Ask a Question, Get An Answer About Outerwear

[spectre6000]

With shell cordovan (super oily/waxy), you brush really fast to work up some heat. It makes the oils/waxes less viscous and allows you to move things around and smooth it all out. You have to really get into though... You'll work up a sweat. Gets the grain to lay down smoothly and evenly. There's a name for the method I've seen referenced a few times, but I don't remember what it's called other than that it might stat with an M. This is likely where this came method from.

For non-shell cordovan type treatments, if the leather in question has plenty of oils and waxes as part of the finish, you could potentially accomplish something similar. Full/top grain doesn't have much in the way of fiber to move around, so it wouldn't do much or maybe not anything at all. Suede doesn't have the waxes, but you'd be brushing crap out of the fibers, and that would smooth things out and make it look a little cleaner and more even. Corrected leathers... I'm not sure... They typically have some sort of non-waxy top coat that wouldn't play nice with this method, but I don't have a ton of experience with it. If you're dealing with something with a seal coat, this won't work at all.

Beyond that, it'll just get in all the little nooks and crannies and work stuff out. Less grit between the fibers to cut into them and weaken the leather.

 

[jr30]

With shell cordovan (super oily/waxy), you brush really fast to work up some heat. It makes the oils/waxes less viscous and allows you to move things around and smooth it all out. You have to really get into though... You'll work up a sweat. Gets the grain to lay down smoothly and evenly. There's a name for the method I've seen referenced a few times, but I don't remember what it's called other than that it might stat with an M. This is likely where this came method from.

For non-shell cordovan type treatments, if the leather in question has plenty of oils and waxes as part of the finish, you could potentially accomplish something similar. Full/top grain doesn't have much in the way of fiber to move around, so it wouldn't do much or maybe not anything at all. Suede doesn't have the waxes, but you'd be brushing crap out of the fibers, and that would smooth things out and make it look a little cleaner and more even. Corrected leathers... I'm not sure... They typically have some sort of non-waxy top coat that wouldn't play nice with this method, but I don't have a ton of experience with it. If you're dealing with something with a seal coat, this won't work at all.

Beyond that, it'll just get in all the little nooks and crannies and work stuff out. Less grit between the fibers to cut into them and weaken the leather.

I think your explanation is just fantastic!
THANK YOU!!!

That sounds very logical to me. Yes, my vegetable tanned horse leather jacket in black really does contain a lot of waxes. If I understand you correctly, I should work quickly to heat the leather and "activate" the waxes in this way.
Can the leather be damaged with a real soft horsehair brush?

 

[spectre6000]

Whether or not it does anything will depend on the grain. Shell Cordovan, if you were to see it prior to the waxing, oiling, and glazing, is technically a suede leather. The top grain in on the INSIDE. This method works with shell cordovan due to the oils and waxes, but also due to the fact that the underlying leather is a very dense, tight grained suede. When you heat up the oils and waxes enough to move them around, the thing you're moving is those small fibers. You're getting them to all lay flat and even.

With your horse hide, I'm going to assume it's full or top grain, and that includes the epidermal layer. It's smooth like the skin on your inner arm (assuming it's not shrunk or any other such complication) without any fibers to really do anything with. The benefits to brushing in this case would be to try to work stuff out of the microscopic crevices and pores. If I had an article of old top grain leather to hand, I'd throw it under my microscope and show you what I'm talking about... Oh! I might!... I have a 50's Hartmann breifcase. It's not likely horse, but it might be top grain. I'll see if I can get some good images. Anyway, you'd just be getting crap out. As you wear the jacket, the leather flexes, and those little bits of grit can abrade the fibers, cutting into them, and weakening the material.

So it won't likely do much, but it'll prolong its life by lessening the wear to the material itself internally. Brushing it shouldn't hurt anything so long as the brush bristles are softer than the leather. Horse hair should be no problem, but I think I'd test out a nylon bristled brush before committing it to something I care about.

