The Crispin Colloquy

Oh, Fred, there is a brain buster. I'm going to need some help from others to get to the bottom of this one. I can probably explain it in the context of how I work but that's just one way and certainly not the only way.

The short answer is no, the vamp point does not lay right on the ball line, it lays higher op the last.
As the VP becomes important when making patterns I only find my VP after I cast the foot, make the last and start my patterns.
Once you start making your patterns you are no longer working of the foot but of the last. I know that the last reflects the foot and all that but the last has a degree of abstraction in how it represents the foot. What works for me is applying a geometric system, adjust in areas where I anticipate a problem. In this stage you have to trust your last and not necessary refer back to the foot.
An added benefit is that on the last the vamp point is consistent as the heel height is consistent. As the heel height increases the vamp point does move slightly forward on the foot.

Anticipating your next question, how much higher is the VP than the joint line? (or the line from mpt1 to mpt5 as the joints don't line up in a straight line) I pulled a pair off the rack that I'm currently working on, aprox. women's size 10, custom lasts. The VP I have found is a little over 10mm higher than a line running from MPT1 to MPT5.

If you bring you VP down to the line based on the joints the thread line will not flex freely. On a derby style the front of your quarters will also be too low, possibly pressing on a bunion if one is present.

I'm very curious if any of the Sabbage's sectionizer "aficionados" have a different approach. I believe there is a way of finding the VP using Sabbage's system but thumbing through Golding I can't put my finger on it.

Rob

Rob,Thanks for your efforts.Could the vamp point be located from the mean form of the last ,generic or orthopedic at or near the point where the instep rises or the cone,weather a side cone last or straight cone more or last?

It is usually at this point where I would make a fold line for the vamp pattern and continue that line to the counter point in creating a Draft Pattern.

I will look at your 1st explanation using that 1/3rd of the lateral distance of the toe to the center of the heel.that does seam to correspond to where the cone of the last rises and also behind the ball measurement for facings and forefoot flexion of the shoe.

Anyway,many thanks as know one else seems to be responding,I am just curious as to how this vamp points importance relates to pattern design and good shoe fit.

In regard to optical illusions and proportions,I think it is all about beauty in design and magic created between positive and negative space,also known as Art.

OK ,Fred

Fred,
As the vamp point pertains more to pattern making that last making I continue this discussion here.

OK, here's a question that I'd like answered, in reference to last sizing.

Is there a standard or rule of thumb about comparisons between men's sizes and women's sizes? Penny says there are two sizes between them - in other words, a women's size 8 is equal to a men's size 6. How accurate is that? I have lasts in one style, in sizes that range from 4A through 15 1/2 EE, with most sizes in between. They only one standard, though - they are all in men's sizes. I even have the capabilities to make combination lasts with the forepart wider than the heel. I have no idea, however, how women's sizes compare to men's. I need to offer them in both men's and women's sizes.
Thanks for the assistance

Bruce

PS Please excuse me - I meant to say "please"

I also wanted to know what the most common woman's size is. I need to make some prototypes, and might as well make them so they can be for sale.
Again, please-and-thank you

B

Bruce

The two size difference is pretty right, I used to use 2 1/2 sizes but think that two sizes is probably closer.

I am not sure about the US but here in Australia, it used to be size 7 when I started out in the beginning of the 80s but has now become something like size 9.

Tim

Bruce/Tim,

The rule of thumb (or toe) in the US industry was always 1.5 to 2 sizes difference, meaning a men's 6 or 6.5 would be equal to a woman's 8. However, there is a major flaw in this formula. The difference in length between the men's Brannock Device and the women's is exactly one size. A men's 7 is equal in length to a women's 8. Be sure you are using the purple women's Brannock. Years ago they had a black device labeled "women's" (all men's Brannocks are black). The sizing was different and the only explanation I ever got was that this was an "orthopedic" women's device. Why the sizing would be different on an orthopedic scale I don't know but that version of the Brannock is no longer manufactured to my knowledge.

But back to the flaw. If there is exactly one size difference in the two scales the only reason I can think of for anyone wanting to use a men's last sized down 1.5 to 2 sizes is to try to get the girth somewhat close. Two sizes is about what it would take to get a men's 6M to come anywhere close to a women's 8M in girth. Keep in mind that almost all companies use D width for a men's medium and B width for a women's medium. The flaw with this system is obvious. You may come close (but that's about all) in girth but you've made the shoe a half to a whole size too short...a pretty big price to pay for "close" girth.

What I always suggest to my manufacturing customers who want to unisex a last to save money is to make a men's last down a half size and correct the girth so that it is exactly what a women's last should be. So clean out a size 7 men's last until it's got the girth of a women's 8 and then you can use the insoles, sock liners, mid soles, and outsoles but you'll need true women's upper patterns. Or go the traditional way and have nothing fit except the budget.

I haven't seen studies for recent years but the "gut sizes" on a women's size run are going to be from about 7-8.5 so I think you'd be safe using any of these for samples. Most manufacturers of dress or casual shoes use size 6 for a sample size but not because it's one of the most often purchased sizes but rather, because it's petite and that's what the target audience wants to see. Athletic companies mostly use size 7 as their sample size.

I just got back from a road trip and tried to answer from the car on my phone (wasn't driving) but got too frustrated, hence the late reply.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

Bruce, I routinely use a 6.5 D men's last for comfort shoes for my 8.5 women's feet with raging bunions. This works fine for an oxfordish shoe worn with socks but in general if you use a men's last you are either going to fit the heel with those A's or B's and need to build up the front for width, or you may find the men's lasts in c's and d's and up are too wide in the heel seat.

After selling thousands of pairs of used vintage lasts to women, I vote for size 8 women's shoes made on your size 6 men's lasts as the most "saleable" sample size. I'd make some in B, C and D widths for comparative fitting since most people seeking custom shoes are seeking relief from their wide or bunioned feet or a shoe style that will accept orthotics. The other area of need seems to be those with very narrow feet that have been abandoned by the "one width fits most" standard of commercial shoe lines. Just my 2 cents based on my customers and last sales.

Regards, Georgene

Tim, Bill and Georgene,

Thank you all for your assistance. You confirm what Penny said. Why I don't just LISTEN to her is beyond me.

Bill, it sounds like I need to modify lasts in order to correctly convert them to women's lasts. Is that accurate? As I said, I have most widths from A to EE. With that in mind, is modification still necessary?

Thanks again,

Bruce

Bruce,

It's good that you have all of those widths. If you're going to use the resizing formula I spoke of and go one size under on men's to equal a women's size you will also need to offset the widths. This will bring you closer to a women's fit but not exactly to the "standard".

Keep in mind that on men's shoes, "D" is usually considered the medium width and on women's shoes it's "B". Also keep in mind that all last styles vary from what the "standards" are supposed to be so the example I'm going to give you is based on the standard girth charts found in Karl Adrian's book "American Last Making".

On those charts you will see that a women's 8B should measure 8 9/16" on the ball, 8 1/2" on the waist, and 8 13/16" on the instep. You will want to use a men's size 7 to match that and the closet you'll find is a 7B. Sounds great but remember this B is two widths narrower than a men's medium D width. A men's 7D, according to the chart will measure 8 1/2" on the ball (1/16" small), 8 7/16" on the waist (also 1/16" small), and 8 13/16" on the instep (3/16" small).

The ball and waist are very close but that 3/16" missing from the instep represents 3/4 of a size or one full width. You could move up to a men's 7C but then the ball and waist would be 3/16" big and the instep would be 1/16" big. I'd say go with the men's 7B for the women's 8B and then go from there. So basically forget that your lasts are men's and just go by the stamping and use them size for size for men's and one size down for women's shoes in the same widths. Just remember that if a woman says she's a "medium" you'll use a B and not a men's medium D.

Now that I've got you thinking it's pretty clear, let me point out something else. Karl's charts are a little inconsistent in how they grade between widths. On his men's charts, Karl grades 1/4" between widths from D all the way down and from D all the way up he goes 3/16". On his women's charts he grades 1/4" from B to AA and from B to D but from AA down and D up he grades 3/16". This may be due to his taking into account that some companies would hold bottoms meaning a EE might have the same bottom as a D in order to save on mold costs for the soles. The grade would be restricted to help keep the wider width that was held to a medium bottom from looking like a watermelon spilling over the sides. The same is true in reverse as a more restricted grade would keep a B that was held to a D bottom from looking so malnourished on top. However, my bottom holding theory doesn't make sense because companies would hold at least some bottoms to the master width and therefore you would want the widths nearest that to have the restricted grade.

Unless I'm forced to by a customer or copying an existing last in multiple widths, I grade 3/16" per width all the way through. The industry, meaning individual companies, for the most part either do whatever the heck they want to do or they turn it over to an offshore shoe or last factory and let them do what they will.

And then we have to ask, how do your lasts grade between widths? Between sizes? Is the men's 8D anywhere close to the "standard" measurements? You'll need to answer these questions before determining any resizing method.

That's my sermon for the morning. Pass the plate and don't forget our ice cream social. It's on the second Tuesday of next week.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

Bill,

As a shoemaker,I apprectiate your sermons on lasts more than than any sermons on any mounts. lastmakers work is a mystery to shoemakers like me,I read your so called sermons about last time after time, thank you for sharing.
regards Nasser.

Thank you Nasser but I don't know...that Guy on the Mount was a pretty powerful speaker. Seriously, I do appreciate the comment. I wish I had more time to share or to write my own book on last making. Someday....

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

I am having to regrind a width run of lasts, as well as regrinding to fill holes in my size-run. I need to know the formula for grading up and down to correctly size them. I've heard that a full size is 1/3" in length and 1/16" added all the way around. To avoid confusion - if I were to take a size 10 D and build up the last - for instance, wrap tape around the whole last so it ends up 1/16 larger in circumferance and 1/3 larger in length, it is a size 11 D. If I want to build from size 10 D to size 10 E, I wrap tape equaling 1/16" around the circumferance without touching the length. I understand there is a proportional consideration to be - well, considered . . .
Is my understanding correct, or is there another formula?

I have only one style of last, so women's and men's are the same. I'll be dealing with foot tracings in order to ascertain size. I'm NOT a custom maker and have no desire to be so.









Thanks,

Bruce

Hi Bruce,

The 1/3" to one size in length is correct but not the other increment you mention. Also, see my previous post on this thread about the variance in lengths between widths. Since you're dealing with used lasts that would depend on how the shoe company had them graded which would depend on how many widths of molds they put in for outsoles.

The standard width grade between widths was always 1/16" but that's the two dimensional ball WIDTH of the insole. The standard insole width grade between sizes is 1/12" (9 to 10 to 11, etc.) The circumference grade is 1/4" per whole size and generally 3/16" per width (B to C to D, etc.). So to make your size 10D and 11D you'd need to add 1/4" to the ball girth and 1/3" to the overall length. To go from a 10D to a 10E you'd need to add 3/16" in girth and 1/24" in length (see previous post). OK, those are all the industry "standard" grades. It's sermon time folks!! And then I'm rushing out to buy stock in the company that makes whatever tape you're using.

I'm sure I've preached this sermon before on this forum but it's been awhile so gather round folks. Your insomnia is about to be cured.

As I said, the industry standard in length is 1/3" per whole size and 1/4" in circumference per whole size and those are the two control points so they should never change. Now I also said that the insole 2D width grade was 1/16" per width and 1/12" per whole size and that the circumference grade between widths was 3/16". Look at the ratios. The insole WIDTH grade of 1/16" between widths is exactly 1/3 of the circumference grade of 3/16" per width and the insole WIDTH grade of 1/12" between sizes is exactly 1/3 of the circumference grade of 1/4" per whole size. How convenient. Or is it?

When you're talking about grading a last from perhaps a size 6 to a 15 in men's and you're using this nice little 33.3% ratio formula, the only way you have any chance of the size 15 looking like the size 6 is if the original model had a ball width at the featherline (insole) that was 1/3 of the circumference at the ball girth. Unless you're dealing with skate boot lasts or a few women's pump lasts from the early 1900s this won't happen. Usually, the insole width is between 36-40% of the girth, not 33%.

Pardon me while I use millimeters to keep my head from exploding with all the different fraction denominators. So let's say you have a size 8D last with a ball girth of 235mm and let's say that ball width at the featherline is 40% at 94mm. Now let's grade that up to a size 16. That's 8 full sizes so we've added 50.8mm in girth to it and the size 16D has a ball girth of 285.8mm. Now let's say we forced the insole width grade to hold to that 1/12" (2.1mm) grade per whole size. So the size 16D has a ball width of 110.8mm. Well, 110.8mm is only about 38.8% of 285.8mm so the proportions of the upper part of the last to the bottom have changed dramatically. If the last bottom had been allowed to maintain it's original proportion to the upper it would have been 114.3mm wide. That's a considerable difference, over 1/8" in fact.

Compound this over multiple widths and the larger sizes on the wider widths start to look like a watermelon hanging over the sides of the bottom while the smaller sizes on the narrow widths begin to look like the last (and therefore, the footwear) has been smashed and the bottom has spread out.

These issues were never controlled back in the "old days" when all lasts were made on mechanical copy lathes. Accommodation models had to be made to overcome the range limitations of those lathes but rather than let the last bottoms grow naturally and maintain the original proportions, last makers forced the bottoms to hold to this arbitrary grade that made no sense.

With a computerized lathe you can actually digitize (I've done it), for example a size 9D and grade up to a size 18EEEEEEEEE (that's 9 E's) and the proportions will remain the same and the featherline will be just as sharp on the large size as it was on the model size.

So when I grade last bottoms I first figure out what the ratio is between the bottom and the upper on the master model and apply that to the grade. So in my earlier example, rather than grade the bottom 2.1mm per whole size I would have graded it 2.54mm per whole size (40% of the 6.35 girth grade). All sizes will look proportionally the same and guess what? We'd have a wider forepart relative to the heel than we do with mosts lasts now. Can someone say "combination last"? Someone else will have to say it because I try to never use the phrase. To me, there should be no such thing. If everyone says they have a narrow heel (and how many customers to any of you get that don't say that), then by default they have an average or "medium" heel. Majority rules in this country...at least for now. I will always contend that the vast majority of people in this country don't have narrow heels. They're just being forced to wear shoes that are too wide in the back but that's another sermon for another service. Thanks for coming.....

"Let's all gather by the river....the beautiful, beautiful river...let's all gather by the river...and catch some fish?...take a dip?" Never did know the words to that song.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

Bill,
What kind of a Babdis ARE you, anyway? You forgot to pass the plate!

I think I need some definitions and pictures. Is the ball width at the feather line measurement taken from the widest point on the inner part of the sole to the widest point on the outer part of the sole? Is the ball girth measured from the aforementioned point and following the same path around the last? Is this described somewhere else on the forum? With definitions? And pictures?
And I thought I had an aptitude for geometry!

B

Bruce,

Free revival today. As we get closer to April 15th I might pass the plate. Darned quarterly taxes....

My high school geometry teacher told us on the first day of class that geometry would serve us well in many areas of life, including the pool hall. I was all in at that point but after losing $300 playing pool one night I decided this science would serve me better being applied to something more practical. I never dreamed that practical approach would lead me into footwear.

There are some pictures in archive 926-950 at the top of this thread but more detailed descriptions are on the two pictures on the OLGA search page of my site. For those who are not among the nearly 100 registered OLGA users, here's a PDF with those pictures in it. There's too much text and fine lines to size down for a suitable image post.

The answer to your questions about ball width and girth location is "yes". As for other such information, I've been kicking around the idea of putting a little book or manual together and self publishing it. It would include technical information such as this, some historical perspectives on last making and last technology as well as my usual deviations off the path and into that weird, dark world known as my sense of humor.
This would be a self published labor of love with no illusions of making a fortune or getting a Pulitzer. I'd be interested to know what kind of interest there would be out there for such a publication and would also appreciate any thoughts on what to include if there is interest.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

Bill,

I don't have a lot of in put but I am game to purchase a copy.Sounds real good so therefore I will wait to hear of it's completion.

Ed

Hi Bill,

I have been waiting for the One to come and put the Last first, understanding different last scaling(measurements) has been a difficult one for me,not to mention confusing and misleading.my lasts are collected from different Last makers in sets,I read Mr Alden's method than the American method,the French with the their Paris point and the German with the stitch and God only knows how many more scaling methods are out there, It would be of great help if a last maker can come up with a standard system of scaling that would be accepted generally,easier said than done i suppose. math was my major in high school,but geometry and technical drawing I was good at and they helped me in shoe making epecially in pattern making. A book on lasts is long over due and if you write one,You will be truly called,"The Last Man Standing" for all times.
Regards Nasser

Bill
Put me down for a copy.
Regards
Brendan

Thanks to everyone for all of the positive feedback both here and through emails. I'll start getting my thoughts together and we'll see where it goes. As I said, feel free to post or email topics to me. If I'm going to do this I should do it the right way and include something for everyone.

