to do this is that it preserves the bottom angles and radius/radii.

That said, if I need to add depth to accomodate an orthotic I would probably add it to the bottom of the last. But there, too, one must exercise a bit of caution. Adding only under the heel may add depth but it also changes the heel height and the "degree" of the heel. But the important point is that when the last is removed, the buildup is removed as well--that's what creates extra depth...the removal of that build up from inside of the shoe.

I am not sure how you are using the "wedge" under the insole...but if this is not taken out of the shoe before it is closed and/or worn, it isn't adding any depth at all. All it's doing is decreasing heel height. That wedge becomes part of the shoe and effectively fills in the depth that you wanted to create.

Also...it is well to bear in mind the concept of the "tread area" when thinking about wedges. If the forward edge of your wedge impinges upon the tread area, you may very well feel like the last is too long inthe shank area. But Luchesse once said...wisely, I think..."if you're going to fit 'em wrong, fit 'em long." Meaning that if you don't have a choice or are missing critical data, a long shank is preferable to a short shank.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[relferink]

DW, Bill,

Thanks for the copyright info. Up to now copyright may not have been much of an issue with the means to copy lasts in the hands of only a few last companies. The unwritten code of ethics seems to have worked reasonably well.
With scanners and CNC milling machines readily availability the copying of lasts is no longer just in the hands of last makers that are willing to invest in a lath. Every machine shop with a CNC milling machine could start making lasts from an emailed milling file that holds the design. Once you throw in the Chinese interpretation of copyright all bets are off anyway, unwritten codes of ethics are not even worth the paper they are not written on.

The push to functional mass customization has many looking at computerized solutions to generate customized lasts. Computers still aren't smart enough to come up with a last design that is functional and ecstatically acceptable. The lasts will likely be based on a library of models that are modified, cut and past. Those last may or may not come out of the public domain. If they are not, how would one get compensated for the design since there may only be one last sold that is scanned and many lasts are copied from it? This is where the copyright may fall in place. The last is after all is a tangibly expression of a design so I would think copyright could apply. It will be extremely difficult to enforce, more so since the removal of the last dogs is performed manual leaving a small degree of variation you get with handwork.

Bill, I'm with you on staying away from the lawyers and dangling live wires where possible. Barefoot wading I'll do as long as it's no deeper than the kiddy pool. I'm trying to get a sense of what is common practice and if there are strong opinions on the matter. I'm not looking for legal advice. Curiosity about the emerging customization industry is really what brought on the question.

Thanks again for the replies.

Rob

[artzend]

Jenny, Rob and DW,

First, Jenny, you now have most of the stuff that pertains to what I think your fitting problem is without actually being there. I think Larry has done this sort of work and will talk to him for when you go there.

If you put your othoses into an existing back height then it will pitch your foot higher and the topline will cut in. You need to add something like 10mm/7/16" to the top of your patterns and to the back height mark on the back of the last. This will put your foot in roughly the normal position it would be in a shoe without the orthotic. Sorry if I am saying something you already know.

I would hold off on grinding the cone down until you can sort the fit. You may have to add material later if you do. Building the bottom of the last and then removing a buildup never seems to give the same result that building up the top does. I am not sure why you have a problem with building the top, you just go by your instep and joint measurements and you should be right. You should always take the shoe from the last and try them on before you get to the sole so you can do minor adjustments then. It's a lot easier than trying to get the bottom right.

It looks as though you can take the sides in a bit at the back, it does look a bit thick but that depends on your ankles a bit too.

DW, the pencil thickness is taken into account with the 5mm placing of the last. It generally falls close to the treadline but the 5mm thing pretty well always worked. It was something that George Koleff used and he had done his training in the 1920s and I assume it was one of those bits of knowledge that had been worked out by experience and time.

Rob, thanks for the info on orthotics, they were the bane of my life when I was shoemaking and you would not believe what some of them looked like, and how they were never going to work, let alone fit in a shoe.

Tim

[dw]

Tim,

I don't doubt that it works...sometimes and in some hands. I have run across "systems" that measure the foot and then subtract an arbitrary amount from the girth measurement before translating to the last. Luchesse used just such a system when the boots were finally fully "factory-ized." But I have always thought that if you couldn't rely on the measurements taken with your own hands, and rely on those hands to pull the tape tight enough so that you wouldn't have to subtract that arbitrary amount, then what could can rely on?! Yet such systems work. And often...in the right hands...work well.