 

[jr30]

Whether or not it does anything will depend on the grain. Shell Cordovan, if you were to see it prior to the waxing, oiling, and glazing, is technically a suede leather. The top grain in on the INSIDE. This method works with shell cordovan due to the oils and waxes, but also due to the fact that the underlying leather is a very dense, tight grained suede. When you heat up the oils and waxes enough to move them around, the thing you're moving is those small fibers. You're getting them to all lay flat and even.

With your horse hide, I'm going to assume it's full or top grain, and that includes the epidermal layer. It's smooth like the skin on your inner arm (assuming it's not shrunk or any other such complication) without any fibers to really do anything with. The benefits to brushing in this case would be to try to work stuff out of the microscopic crevices and pores. If I had an article of old top grain leather to hand, I'd throw it under my microscope and show you what I'm talking about... Oh! I might!... I have a 50's Hartmann breifcase. It's not likely horse, but it might be top grain. I'll see if I can get some good images. Anyway, you'd just be getting crap out. As you wear the jacket, the leather flexes, and those little bits of grit can abrade the fibers, cutting into them, and weakening the material.

So it won't likely do much, but it'll prolong its life by lessening the wear to the material itself internally. Brushing it shouldn't hurt anything so long as the brush bristles are softer than the leather. Horse hair should be no problem, but I think I'd test out a nylon bristled brush before committing it to something I care about.

@spectre6000
Wow - that's what I call a profound answer. I already knew there was a lot of expertise in the TFL forum, but now I'm blown away. Thank you so much for this well-founded explanation. I think I got it - it's indeed a full grain leather.
But the pictures would be really perfect, not just for me - I guess it's very interesting and many people can benefit from it.
Again, thank you very much.

 

[spectre6000]

Well... This is crap. I had this whole long thing all typed up, and the server shit the bed... All gone.

This is a top grain leather briefcase. I don't know the species. I'm guessing based on the tags and plates that it's from the 60s.

Here's a macro shot of the side:

And here's the micro scope view. It's a monitor shot, and I don't have a memory card in the camera, so it is what it is for now. Magnification is pretty minimal, but it's the lenses that were on the scope.

Here you can see the smooth epidermal layer with pores and hair folicles. Oils and dirt are visible in the pores as that yellow waxy looking stuff.

Here's where things get interesting for those interested in leather color...

A lot of the browns we see are an attempt to essentially imitate this coloration, and various other colors along this trajectory. This is undyed, unpigmented vegetable tanned top grain leather that's just been used a lot.

Again with the crappy monitor shot, but basically it's just smooth with a slight texture. I have better resolution and magnification in the eye pieces, and the only thing I can see that isn't easily visible here is fine cracking. This is the exact same leather, just with a lot of contamination, oil, and handling. Think of leather like a fibrous sponge. In this case, it's been compressed and slicked down as opposed to being fluffy and three dimensional. The best analog I'm able to come up with is a colored marshmallow. When it's nice and fluffy it's whatever pastel color, but if you squish it down and make it really smooth, it gets darker (honestly, I've never done this, I'm making assumptions). The surface of all the various layers of the sponge reflect light, and give clean, undyed leather that three dimensional sheen. If you compress those layers, the light doesn't really get out. Smoothing out the surface reduces the surface area available to reflect light as well. The oils consolidate those layers, and allow the light to penetrate deeper before it's reflected back, at which point more of it is absorbed. Longer (redder) wavelengths are able to get in and out to and from deeper in the leather, which is where the redness comes from.

Dyes and pigments throw all of this out the window. I have some vegetable tanned leather around here that I've treated to the max to get as much color as possible without the use of dyes and pigments. I'll see if I can't get some of it under the scope later, hopefully with some more powerful magnification, and either a memory card, or I'll just take a photo through the eyepiece.

The damn server had better work this time...

 

[jr30]

Well... This is crap. I had this whole long thing all typed up, and the server shit the bed... All gone.

This is a top grain leather briefcase. I don't know the species. I'm guessing based on the tags and plates that it's from the 60s.

Here's a macro shot of the side:
View attachment 586647

And here's the micro scope view. It's a monitor shot, and I don't have a memory card in the camera, so it is what it is for now. Magnification is pretty minimal, but it's the lenses that were on the scope.
View attachment 586650
Here you can see the smooth epidermal layer with pores and hair folicles. Oils and dirt are visible in the pores as that yellow waxy looking stuff.

Here's where things get interesting for those interested in leather color...
View attachment 586657
A lot of the browns we see are an attempt to essentially imitate this coloration, and various other colors along this trajectory. This is undyed, unpigmented vegetable tanned top grain leather that's just been used a lot.
View attachment 586658
Again with the crappy monitor shot, but basically it's just smooth with a slight texture. I have better resolution and magnification in the eye pieces, and the only thing I can see that isn't easily visible here is fine cracking. This is the exact same leather, just with a lot of contamination, oil, and handling. Think of leather like a fibrous sponge. In this case, it's been compressed and slicked down as opposed to being fluffy and three dimensional. The best analog I'm able to come up with is a colored marshmallow. When it's nice and fluffy it's whatever pastel color, but if you squish it down and make it really smooth, it gets darker (honestly, I've never done this, I'm making assumptions). The surface of all the various layers of the sponge reflect light, and give clean, undyed leather that three dimensional sheen. If you compress those layers, the light doesn't really get out. Smoothing out the surface reduces the surface area available to reflect light as well. The oils consolidate those layers, and allow the light to penetrate deeper before it's reflected back, at which point more of it is absorbed. Longer (redder) wavelengths are able to get in and out to and from deeper in the leather, which is where the redness comes from.

Dyes and pigments throw all of this out the window. I have some vegetable tanned leather around here that I've treated to the max to get as much color as possible without the use of dyes and pigments. I'll see if I can't get some of it under the scope later, hopefully with some more powerful magnification, and either a memory card, or I'll just take a photo through the eyepiece.

The damn server had better work this time...

I do not know what to say? I am deeply impressed and have never seen macro shots like this before.
Incredible - are you actually a tanner, biologist or other scientist?

 

[spectre6000]

I do not know what to say? I am deeply impressed and have never seen macro shots like this before.
Incredible - are you actually a tanner, biologist or other scientist?

Thank you. I'm just a serial nerd. Professionally, I'm mostly a software engineer, but I also play with chemistry. There's an IP situation, so I can't go into a lot of detail, but I'm developing some water chemistry automation technology that I hope to bring to market soon. In a past life, I was head of the experimental feedstocks program at the largest biodiesel refinery in the US. I learned a lot about triglycerides, fatty acids, and the like in that gig, and there's a significant application crossover in leather treatment. The microscope I actually bought for watchmaking and electronics (and then stocked up on optics for when my kids are old enough to appreciate it and be able to use the tools), but it has been a surprisingly useful tool. I've used it, for example, to straighten out the grooves in LPs that skip so that they'll play properly.

I think I have some of my mahogany leather in my office somewhere. I'll mess around with that a bit this evening with some more powerful optics and see what can be seen. This is the first time I've ever put leather under the scope. I knew what I'd find academically, but haven't laid eyes on it personally until now.

 

[jr30]

Thank you. I'm just a serial nerd. Professionally, I'm mostly a software engineer, but I also play with chemistry. There's an IP situation, so I can't go into a lot of detail, but I'm developing some water chemistry automation technology that I hope to bring to market soon. In a past life, I was head of the experimental feedstocks program at the largest biodiesel refinery in the US. I learned a lot about triglycerides, fatty acids, and the like in that gig, and there's a significant application crossover in leather treatment. The microscope I actually bought for watchmaking and electronics (and then stocked up on optics for when my kids are old enough to appreciate it and be able to use the tools), but it has been a surprisingly useful tool. I've used it, for example, to straighten out the grooves in LPs that skip so that they'll play properly.

I think I have some of my mahogany leather in my office somewhere. I'll mess around with that a bit this evening with some more powerful optics and see what can be seen. This is the first time I've ever put leather under the scope. I knew what I'd find academically, but haven't laid eyes on it personally until now.

To be honest, of course I thought something like that. There must be a deep understanding of biological and chemical processes in order to answer a yet 'banal question' in such detail. I'm still impressed and find it interesting what different people with deep know-how are in this forum.

In any case, my question couldn't be answered any better. Since I'm not a native speaker, my sentences probably don't sound particularly 'intelligent'... but I have learned a lot! Thank you!

 

[spectre6000]

Could have fooled me that English wasn't your first language. Lots of native speakers that can't write that well.

OK. So, whole famn damily is home sick with a cold. Just another stop in the preschool pathogen parade. So I have a bit more daylight time than usual today!

Here are some bonus microscope images. My scope is capable of... I think 270X with the right combo of eyepieces, zoom, and Barlow lens, but I mostly use it in the 3.5X-10X range. It's stereo and low power with a large working distance in order to be able to get watch movements/electronics and tools under the lens while working on them. As a result, at higher magnification levels, it sort of falls on its face. The image gets very dim for lack of available light. Fortunately, the phone camera adjusts somewhat, but it's also more difficult to get things into focus.

Clean side of briefcase (refer to previous post for macro view):
Max zoom w/ 10X eyepieces:

20X eyepieces

30X eyepieces

I tried to get some shots of the handle at higher magnification, but the combination of the obstruction of the body of the briefcase and the curvature of the handle meant I could barely get a thin band in focus. Really not helpful, even when I can manipulate it in person. So, I found the dirtiest and most worn, aka most colorful, corner of the side. Best I could do to find some darker color on the same hide with a conventional wear/coloration pattern.

Macro view:

10X eyepieces

20X eyepiece

30X

I hit my image max with the last sample, so I'll have to make a second post... Stay tuned.

 

[spectre6000]

This is a prototype moleskine notebook cover I made a few years back, but I goofed and it's a little small. The leather was oiled with a blend of oils I came up with that maximizes color, protection, and finish, and then exposed to a LOT of high altitude (7K') sun for maximum UV damage. THEN I made it into (whatever). This is the first time I've poked at it like this. It still smells sweet after however many years of sitting on a shelf collecting dust (speaking of, the white flecks are dust). It's vegetable tanned cow. No dyes or pigments of any sort. I usually use this leather for tool rolls/pouches. It's super durable, handles a LOT of abuse, and just great stuff!

Macro:

Minimum zoom

Max zoom w/ 10X eyepiece

20X

30X

The thing that's interesting to me here is being able to see the difference in the condition of the leather itself. The naturally worn briefcase has a bit more black and yellow to it. That definitely makes for a deeper and more interesting coloration. The black is dirt, and the yellow is leather that's less damaged/compressed deeper in the pores. The treated leather is much more evenly colored, and lacks the depth, but the attractive deep red/mahogany color is there, and the wear will happen. The color goes all the way down deep into the leather. What's more interesting is that as it collects actual wear and dirt (this has not been handled really save what it took to make it), it'll get really dark in a good way... I don't know how much depth can be had from compression given the type of damage that makes starting point. Most of my tool roll stuff have black spots, but it's iron contamination from the tools. Very neat. I've been doing this for the better part of a decade, and never had anyone to share it with that might have the faintest interest. Also never thought to put it under the scope!

 

[jr30]

This is a prototype moleskine notebook cover I made a few years back, but I goofed and it's a little small. The leather was oiled with a blend of oils I came up with that maximizes color, protection, and finish, and then exposed to a LOT of high altitude (7K') sun for maximum UV damage. THEN I made it into (whatever). This is the first time I've poked at it like this. It still smells sweet after however many years of sitting on a shelf collecting dust (speaking of, the white flecks are dust). It's vegetable tanned cow. No dyes or pigments of any sort. I usually use this leather for tool rolls/pouches. It's super durable, handles a LOT of abuse, and just great stuff!

