One "Last" Question

[sorrell]

Would that rule vary depending on toe shape? Do you think 1/12 of the last length could be a hard and fast rule for both a wide round toe or a long narrow one?

Lisa

[angel]

Lisa,
Speaking from a common sense view, I would say that rounded toes would have less allowance. That´s the way I did it before.
I'd like to hear Bill Tippit´s opinion here. He´s the expert!

[sorrell]

Angel,
Yes, I think so too. I was interested to hear the 1/12 rule but I was curious if a toe shape was specified. It seems to me that any toe length rule would have to take the toe shape into account. I'm going to measure 1/12 the next time I fit a last though, and see what I think!

Lisa

[dw]

Sabbages Sectionizer says to divide the foot length into 11 equal parts. To get the SLL (standard last length) for a medium round toe, add one 11th to the foot length. (same thing as Angelo said but there are other implications of thinking about it this way...read the section on the webpage, it's very interesting)

For wider round toes I think it goes without saying that a smaller distance could be used. For narrow round or pointed toes a longer length almost must be used.

But to return to the OP's question, I understand that a photo can make a shoe look longer than it is, just by virtue of the angle of the photograph. But I've been studying Santoni's and G&G's and Berlutti's and every website I can get to, and I am near certain it's not just angle I'm seeing. Of course I've just got the pics to go by, I've never handled the shoes themselves.

I have a wide foot and I can build a shoe with a full inch or better of extra room on a wide square toe in an effort to elongate the look of the shoe and it looks OK but still a little stubby. I wonder what the limit is before the foot loses control over the toe of the shoe? Inch and a quarter? Inch and a half? I'm not sure. And surely the width and shape of the toe would have some bearing?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[mack]

DW,
We get this all the time , I'm afraid the width and shape of the foot govern which shapes are possible and some comfort is sacrificed for an extreme look. I dont think you can generalise about the maximum length you can use it will vary from foot to foot charts and maths do not always work in this trade. My own foot is quite broad and I doubt I could get away with a very narrow look even if I wanted it,but the methods I spoke of using the insole and extending the toe box make quite a difference also showing a little more welt at the toe gives an illusion of length.
I looked at Santoni's website and these shoes are very long and most of them are factory made so the fit is a secondary consideration
Makers will only show there best examples of work and the chunky broad feet do not show what they want. this long narrow look is a trend in the bespoke trade that will fade in time after all the whole point of bespoke is a superior fit.
The fitting of shoes is a little different to boots and if you are new to shoemaking it may be easier to work on a more standard look first
It took me a while to figure out how to get this narrower look right and I have been making shoes for 34 years .Getting the last shape right is one thing but the making involves a lot of technique to get it looking right.
Regards Mack.

[dw]

Mack,

Thanks for your reply.

A "follow-up," if you don't mind. We had a discussion some months back about measurements on a last. Specifically a shoe last.

As a bootmaker I take a short heel, a high instep, a low instep, a waist, a ball girth and a long heel. In the informal survey that ensued I came away with the impression that most shoemakers don't take a long heel measurement--which for the purposes of the discussion can be defined as from the corner of the heel to the middle cuniform. I have a hard time accepting that. I know I've got a lot to learn but when I make a trial shoe for myself it fits and laces up just as I designed it if I plug in some variation of the long heel measurement. For instance on my last trial shoe, I made the last about a quarter inch smaller in the instep and the long heel measurement and the laced the shoe facings tight together. It worked beautifully. But, it seems to me you couldn't do that with a derby.

So...my question...do you factor in a long heel measurement..exact, shy or do you ignore it altogether and focus solely on the instep girth. And as for the instep girth, do you make the last, exact shy or what?

And maybe the lasts and uppers just come to you to bottom...but if you were to do it for yourself what would you do?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[relferink]

All,

Having watched this from the sideline I've been wondering if I should jump in. Not being nearly the expert some others here are, I would be afraid to complicate the discussion more than helping it but here we go anyway.
First of all, I don't have an answer that goes beyond sharing what works for me and an interpretation of what I observe.