Using a series of empirical measurement derived from a "stick" and transposing them to the pedograph/tracing, my backpart endpoint often comes at or around 5 mm in from the tracing. But not always. As I mentioned, the tracing may be off...it is always suspect in my shop even though I sometimes resort to a "device." It is always suspect simply because it is "representational" rather than empirical. And as such...and a test to see how accurate and empirical it might possibly be...I've never seen a tracing be exactly the same...on the same foot...twice in a row. Even little discrepancies in the tracing bother me especially when I compare it to a "stick"--which will read the same 9 times out of 10.

Bottom line, however, is not that George or anyone else was wrong...simply that (as this discussion demonstrates) representational data is not easy to interpret even for experts such as yourself and Rob, much less someone like myself who is more literal minded...and especially at a distance.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[jenny_fleishman]

Tim, the leather layer I tack on for depth comes out of the shoe before the orthotic goes in. The one in the picture above is from the pair of shoes I just made.

re measurements...I don't really use them much (ouch!). At one of my visits to Walrus Shoe I had Larry give me a little instruction, but I am still not confident about it, plus I have only been working on my own feet, so it's tricky.

Before I go into a long discussion of my measuring concerns, Tim, I want to look at what you have in your book about that. I will say that measuring seems like, at best, an inexact science!

Jenny

[artzend]

Jenny,

I realise from what you said once before that you remove the insert, I would not even put it in in the first place, I found that when I tried it, putting in the orthotic just didn't work. Fitting up the top of the last is not difficult.

Measurements are crucial. Near enough is not good enough and I am not sure I agree that it is an inexact science. Done properly you will find that it works. You can't start to fit a last until you have something to work on. You may need to fine tune the fitting later but it generally doesn't take much.

Between all of us we'll get your shoes to fit.

Tim

[relferink]

Tim, I hear you about the orthotics, there are many orthotics made by people that do not bother to figure out how they are going to fit and function in a shoe. No matter how good the orthotic if it does not fit a shoe securely and/or the shoe is not able to keep the foot in place on the orthotic it will not do the customer any good.

Tim has a very valid point about changing the heel pitch if you add to the bottom of the heel for a ¾ length orthotic. This is often overlooked and will cause a drastic change in the function of the shoe. With a full length orthotic this should not be nearly as much of an issue. Over 95 percent of the orthotics I make are full length for a verity of reasons and I always aim to have the heel thickness and the ball thickens as much the same as possible. The toe is typically thinner but having a little more toe spring would be no big deal and that can be offset by leaving the toe slightly thicker.
So Jenny, with your full length orthotic you could opt going either way, adding to the cone is more work and somewhat harder to adjust. If you go with a spacer on the bottom be careful not to cut it to narrow. Keep the bottom of the last slightly wider compared to what you would do without the spacer. Consider the width at the bottom of the last if there were no spacer used, this is the width you want the bottom of your spacer to be, you taper to the bottom from the widest part of the heel should be less aggressive. This way you do not loose contact surface and subsequently stability. Based on the picture of the shoe you posted you could keep the bottom a little wider.

Holding the foot to the bottom of the shoe does NOT work. You are comparing the left foot with the right shoe or lining up the lateral side of the shoe with the medial side of your foot. The only time I do measure a foot against the bottom of the shoe is when fitting children's straight last corrective shoes. Now picture the kid screaming bluddy murder and they won't let you put a shoe on it's foot. By lining up the bottom you can get an idea if the shoe is the correct length.
In the picture are we looking at the right foot and left shoe? If both feet would be the same, I site with Tim; the ball seems to be behind the treadline. Not to beat a dead horse but I would take material off the heel to match the last length to the foot. In the picture it seems that the shoe has collapsed some behind the tread line. Was the wrinkle in the upper there before you started wearing this shoe? You're right that with a wedge sole this can not happen so the shoe will press up against your foot in that area. In the shoe pictured I suspect that the placement of the shank was to far back.

Jenny, is this the last I saw last year at the HCC annual meeting? Somehow it seems that this is about the 10th reincarnation of the one I've seen. I'll try to make it to Wisconsin for the AGM this year and look forward seeing the progress in fit you made from the other lasts.

