Fitting the Foot

Message

dearbone · #126 Post by **dearbone** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:21 am

Jon,

Adding to what is said above,There is no single answer,formula,or a book that can lead one over night to correct fitting of the foot to last,but a collections of factors,selecting the correct last from measurement is a very careful operation,the shoe maker must have a good 3 dimension picture of the customer feet or a cast,i take as much time as possible looking at customers feet,as to memorize them digitally,some times the correct last comes to mind right away and some times in days,it is very easy to miss a half a size or a full size when choosing the last for the foot and there is little forgiveness in fitting shoes,it either fits or not,i have been embarrass few times in front of the customer when this happened,the lowest point for this shoe maker,but don't loose heart,the best firms make around %5 shoes that don't fit, my point is taking measurements is very important,more important is choosing the correct last from them,i have recently started taking imprint of the bottom of feet by using orthopedic foam, it cost few dollars,but it helps me a lot in choosing the correct last in combination with my measurements and lots of prayers.

Nasser

jon_g · #127 Post by **jon_g** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:52 am

And how about tracings, is it generally agreed that a standing tracing is best? I have been using semi weight bearing tracings used but I'm finding the ball to heel lengths short. Comments?

Jon

dearbone · #128 Post by **dearbone** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:14 am

A simple rule i follow,if shoes are made for walking,than i trace standing up with full weight on flat surface,try the foam imprint,it might solve the ball to heel length issue.

Nasser

#129 Post by dw » Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:03 am

Jon,

A pedograph will go a long way towards revealing the correct heel to ball length. Additionally, Sabbage suggests that, on normally proportioned feet, the "shank" measurement will be 8/11ths of the foot length from the back of the heel.

Nasser's point about tracing, or obtaining the footprint while standing is, in my opinion, spot on and as good a rationale for doing it that way as any. However, I generally measure the girths weight off. I'm not sure whether or not it might be better to measure the girths weight on but I've found that if I do that for boots, the boots will inevitably be too loose.

I have often said that bootmaking (and by inference, shoemaking) is easy. Once you learn the skills...and given that you're not in a race...it's all just muscle memory.

What's hard...and the key to any successful career in the Trade...is fitting. But I don't think that there is any hard and fast way to get from here to there. Just how tightly you pull the tape measure...that alone can make a significant difference in your results. But it is extremely hard to codify the degree of tension that must be imparted to the tape.

Some will pull it relatively loose and place the measurements higher, or differently, on the last. Some will pull tighter and locate those girths on the last in a different place. Some will add or subtract arbitrary measurements from the girths they obtain from the foot.

And in the end, it all comes down to your understanding of the foot, in general, and the one in front of you. Is it fleshy? Is it firm? Is it flexible? To what degree? How do you pull the tape to accommodate these differences?

Procedures for measuring the foot can be codified, but there is a limit to how strict and how empiric those methods can be. The foot itself is too indeterminate.

And then there's the subjective perception of fit...

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

jon_g · #130 Post by **jon_g** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:32 am

Thanks to all of you for writing on the subject. Fitting has always seemed so subjective. Like some of you I have always adjusted the last tighter than the measurements I guess to compensate for my style of taking measurements. Although these days, refining my techniques and using firmer leather, GN burnishable buffalo I find I'm getting closer to the actual measurements.

I am resolved to fitting being a long term project and for the forseeable future I'm going to take standing and sitting tracings and pay attention to what works.

In the meantime I will check out the Sabbages Sectionizer area of this forum. I admit I haven't looked there yet.

Jon

dearbone · #131 Post by **dearbone** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:49 am

Jon,

It is always a good idea to make a single fitter shoe to try on the customer before making him/her the real shoes,it cost less in time and money.For my hammer toed customer,i made a fitter for each foot because they were different and once the last issue is resolved,his four pairs order was easy to carry on,knowing that the last fits or (the foot fits the last),i go on to making correct uppers(easy lasting) from the last,experience gained here in this way leads the bespoke shoe or boot maker forward,knowing that he has to do the same for the next pair and with God's many blessings towards the boot and shoe makers,every pair of feet are different.