The way I was taught and have always handled toe elongation is adding 10 to 15 mm beyond the longest toe based on a weight bearing length measurement. I have always considered this a slightly inaccurate way of working as it does not account for the foot size and foot type. Over the years I have however learned to give my own interpretation to the feet at hand and add anywhere from 10 to 15 mm with a mostly roundish toe.
Adding less would obviously be a problem as the foot would hit the toe box when walking, adding more will cause the toe of the shoe to curl up and will make the shoe look to big from across the room.
This can be offset by adding toe spring in the last but if you add toe spring without heel height the shoe will not look proportionately correct.

As Angel noted, Sabbage adds 1/11^th as a toe elongation. I've read this but it really never got processed by my brain untill Angel sets it out to his foot length and the toe elongation becomes more than I would consider appropriate. First thing that comes to mind is that Sabbage is simply wrong but I don't think it's that simple. Scanning over the chapter again nothing jumps out at me if Sabbage measures the foot weight bearing or not. Considering the “long” elongation I would venture to guess that he takes the measurements non weight bearing.
An article by Bill Tippit published in World Footwear comes to mind. In it he tells the reader how the Brannock device was originally used to measure customer seated and last maker would size lasts according to this principal. Not exactly what we are discussing here but it does give the thought of Sabbage basing his sectionizing on non weight bearing some credibility.
As Bill is currently at the World Shoe Association show in Las Vegas he may not be available to comment immediately but will hopefully chime in when he has a chance.

With that said, back the the question how much to add. Looking at a well styled lasts that seem to add length, most lasts come in narrow or low to the front as seen on a chisel style last. The way I would approach this is by determining where you would normally end your 10/15mm toe elongation. Anything beyond that spot I would make to narrow of shallow to accommodate the toe. I would be hesitant to go beyond 5 to 10 mm as that will still bring you out nearly 1 inch (25mm).
Use your judgment based on the length of the foot. A longer foot can more easily accommodate a little extra length.
Any extra length does not come so much from true length but from “adjustments” such as suggested by Mack. I particularly like the one tip to show a little more welt at the toe to project length, thanks for that.
Don't under estimate the "optical illusion" of length. By using sleek lasts with relative low toes and having the instep point higher up the last than a average round toe you can project length. How much higher an instep point you ask? Not sure if there is truly a measurement for that or if that's dictated by the eye for balance and proportions, aka experience.

Consider derbies vs oxfords. On the shoes I've been looking at the derbies seem to have more length compared to the oxfords. I have not reason to believe that there actually is a difference in the lasts, just the way the pattern is scaled that will give you the optical illusion.

I'm very curious what Nick's experience is, he's the last maker apprentice. Nick, feel free to jump in!

Just my (can I get that in Euro-cents?)

Rob

[large_shoemaker_at_large]

Hi All
What a timing I had a pair of enlongated toe shoes cross the bench Tuesday. I had to do a build up. They had a toe that was shaped to a chisel but you could see were they dropped the angle and still left a slight dome were the 1st toe went. Interesting style 1 piece upper. very conservative brouging no sticthing along the holes. A fairly well built shoe but I didn't recognise the brand.
The elongation seemed to be 7/8ths from were the dome edge was and the feather line with a fat welt. and as I think about the shape the flat on the front was about 7/8 wide also. It was a nice shaped last, reminded me of a sleek racing boat hull. I don't think you would find that style of shoe in 5 E

Hope that helps
Brendan

[dw]

Rob, all,

I apologize for not answering your earlier PM on this subject...I needed a nap.

I wouldn't have asked this question if I were certain of the answer...esp. regarding shoes. That said, I have some new material to add; some thoughts on Sabbage; and some of my own personal experiences to relate. How it will affect or apply to the discussion remains to be seen.

In no particular order...