You are correct that during the measuring and placement of the last on the tracing you have a lot of opportunities to go wrong. It's hard to spot the correct placement for the untrained eye. What may seem like an inexact science is simply the best available and when performed in a consistent manor it will yield results.
Most importantly is consistency, the more you work with your last on the foot tracings and check the measurements, the better you will get in knowing your own style. At some point you realize you normally hold the pencil in a similar position and that you should place the last within the same margin every time. As long as you take the tracing and measurement yourself you develop your own style. I don't think there is anyone here that would take a chance on getting a fit from someone else's tracing unless you were taught by that person and have worked together for some time.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the last is a static representation of the foot. Certain landmarks need to be right on, other parts are nothing like the foot. With a quarter of the body's bones in the feet, it's an extremely complicated balancing of movement that allows us to walk. You simply can not account for all those movements in the static model the last is. Modern last have proven to be a very acceptable way to cover and protect the feet as long as you respect certain measurements and landmarks on the foot. “Listen” to your feet, when they complain you may want to fix it.

Hope this helps.

Rob

[artzend]

Rob,

Thanks for that. It sums up my thoughts over the last day or so. I disagree that building the top of the last is tricky, but that is neither here nor there, I am sure we could talk for hours on that subject.

One thing with the build up on the bottom is that as it gets higher, the bottom surface must become narrower as the sides of the last must be followed to make a continuous wall or your shoe is going to look odd with a curved wall and then a straight edge down to the new feather edge if you are trying to keep the same bottom shape. Your heel is made smaller (narrower and shorter) because of this.

I agree that experience helps when measuring but if you are sensible about it and follow some fairly straightforward steps, you are going to have a good fit most of the time and any small alterations you will find out about when doing a fitting, and correct it then.

It will be good for you guys to actually see what is happening with the lasts. It is tricky to do at a distance.

Tim

[relferink]

Tim,

Building up the cone is not necessary tricky but requires more shaping and you have to pay more attention to the measurements. Like everything it's what you used to that seems the easiest and best way.

When building up the bottom I'm not saying that you should go straight down, just lessen the degree of taper to the feather line. This of course with a custom last, with a stock last you don't want to change you do indeed need to follow the "flow" of the last. The base getting narrower is something you will just have to accept or change the last. In the picture from the back of Jenny's shoes posted above, the base seems slightly narrow and somewhat out of proportion. This of course is like beauty, it's all in the eye of the beholder.

It sounds like you won't be attending the HCC annual meeting? To bad since it's a really good time and in top of that very informative and great to meet all the other shoemakers. Why don't you combine coming to the meeting with that worldwide book signing tour you've been putting off?

Rob

[artzend]

Rob,

I would love to come over but it's just too much at this stage. Larry is on at me too. The worldwide book signing tour may have to be put off for a while.

I only just thought of the problem with tapering the build up on the bottom, but know from past experience what it looks like, and how it affects everything. Gee, I wish those little gifs would stop doing that above what I am writing.

I am finding that there are quite a few shoemakers that I can talk to now. I stayed away from forums until I finished the book. I now talk on a regular basis to Larry and DW, and Marcell, who is a shoemaker in Hungary and has just joined us here. The differences and similarities between us and our methods are fascinating (to a shoemaker at least) probably boring to anyone else.

It is really nice to know so many people who are prepared to trade ideas and help. It is good to be part of a group who don't want this trade/craft to die out. It would be a terrible pity if that happened.

Tim

[relferink]

Tim,

Those little gif guys are all excite about your worldwide book signing tour, can you blame them?
This is a very exciting place, at least for shoemakers. It's great to have a way to communicate and learn from others in the gentle craft.

Marcell, welcome to the form. Step out of the shadows when your ready and introduce yourself. We may bark at times but rarely bite. I'd be very interested to learn about your background and experience.

Rob

[dw]

Tim,

Can't you see?!! All those little guys are cheering you on...saying A-G-M, A-G-M, A-G-M...or maybe it's Adelaide, Adelaide...I never was any good at reading lips.



Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

[artzend]

DW,

It's Agnes now (Agnes Water) Adelaide was too cold. I really like the tropics. Maybe one day but not this one, sorry. Unless someone sends me a ticket.

Tim

[marcell]

Hi All,

I step out.. I am still not so familiar with this forum, so - I f you don't mind, I will write a few words here.

I am a shoemaker for 20 years. Leathercraft is a family tradition for six generation. Now I work on restarting my business - I try to make high quality handmade sewn men shoes.

I am happy to be here, I hope that I will learn new things and maybe I can help - especially, if someone is interested in hungarian shoemakers' tradition.