Nasser

jesselee · #132 Post by **jesselee** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 9:29 am

Jon et al

Arch is paramount for a good fit. Fit the last hugging the arch fr support. One thought I forgot to mention was heel width. The last must be brought to the heel width. In the old days they used a type of calipers with flat parts rather than points. If you examine pre 20th century boots and shoes you notice the narrowness across the counter area and heel as compared to the wide counters and heels of todays footwear.
I have been demonstrating this to my current student who works at a Pioneer Village and illustrated how her reenactment shoes fit and they being 3/4 in. more narrow than the widest part of the foot.
But ultimately as DW said, its the 'perception' of fit. So always make that fitters model. It is perhaps the greatest aid to boot and shoe making.

JesseLee

big_larry · #133 Post by **big_larry** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:47 pm

Jon,

I am not an "old timer" but during the past 3 years I have worked very hard to get the best fit possible. I use a plaster casting of the bottom of the foot in addition to measurements and bottom imprint. D.W said that is is critical to get the heel and the ball of the foot to match exactly to the last. I totally agree with this!

I make the cast from a bare foot, no sock. The sock they normally wear is perfect for doing measurements. This socken issue and whether or not you use a leather insole liner can make a big difference in the final fit.

I agree with making a pair of "fitter boots" every time you fit a new customer. In addition, some folks have notions about toe room and heel tightness. One ting I really watch out for is whether the large toenail is pressured on the inside or outside. I like to give it a bit of room. I measure for bunyons but do not make the bulge. I let the bunyon do that, remembering that it requires a tiny bit of extra to allow for the form fitting to occure without pain.

When the heel is not a bit snug, the heel will slide around, especially after a few months of wear. "Snug is good." I hope this helps,

Larry Peterson HCC Member

luckyduck · #134 Post by **luckyduck** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:42 am

Hey Everyone,

Another question on heel to ball length. So far I have made 6 trys at this type of boot and the heel to ball length is too short every time. I started with Koleff's method and it was way too short. Everything felt great about the shoe, except for making a nasty bruise on the back of my heel.

Soooo. Here are some pictures of what I have done so far. Maybe someone can point out my going astray.

Here is the type of boot I am making. Sewn in, soling leather counter. Fairly firm leather.

10096.jpg

First off I used the foot tracing as in Koleff and here is what it looks like.

10097.jpg

Then transfering to the last. I put the heel feather line at the outside traced line on the foot tracing to try and get a little extra length.

10098.jpg

Taping the foot tracing to the bottom of the last gives the black lines on the last matching with the 2 marks at the foot joint from the tracing. The tracing is VERY carefully made and doing several tracings on different days gave the same results with a mm, so it seems unlikely to be a tracing issue. The boots feel a lot better if I lace them up only to the top of the eyelets and leave the hooks un-laced. Is there some rule of thumb to add extra if it is a laced up high boot?

By the way. Using the Koleff measuremtents I came up with a last 2 sizes smaller than what I normally wear. (Average size 10 on store bought shoes. Measurements gave a size 8 in my lasts)

Thanks for the help. My shoe making skills are to the point of making ones that look wearable. Now if they fit at least fairly close it would be nice.

Thanks

Paul

ps. I should mention that I also have Tim's and DW's Western boot book. But have been rying to stick to one fitting method and figure it out.

Thanks again.

Paul

(Message edited by luckyduck on September 17, 2009)

lancepryor · #135 Post by **lancepryor** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:29 am

Paul:

Nice looking boots.

I trust someone else will be better able to answer your question than I, but a couple of questions/observations from the peanut gallery....