I think we have some clues as to how Sabbage approached his Sectionizer. In one of the diagrams he depicts a "skeletonized" cross-section of the foot within a frame which is subdivided into 11 sections. I can only assume that this illustration is meant to be taken literally. If so, I think the foot is being presented as if resting on the ground...whether weight bearing or not is a different question, I do agree. But it has always struck me that a non-weight bearing footprint or even a non-weight bearing stick is nearly as useless a datum as we can gather. The shoe is nearly of no consequence when the foot is not bearing weight.

OK, that's all speculation and I guess we can interpret the illustration any way we want.

But Sabbage does say that "The usual allowance made in the trade for men's is three shoe sizes, i.e. 1 in...." (one size being based upon the mythical ideal length of a barleycorn...ie. one-third of an inch)...all of which is what I was always taught as well. That' more than 15mm no matter how you cut it.

[Parenthetically, the beauty of Sabbage is that it recognizes that a "size" can be relative...less for smaller feet, more for longer feet.]

Making boots for many years, I have always allowed five-eights of an inch (15mm) for wide round toes and one full section (one-eleventh of the foot length...weight on)for medium round toes. More...up to inch and a quarter for narrow pointed toes.

This practice, although somewhat rough and ready, has always served me well and has never resulted in curled toes even though in my earlier years I advocated that shoe trees not be used with western boots (something I got from my teacher).

On my pair of full cut shoes (my first pair of shoes made using traditional techniques), that I exhibited in the Gallery, the lasts in question are more than a full section...an inch or better...longer than my weight-on foot length. The toe shape is a wide chisel and somewhat low in profile (although certainly not as low as shoes made by Dmitri Gomez or the like). The shoes fit my foot very, very well and I have a predisposition to judge fit relative to the way I want a boot to fit--snug, no adjustments via laces necessary.

Yet the shoes and the toes look short. As one of my current mentors put it, they look "foreshortened." This is partially my foot structure. But I believe I could go to a full inch and a quarter with this style of last and not see toe curl. And as a bonus, I do believe that the extra length would improve the overall look of the shoe.

New material...I am converting Golding's volume I to pdf. I chose this volume partially because it included a section on making lasts. The author of this section is "Mr. Beresford Worswick, Principal of the Cordwainers' Technical College" (as was Sabbage, if I recall correctly), and "formerly Physicist to British Boot, Shoe, and Allied Trades Research Association."

He says:

Consider that the plan of the foot is a true one, that is, taken with a tracer--not a pencil. This plan can have been taken with the weight on or weight off, but the condition, whichever it is, will have been noted. If both are taken, the mean can be assumed to be the length of the foot. The last must be made longer than the foot, and, consequently, the sole pattern also. This increase depends on the width and shape of the toe required, whether pointed or square, receding or upright. For average purposes with a man's foot, say, size 7, the extension might be 2½ sizes for a square toe, three sizes medium toe, and 3½ to 4 sizes pointed toe. For ladies' size 2 to size 7, 2 sizes, 2½ sizes and 3 sizes respectively.

(emphasis mine)

So...what do we make of all this ? Beats me...I still don't know how much to add to my particular foot to get a sleeker, more elongated look without disregarding the footprint.

I'll see your and raise you €0,02.


Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[elstoof]

All,
I'm just been getting up to speed with this thread and it's certainly interesting.

The way I've been taught when making a last is to add two and a half english sizes to the length of the foot, but as this length is obtained from the draft outline, the pencil also adds a bit to the size. This isn't hard and fast though and a little more is can be added, particularly if the joint is far up the foot, but I don't think anyone I know would add more than three and a half sizes otherwise it'd be getting into flipper territory. Looking at a couple of the pictures on the Santoni website that look overly long, I'd be hard pressed to say whether or not this is a 'good thing'.
The side on pictures on G&G's bespoke gallery don't look out of proportion, the joint and tread area is nicely balanced, but that slender chisely slope on the toe really adds to the look of length (especially on the angled pictures) as the toe shape on a more "traditional english" style last comes up almost at a right angle from the bottom and as Mack stated above, the insole will carry this line even further.
DW, with regards to the measurements, I can reassure you that the long heel measure is one I've been taught to use, reducing it by a quarter of an inch, along with the instep which is under by an eighth to allow for lacing.