Nasser...really..."The One"? No pressure, right? I like your sense of humor since I realize, I'm really just "one" (lower case emphasized) of a few that are left.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

Bill,

By The One i meant the only last maker among us and no pressure at all,i do underestand this is a big under-taking and we are here to contribute our help as shoe/boot makers to you whenever.I started making shoes without lasts, stitched down sewn shoes consisted of vamp and one piece back(quarters)when i met my 86 years old master at Fred's shop and he saw i was making shoes without last,he was taken back a little,than came the famous saying of his,do it my way and if you don't like it you can go back to your way,this is how he convinced me to make shoes on last and i never looked back at those days when i made shoes without lasts.
Nasser

Ed & Brendan, you're on the list.

Actually Nasser, I consider all of you last makers. Maybe not in the sense of production model making and standards, etc., but in a very real way the custom maker is a last model maker. What makes it so amazing and enlightening is that there are so many different ways of customizing the last for an individual's feet and yet I'd be willing to bet money that if one customer when to 10 different (and experienced) makers asking for the same footwear, when all were finished, the 10 pairs of lasts would be noticeably different in measurements and to some degree, shape and yet the customer would most likely be satisfied. It's all about learning what works in last modification for the methods you use in boot/shoe making. Some people would make their patterns in a certain fashion that would require something different for the last. Maybe it would be something else, like the length or pitch of the heel or the materials being used. And let's not underestimate the differences in the way the lasting is done. I have my own ideas on how to customize a last but since I work with so many different makers, I always defer to their wishes and besides, I'm trying very hard to only do standard sizes from OLGA now anyway.

By the way, I met a fellow up at the Sheridan show back in the days of The Last Word. He was from California and I don't remember his name but he also made shoes without lasts. He would wrap duct tape around the foot and then cut it off and score it so that it could be flattened. Then he'd make the shoes. The oddest thing about his methods was that he made most (or maybe it was all) of his shoes from shark skin and I don't remember the details but there were some makers up there that didn't believe he could get all of the smell out of the skin before he made the shoes. I guess you'd have no trouble having an open seat next to you on the airplanes though.

Bill “The Last Man Standingâ€

Nasser, Tim,

I have moved this discussion to "Rants, Rationales and Suppositions" > "Just Some Thoughts." The discussion may have more room over there.

Emmett...

OK...I have a problem that I really don't know how to solve.

I have "virgin heels." I wear boots all the time and the heel stiffeners are, relative to shoes, mostly straight up and down--the stiffeners cup the heel slightly but nothing like the way a shoe stiffener/last cups the heel.

I have a lovely West End last that I am making shoes upon. I have modified a standard size to fit myself. And it does fit. The shoes I am making are neither too big nor to snug. If I last the shoes with a quarter inch gap between the facings, they tighten down to almost exactly a quarter of an inch when I put the shoes on and lace them up. Standing still and even when walking I feel like I have a perfect fit...lengthwise, widthwise, girths, heel seat, etc..

But here's my problem...my shoes are biting the back of my heels--giving me blisters in short order. I wear heavy socks...relatively heavy...but the lasts were modified to accommodate those socks. I can wear a band-aid or maybe moleskin and avoid the problem...at which point I have no other complaints. But I can't decide whether this problem is just because my heels are so tender and I need to just let them toughen up or whether I should modify the last a bit--widen or slightly wedge the back of the comb?

The first two photos below show the narrowness of the comb and the heel curve respectively. The third photos shows the mean form. And yes, I pulled the topline in a bit at the top.




Tight Stitches
DWFII--Member HCC

DW

It sounds as though the back height measurement may be a bit high, try putting some 5mm foam under your heel and see if that helps. This is the easiest way to see if that is the problem.

How did you come about your back height measurement on the last? Was it already marked?

Tim