First, you might want to check the length of the last from the toe to the CP -- might the bottom length be okay but the heel be too curved? Related to this, the back of the boot looks like it has alot of curvature. I am of the impression that boot lasts use less curvature at the heel, but your boot seems to really curve in at the back. That might be why they fit better with the top of the boot undone. Maybe the bruise is from putting them on and off, rather than once they are on your foot? Finally, when the boots are on are the joints in the proper position in the boots, or is there something keeping your foot from getting far enough forward in the boot?

(I look forward to learning from the more learned members' thoughts and experience.)

Lance

#136 Post by dw » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:49 am

Paul,

I shouldn't weigh in here at all since I know next to nothing about the method you are using and it is always a lost cause to try and diagnose problems someone is having with a system you aren't familiar with.

That said, I think, just from a casual, long distant inspection of your approach that the last is the right size/length and if that is true, you need to look elsewhere for the problem.

I see the back of the boot leaning back...including the counter. If the counter does not cup and does not conform to the back of the last it will always be like having a slanted board at the back of your heel--your foot can never seat down fully into the boot and your heel will always be compressed trying to seat. The observation that the boot feels better when you don't lace the tops is quite consistent with this theory as lacing the top would hold your foot in an unnatural position...further exacerbating the problem.

Where is the bruise? Towards the bottom of the heel or towards the top? At the bottom would tend to verify my idea, towards the top would totally shoot it down.

My system for making packers uses soling leather for a counter...but the way the patterns are developed and play out during lasting tends to prevent this kind of thing. That said, if you were making a high topped shoe, or a lace up boot as you would make a shoe, you would probably use insole leather rather than soling for your counter, and would seldom, if ever, need to use anything much above 6 iron. And it would be sufficient...more than sufficient, in most cases.

But the key, is that your your patterns would guarantee that the counter area of the boot was contoured to the back of the last and would not end up being flat and/or leaning away from the insole.

I could be way off base on all of this (wouldn't be the first time) but not having the boot in front of me...that's my first impression.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

janne_melkersson · Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:33 am

I am not sure it is something wrong with the pattern but the upper is lasted leaning backward and the heel is to high and there is to little toe spring.
I don't know what causes the bruise, could it be that the heel is not fixed at the back and therefore could slide up and down at the back?
It is crucial that the shoe or boot hold the feet tight at the back. If not things like this could happens.

artzend · #138 Post by **artzend** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:35 pm

Paul

A couple of things, one is that your last feather edge should be placed on the inside line, 5mm forward of the outside line on your foot outline.

Your marks on the last showing the inside and outside joints looks very square, normally the outside mark is further back. I think in this case that it is the inside joint that possibly needs to be a bit further forward. Mark both sides of your tape instead of just the one mark so it's easier to see where the tape lies.

Does this last have a very short forepart? It looks like that from the photo but that may be perspective.

Try marking the inside and outside joints on the last by holding the last parallel to a bench, so only the widest part touches. Then put your last on the inside mark of the foot outline and see what that looks like.

big_larry · #139 Post by **big_larry** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:37 pm

Paul,

I am not in a league to be giving counsel, however, I thought I would suppose with you and propose an idea or two in the spirit of friendship.

Heels vary in width and protrusion. That said, when the heel is bruised on the back part, it seems to me that there is not enough heel/cup space. Theory in pattern making is tremendous but if we use the boot as a trial or fitter boot, my guess is that the heel socket must be large enough to accomadate the heel without putting so much pressure on it as to cause a bruise.

That said, in a situation like that I would probably add some leather onto the heel of the last after examining the structure of your heel. I wet last and so the "counter" gets a form fit to the last. I use 12 Iron and skive the edges down with the center part being near full thickness. As you know, I use a plaster casting with each new fitting and to aid the fit. If you don't have a foam box and if you would like one, I would be very happy to send you one. As with all my counsel, apply the rule of using "MAGNUS GRAINUS SALTUS."

BEST WISHES, LARRY PETERSON, 3RD YEAR STUDENT.

luckyduck · #140 Post by **luckyduck** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:09 pm

Thanks for the thoughts everyone.

Some things after reading these.

Putting the last back in, the counter is not tight the top 1/3 or so. I did have a hard time getting it even close to hugging the last.

Heel width and everything foreward of the back 1/4" feels great.

My last looks funny because my feet are 270mm long and my joint measures 255mm. Hence the non-standard length to width ratios. The last marks were made using the edge of bench method.

I do have a cast of my foot, as well. That is what is so perplexing to me. The foot and last measurements match up and the casting looks good, yet the darn things don't fit the heel. In fact, wearing them for the last hour or so, they feel good standing around, but walking digs in proportionally to stride length. Longer steps give more heel biting right at the bottom, back most edge of the heel bone.

Perhaps it is a pattern / molding counter issue instead of a last sizing problem? Does that make sense? This is so confounding to a sandal maker.

Thanks again

Paul

#141 Post by dw » Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:49 pm

heel biting right at the bottom, back most edge of the heel bone.

Perhaps it is a pattern / molding counter issue instead of a last sizing problem? Does that make sense?

There you go...the counter is almost certainly leaning backward --after lasting, it was probably tight to the last at the insole level but, as you say, considerably away from the last at the top.

As we walk the os calcis moves backward...so in your case, it presses even harder against that incline I suggested in my previous response.

If you are using a flat, sole leather counter that is thick and is sewn in, it needs to be tight against the cone of the last at the back of the heel before you can even begin to think about drafting around the insole.

There is a way to do this using a hard counter...lasting "seats up", and after hoisting, deliberately drafting the counter at the breast before trying to draw the counter in against the back of the last at the insole level. It also helps if you have some idea of the angle needed to pattern the counter so that it hugs the cone of the last.

I am more convinced than ever that the last is not the problem. It is patterns and, as Janne said, the way the boot is lasted.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

fred_coencped · #142 Post by **fred_coencped** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:55 am

Paul,
Are you sure your last is the correct heel pitch?It appears besides the boot leaning back with insufficient heel height the toe is driven to the floor.

I think the strain or heel pressure may be the tension created via archilles tendon/calf muscle and the plantar faschia.

You should have about a thumbs width of toe spring under the forepart of your last with the heel height raised to its height as the ball or thread is on the floor or bench.

From my perspective I question your lateral/outside buildup and think about 2/3rds of your build up should be on the inside of you last.judging by your foot shape,inflared.

Maybe recheck your last,I think that is your first problem.For sure lastmaking is the most difficult of shoe making skills,I think.

Anyway I like to build up about 1" higher on the cone and back part of the last providing a reverse heel curve on the back part for hiking and work boots.

Lasting and patterns may be one or two of your problems,but I think your last is a bigger problem.

OK Cheers,Fred

luckyduck · #143 Post by **luckyduck** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:25 am

Hey Fred (or anyone else),

Is there some good reference material on last fitting you could recommend? Maybe some pedorthic books? It really feels like that is my weakest point and I don't have a path that I can see to learning more. Other than trial and error or blindly following some method without understanding how foot structure interacts with last choices.

Maybe this should be in the last word section? But then modifying the last is how you fit the foot.

Thanks again,

Paul

dearbone · #144 Post by **dearbone** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:22 pm

Paul,

Look through the contents of the 3 Golding books DW put out,look for, THE RELATIONS OF FOOTWEAR TO FEET.
it will explains there, SHAPE OF LAST AND FOOT.

I have them in my J.Korn book,which is a very short summary of Golding, so i think it is in one of Golding books.

Nasser

#145 Post by dw » Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:47 pm

Paul,

It is smart to check out sources of knowledge for the fitting up the last.

At the same time, it is as much a matter of common sense as procedure. You need to end up with a form that models the foot in as many dimensions as possible while also establishing the shape of the shoe.

If you are looking for a book that will tell you how to shape the curve of the heel or what radius to put on the bottom of the last, you may be on a fruitless quest, however.

The way I see it you have a choice of two alternatives--either your problem lies (1) in the last or (2) in the patterns. ("In the patterns" includes the procedures you use for lasting or using those patterns.)