Regards,
Nick

[gshoes]

Hello All,

I have been going back to the very beginning of this thread in the 2002 archives and printing it out so that I may read and reread it away from the computer screen. So many of my questions are being answered that I don't need to open my mouth. But, thats really not like me. So...I thought that I would just share a laugh with all of you by showing you what last making in the dark creates.


GERI

6990.jpg

[dw]

Nick,

The info about using the long heel is so welcome and so reassuring...at least to me. The whole concept of using, and why to use, the long heel is central to my entire approach to fitting.

Thank you for your insights into the length of the last, as well. However, I didn't catch whether you were obtaining the stick of the foot weight on or weight off. ??

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[dw]

Mack,

Re-reading your earlier two posts on this subject...I am puzzled (and maybe on the verge of an epiphany) when you speak about "methods we use for the bespoke work can help elongate the toe beyond the last length, using the insole and an extra toe piece," and "using the insole and extending the toe box."

Are you talking about bringing the insole up and over the end of the last when you refer to "an extra toe piece?"

If so, the light bulb is coming on. I could see how one could gain an extra quarter of an inch without making the last longer or increasing the space beyond the toes inside the shoe. If not, I wonder if you could explain in a little more detail?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[elstoof]

DW,

All the measures worked to are taken while seated, it's very rare that a standing measure is used unless it's a particularly problem foot.

Regards,

Nick

[dw]

Nick,

So, a slight to moderate amount of weight on the foot? Do you take the girth measurements like this too? And if you do, do you reduce the girths (other than the instep) as a matter of course when you apply them to the last or only under special circumstances? Or maybe not at all?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[elstoof]

DW,

The girth measures are also taken like this and generally have a quarter or so added to the last to allow for spreading at the joint etc, except for the instep which is reduced to allow for lacing (provided it's a laced shoe).

Regards,
Nick

[relferink]

Nick,

Thanks for jumping in and clarifying the approach you are taught. I'm curious how the measurements are taken. Referring to this old post from Bill, are these the locations you take your measurements?

DW, your long heel measurement goes to the middle cuniform , not as far down as Bill's print. I'm following the measurement sage with great interest but just like us earlier it would be good to have the terminology straight.

Rob.

[relferink]

DW,

Was it beauty sleep you needed? Well, no one can fault you for trying.
I just didn't have time to really re-read the Sabbge section, scanned over it but figured I may have missed something. The honey-do list was waiting and I know better than to ignore that one (found out the hard way)

I agree with your assessment of the Sabbage approach. I can only see this as a non or partial weight bearing measurement. The reason I referred to Bill Tippit's article was his statement that last makers traditionally use a non weight bearing foot to derive a last from. Doesn't make an awful lot of sense to me but this may be (has been) industry standard. It would be plain silly to go through the trouble of writing a chapter as Sabbage did without specifying a curtail detail like weight bearing or not unless it's so obvious to the intended audience that it does not require mention. (if it was an industry standard)

I come up empty reading Mr. Worswick's writing. The fact that he is so casual about the difference in weight bearing and non weight bearing tracings and the extreme amount he adds to the length goes against all my training and experience. Maybe there is a larger context these writings need to be seen in. I just don't see it.

Your boot experience is valid but can not easily transferred to shoes as the last is quiet different in a few specifically important areas. First of all the toe spring on your boots is in balance with the heel height but is much higher than a shoe. Having this toe spring build into the boot makes the toe less prone to pointing up as it already does that to begin with.
On the construction, you use an insole that is much heavier than one would in a shoe, this makes your boot much firmer, I hesitate to call it stiffer but you get my drift. That keeps the toe from going skyward as well.