Macro:
View attachment 586759
Minimum zoom
View attachment 586760
Max zoom w/ 10X eyepiece
View attachment 586761
20X View attachment 586762
30X
View attachment 586763

The thing that's interesting to me here is being able to see the difference in the condition of the leather itself. The naturally worn briefcase has a bit more black and yellow to it. That definitely makes for a deeper and more interesting coloration. The black is dirt, and the yellow is leather that's less damaged/compressed deeper in the pores. The treated leather is much more evenly colored, and lacks the depth, but the attractive deep red/mahogany color is there, and the wear will happen. The color goes all the way down deep into the leather. What's more interesting is that as it collects actual wear and dirt (this has not been handled really save what it took to make it), it'll get really dark in a good way... I don't know how much depth can be had from compression given the type of damage that makes starting point. Most of my tool roll stuff have black spots, but it's iron contamination from the tools. Very neat. I've been doing this for the better part of a decade, and never had anyone to share it with that might have the faintest interest. Also never thought to put it under the scope!

If you know what you're doing, you can make incredibly beautiful pieces, in this case a notebook cover.

You first have to understand the interaction between leather skin, tanning process, light and other substances as well as environmental influences during the life cycle. As mentioned, I can only repeat my superalatives: I am impressed and the pictures with the explanation are really phenomenal. I've never seen anything like it before and I have to admit I didn't pay any attention to it.

 

[jr30]

If you know what you're doing, you can make incredibly beautiful pieces, in this case a notebook cover.

You first have to understand the interaction between leather skin, tanning process, light and other substances as well as environmental influences during the life cycle. As mentioned, I can only repeat my superalatives: I am impressed and the pictures with the explanation are really phenomenal. I've never seen anything like it before and I have to admit I didn't pay any attention to it.

I forgot to take an A/B comparison photo, but look at the result. I achieved this result with a horsehair brush and medium force in the brush movements and I am thrilled.

Beforehand, I tested the leather area on the inside of the jacket to see if there could be any scratches. But my horsehair brush is extremely soft...
A paradox: The horsehide maintained with horse hair.

 

[spectre6000]

No one asked except my inquiring mind, but I'm sick, and it's a snowy day to boot. I don't want to further clog this thread with photos no one asked for, but if there's interest, I might start a new thread, and go around the house gathering up all the different leather articles I can find, and put them under the scope just to see what there is to see.

 

[jr30]

No one asked except my inquiring mind, but I'm sick, and it's a snowy day to boot. I don't want to further clog this thread with photos no one asked for, but if there's interest, I might start a new thread, and go around the house gathering up all the different leather articles I can find, and put them under the scope just to see what there is to see.

Many of us simply want to dress beautifully, look stylish, or strive for an ideal, sometimes even an ideal of days gone by. I'm tired of today's trendy fashion. Almost all people look the same in some way. Fashion serves all people, whether man or woman, young or old. The fashion industry lacks individuality and independence. And people buy what they see on Instagram and strive for as many “LIKES” as possible. Uhh...

Here in the forum you can also find like-minded people outside of the mainstream who just want to dress in an exciting, interesting, adventurous, vintage or whatever way.

I find your rather scientific approach to the topic very interesting and can learn many details that remain hidden to simple leather jacket and leather shoe wearers.

Just from my simple question and your detailed answer, I've learned a lot and saw details in photos that were unknown to me. Furthermore, I wouldn't have the microscopes at my disposal to gain such insights.

I think it's definitely justified to have an own thread, even though not everyone will probably be equally interested in it. My 0.5 cents...

Best regards
Roman

 

[hungapotamus]

Rookie question here that doesn't warrant it's own thread.

What is this Schott Perfecto model number? I think it's mid/late 70's based on the tag, the pocket tag only shows the size and not the model.

 

[Aloysius]

Rookie question here that doesn't warrant it's own thread.

What is this Schott Perfecto model number? I think it's mid/late 70's based on the tag, the pocket tag only shows the size and not the model.

Respect. Some guy (seems to be an aspiring flipper) made a full thread for this, lol.

This label places it at mid-70s at latest. I think it's straightforwardly a 618, nothing to indicate otherwise.

 

[KBlake]

I just noticed this errant line of stitch marks on my 1940s campus jacket cuff.

 

[jeo]

I just noticed this errant line of stitch marks on my 1940s campus jacket cuff. View attachment 587570

Yes, very common on vintage jackets. Does this bother you?

 

[KBlake]

No, not really.

 

[jeo]

Good. This is pretty bad so you won’t see this level of sloppiness often but you will see many imperfections.