The best advice anyone can give you at this point is to approach solving this problem in a methodical manner. It is a recipe for frustration and disaster to try and change too many things at once.

If I understood your original post correctly, you started with a standard last and modified it. If you modified it six times (with due care and deliberation) trying to get more length, and the problem still exists, chances are the problem lies in the patterns...or somewhere other than the lasts. I'm not saying the lasts are perfect or that they can't be improved, just that it is unlikely to be the source of your problems or your bruise.

From your description, your last would have to be so distorted and disconnected from the foot and its dimensions as to be unrecognizable as a last
for you to be experiencing the same issues over and over again.

As an example, think about this scenario: the average Joe regularly tries on, and even purchases, shoes that are too small, or don't fit in some other, sometimes, extreme fashion. I've done it myself. And while prolonged wearing of such footwear can be painful, short term exposure isn't going to cause a bruise.

My suggestion is to make the lasts as close to your foot dimensions as understanding will allow (sounds like you're there already) and then review your patterns. Look elsewhere for the problem, IOW.

Apply Occam's Razor...which posits (according to Wikipedia)

Of several acceptable explanations, the most accurate and well-ordered theory of explanation is preferable, provided that it does not contradict the observed facts.

In other words, take one issue at a time, and eliminate it as the source of the problem. Then, and only then, move on to the next.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

(Message edited by admin on September 20, 2009)

fred_coencped · #146 Post by **fred_coencped** » Wed Sep 23, 2009 3:30 pm

Paul,
I don`t know of any book either,but always respect the great toe joint.I like to use the Harris Mat print.The weight bearing static print in contrast to your outline of the foot clearly will show about 1/4" of space more or less along the inner front part of your foot along the big toe.

Usually I will define the median of those 2 lines to determine the last bottom line,That line will be vertical from the 1st MPJ[ball joint or metatarsal phalengeal joint] to the center of the toe character more or less on the last.

Also the back part of the heel seat is averaged between the heel print and the heel tracing to determine the heel featherline,also more or less.

I hope this info will help you .Perhaps Otto Bock in Minneapolis has the harris Matts available
I definetely strongly recommend this device to anyone making custom shoes.There is a lot to see in both static and dynamic foot prints.
OK,Fred

#147 Post by dw » Wed Sep 23, 2009 5:52 pm

Fred,

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. I don't mean to be contrary but if you have an accurate, weight-bearing footprint why would you want to make the insole (last bottom) any wider than where the foot touches the ground?

I must be missing something here...?

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

(Message edited by DWFII on September 23, 2009)

(Message edited by admin on September 23, 2009)

fred_coencped · #148 Post by **fred_coencped** » Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:48 am

DW,
The harris matt print is always smaller then the outline of the foot.Where the foot weight bearing touches the ground clearly does not account for the natural vertical curvature of the medial aspect of the big toe joint or the big toe itself.

I am addressing the posterior of the heel and the MPJ,outlines of both the imprint and the foot outline with a vertical stylus on the harris matt weight bearing print.Averaging between those lines more or less will become the feather line of the last.

A good part of my reasoning is as the forefoot is fully loaded from heel lift to toe off in gait the forefoot will naturally become widened transversely across the MPJ`s.Therefore if your last is cut to the print it will squeeze the mpj joint.And by averaging between the outline and the print more or less will insure that the metatarsal heads are not squeezing or entrapping the compartmental spaces between the metatarsal heads.specifically the nerves.

I hope this helps.My words of caution to Paul in moving his lateral buildup to the medial column of his last simply stated is that the last always must follow the dynamic foot.

MY saying goes NO TIGHT SHOES,PLEASE.

I suppose the simple answer to your question is that the wider outline of the weight bearing foot is wider then the harris print and the insole[last bottom] is really narrower then the foot outline tracing and the my reasoning of why the last should be wider then the harris print is just that "my reasoning".

I would only like to invite any seemingly contrary opinions in an effort to improve myself in last making skills and shoemaking skills.

Ah,lastmaking,the abysmal quest for the holy grail!

Truly,Fred

#149 Post by dw » Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:34 am

fred,

I guess the bottom line is that the Harris Mat is a lot firmer and higher off the ground than an ordinary pedograph?

I don't believe that the footprint from a pedograph is significantly narrower than what would be obtained if we inked up the bottom of the foot itself and stood on a sheet of paper.

I agree with you entirely that this is sort of a holy grail or if not, at least a personal quest for most of us. I feel comfortable in my approach but I know that many, many RTW, and even MTM shoes have an insole that is wider than the footprint would be.

Another factor is that I don't equate width of insole with tightness or looseness. Girth measurements seem to me to be the controlling factor, in that regard. I have seen many...especially vintage boots...that had insoles significantly narrower than the footprint. I was taught that approach myself and it can work...provided you don't mind the foot hanging over the welts.

But the too wide insole gives me the heebee-jeebees. I don't see a good reason to have extra insole that the foot itself will never occupy. If nothing else, what happens is that you get a build-up of sock lint and toe jam in the corners. [img]http://www.thehcc.org/forum/images/old_smilies/proud.gif"%20ALT=":O[/img] I've always suspected that it would also cause the welt and insole to curl up.

Thinking about it...and definitely in line with the "holy grail" sentiment...I wonder if making the bottom of the last too wide for the foot wouldn't also affect the girth measurements? It seems to me we would be measuring an "empty"corner" that the dimensions of the foot will never fill.

All that said, I'm still looking for answers. Thanks for taking the time.

Tight Stitches
DWFII--HCC Member

fred_coencped · #150 Post by **fred_coencped** » Thu Sep 24, 2009 2:21 pm

DW.

In our pursuits of perfection........

Girth measurements are controlling factors,always.I am only referring to use caution with the 1st mpj.Undercutting the last from the hallux to the 1st mpj and into the arch area does follow the natural curvature of the foots archecture.This does follow the foot for non weight bearing horsebackriding but does not allow for the foot to naturally widen while walking or running.The upper will stretch and give and thats the beauty in our material selections to allow the foot to hang or ride over the medial forefoot welt,so of course I must agree with your perspective of bringing the last to the footprint.

In your observation of the vintage boots where the medial forefoot of the last is undercut narrower then the footprint and follows the natural curvature of the joint and toe seems pretty acceptable for a riding boot and if that is comfortable for the wearer in walking that is totally acceptable in my minds eye,and aestetically looks good too.

If as you say the insole is too wide[I think you are referring to the medial forefoot}"toe jam in the corners",what and where is this toe jam you are referring to.Regarding the "empty corner"the foot will never fill,is that where the insole meets the inside medial sidewall of the shoe upper?Curling up the the insole and welt, and sock lint on top of toe jam sounds awful.

I suppose we are getting answers,slowly but surely.

These are the differences in last design in the myriad of possibilities in syle.I think the cowboy boot last is in a class of its own.The contours of the medial and lateral arches in the last are testimonial to the comfort claims by their wearers.I think you are smart to be questioning and looking for answers, and for the good questions too.

Incorporating those features in a walking shoe,work and hiking boot is an excellent approach to the "ultimate" in last design.Perhaps at varying levels in orthopedic shoe making these qualities are intrinsic to the innersole/foot orthotic that in fact becomes the last bottom.

The Harris Mat I am referring to is a pedogragh,and it is not firmer or high off the ground.We are probably referring to the same device.If so,have you used yours dynamically to observe your foot in gait.For example you will note the stages in your gait from heel strike and especially toe off.Is the fully loaded forefoot evenly reflected? I agree that the footprint would be just the same with the pedograph print, inking or red wine.

And thank you to in taking your time addressing fitting the foot to the last.It is helpful to me and I only hope it will help others always to question why we do things the way we do.

OK,Fred

.

Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot

Re: Fitting the Foot