The shoe you made on your boot lasts has a higher heel and additional toe spring but more than that, because of the heel height the cone of your last is much fuller than an average shoe last. This alone is enough to take away any optical elongation you try to achieve. You also made an oxford, I find oxford's look less long compared to derbies. The instep point being moved is in my opinion the reason.
Your foot being broad obviously does not help, what would you guess the width to be, 2E or wider? With the correct last and some visual “tricks” I don't see how you wouldn't be able to archive a longer look. Maybe not quite like the model shoes that are selected for sleekness but still longer looking. Also remember that you have to compromise your footprint in order to get a great looking shoe. As the movie “Kinky boots” put it:

Lola: [When looking at the first sample boot created by the Price & Sons company] Please, God! Tell me I have not inspired something burgundy!
Charlie Price: But they're comfy.
Lola: [after Lola had accidentally put the sample boot onto the loudspeaker microphone button] SEX, shouldn't be comfy!
Mel: Thank God, I thought it was just me!

I just checked out the Santoni site. Guess I'm not the only one. It was slow to load. Not sure what they do to be able to get away with that. Looking at the loafer style it almost looks as if the widest part of the foot, traditionally the ball of the foot is forward from where I would expect to see it based on the cut of the upper.
Maybe I'm seeing things that are not there but the reason I looked at the loafer is that it is harder to hold on one's foot if you up the length / size to much.

Oh, just to be clear, my experience is mostly base on cemented construction. I don't see how it would be different from a sewn construction as long as it's sewn on the insole. Goodyear sewn with a rib may be stiffer as it creates a cavity between the insole and outsole, the lamination effect will stiffen the shoe.

Hey , you must be confused, it's Bill Tippit who's in Vegas playing poker and who knows what else.
Anyhow, I'm out of Euro cents. Do you have change for

6992.jpg

?

Rob

[dw]

Rob,

I'm not sure how Bill's long heel relates. I've talked to Bill about this on several occasions and come away with the impression that Lastmakers (at least here in the US) and shoemakers may share terminology but they do not share a common purpose or a common definition of what those terms relate to. And last makers don't make any bones about the fact that the lastmakers long heel is not and never has been equivalent to the shoemakers long heel.

Heck, for that matter, not all shoemakers agree on what constitutes the long heel.

PS...for what it is worth I always take all girth measurements non-weightbearing. But the length and the pedograph is always taken weight on.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[dw]

Nick,

Thanks again for your insights.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

[btippit]

To All:

With all the preparation for the Materials At WSA Show and learning how to use the new features added to the lightbeam foot scanner and now our scanner that captures the INSIDE of a shoe, I just haven't had time to jump into this thread, though I have wanted to do so. I tried from the airport in Vegas on the way home yesterday but my free "high speed" connection (about 1/25th of my AT&T U-Verse connection at home) there failed me after I had written about 3 pages on the subject. Once I got logged back on I noticed that my plane was boarding and had to abort again. So here goes.....

From a PRODUCTION LAST MODEL MAKING perspective only, here is how I was taught to determine toe extension. The women's method comes right out of Karl Adrian's "American Last Making". My good friend Wilson Schaedler taught me the men's method.

Women's lasts have a wide variety of heel heights, which affects the linear view of the last as far as length goes. The higher the heel height, the shorter the straight line length of the last from a side view. The page in Karl's book will depend on the version you have but basically we set a last size stick on a size defined by a chart which grades the location based on heel height. The example pictured below is a 15/8 heel height size 6B so the last stick is set on size 2 3/8. The back end of the stick is placed on back of the heel where the top of the shoe would be (typically 2 1/16" on a size 6B). The other end of the stick is allowed to mark the bottom of the toe and this is the location where the end of the toe of the foot will be. The minimum thickness at this point on a women's size 6B is 11/16" and this thickness should grade about 1/64" per whole size. The stick is set to grade size for size if you need to check a size other than the 6B model size. Here is a picture that I hope shows what I'm talking about.

6994.jpg

The men's method doesn't offer any variation in heel height since we typically trod around in shoes ranging from half an inch to around one inch or slightly higher in heel height. I've never seen a chart for toe thickness relative to Western Boots so I just use my experience with the styles I have as a guide. On a men's shoe last you set the last stick 2.5 sizes below the size of last you are checking and then set one end of it at the base of the heel and let the other end drag across the top of the toe as shown below and this is where you measure the toe thickness. On a men's 8D the thickness should be one inch with a grade of 1/48" per whole size.

6995.jpg

As for the elongated toes that started this whole conversation, anything that happens beyond the toe thickness point is purely for style and should not affect fit as there should be no part of the foot there. Since I don't mind being the butt of a joke I'll tell one on myself.

The first time I saw one of those long toes was when a customer many years ago sent me a last to analyze and modify as I saw fit. Not being aware of this fashion trend (it was a women's high heel pump with about 1.5 inches extending beyond the toe thickness point), I proceeded to fix the other areas that needed work and then shorted the toe beyond the toe thickness point by about 3/4". Needless to say he wasn't too happy and I got a quick education on European styles as well as customer service since I had to make a second model at no charge.

So that's it. My feeling is that if the toe thickness point is respected, then it doesn't matter how long or narrow a toe is on a shoe as long as there's room where the foot is.

I'm sure I've missed something but I'm really too tired to go back and read the thread again. I'll try to offer what perspective I have if there are any other questions.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

[btippit]

Sorry....forgot to shrink the pictures.

Bill

[mack]

All,
I went back and read the previous thread about measures and shoe lasts and there are obviously variations in peoples methods and if it works its good .
Just a few observations, bear in mind I am not a trained lastmaker so feel free to call my bluff.
I get to work on lasts from many different lastmakers and on one occasion I made shoes for one customer for three different shops.Two of the shops lasts were fairly similar and the third was quite different but as far as the customer was concerned they all were a good fit. He went on to have more shoes from the third shop but I think this was more for style reasons and selection of leathers available rather than fit issues ,so how we all see a foot and make a last can vary a lot.
I recently made a last for myself and I made a trail shoe which allowed me to tweak the fit a little.I did my measures sitting just doing a trace and taking 3 measurements ,joint, instep and a heel measure ( back of heel to top of instep )I added three sizes to the length.When making the last I made the measures just under all over and made the trail shoe.Fit was good but roomy and I also decided to alter the pattern a little to change the proportions slightly. I ignored the measurements and reduced the last based on what I saw with the shoe on the foot.I then made another trail shoe and liked the fit better . The lacing was open and was fairly tight when done up but I was advised by an experienced lastmaker that this would resolve itself with wear of the shoe so I have left it alone. I measured the last then and compared it to the original measurements and it was under measure by more than I would have guessed but I am happy with this snug fit as I am trying to make as smart a shoe as possible . Not all customers would like or want this fit so we need to bear in mind what they are comfortable with.Getting to know ones customers will pay off over time.
I will happily make oxfords and derbies on this last but not a casual or boot these will need ajustments.
I've yet to complete these shoes, uppers are closed ( half brogue oxford ), insoles blocked, just need some time to do the rest.
Regards Mack.

[mack]

DW,
Ajusting the shape and lengthening the toe is done by leaving the insole a little longer at the toe and maybe shaping it differently to change the toe shape.Then when the lining is lasted adding a piece of leather onto the lining and blending it to a desired shape, some makers use a smaller toe box to do this. When done last the toe box over it and hammer to shape then the rest is done the same as usual.I would think the most you would get using this method combined with the insole is 1/4 inch .You need to alter the feather on the insole at the toe so the awl comes out at the correct position or if you forget use a different awl to make sure your welt stitches come out ok.
Regards Mack.

[dw]

Mack,

Thanks!! That's what I thought you were talking about.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC