(Trigger warning) Are we giving too much credit for wabi-sabi/Japanese craftmanship reputation for uneven graining (especially in high visible area)?

[long218]

I have never found this to be true.

They're both making fake grain, and making stealth grain that waits for 5 wears?

Seems a lot more likely they're just selecting grainy contrast panels to look like vintage jackets and because the Japanese market likes it.

In the original post, I linked both a smooth and an uneven-grain RMC J100, a $2000+ jacket. Real McCoy's is neither selecting for nor against grainy contrast panels. They are just low-effort putting together a FQHH as cheaply as possible while continue to project a premium message.

 

[long218]

Related and might warrant its own thread but

WHICH BRANDS PUT IN THE MOST EFFORT TO SELECT THE BEST (FQHH) PANELS FOR THEIR JACKETS?

 

[cbez]

The second j100 is barely uneven. They are doing batches year after year with different leathers and trying different looks. There's no grand conspiracy.

You're assuming smooth panels or perfectly matched panels are somehow objectively a superior piece. They're not. But if that's your preference, there are plenty of options out there for you.

 

[barnabus]

Related and might warrant its own thread but

WHICH BRANDS PUT IN THE MOST EFFORT TO SELECT THE BEST (FQHH) PANELS FOR THEIR JACKETS?

No need to shout.

 

[Edward]

I personally lean to the view that there's an awful lot of stuff that has the price artificially inflated in the West because "Made in Japan" now has the cachet that "Made in the USA" once did. I've played electric guitar for over thirty years now, and seen it all in that world. All sorts of mythologies come into play: you'd have a guy insisting (with zero knowledge of the Far East) that American guitars were inherently superior because of 'better' wood, or other things- it got as absurd (and, frankly, borderline racist) at one point as people insisting that a Us made Fender was a superior instrument to a Japanese or an American one because the guy operating the CRT machine in the factory "understands the culture of rock music and is probably a musician". Nuts. Superstition aside, to a certain degree a lot of it is little different to the perceived value in a 'designer brand'. I tend to the view that, all other things being equal, country of origin of goods is irrelevant in terms of their quality. The fashion ability of Japanese brands has raised their market price here beyond what I could justify (or, often, afford) - though how much of the UK prices is that alone, and how much this is amplified by the pound's value remaining at a historical low for closing in on a decade now, I couldn't claim to know.

As to grain v smooth, matched v unmatched.... it's all cosmetic choice. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[MickeyPunch]

I didn’t want to agree with OP but I kind of do…

I’ve been saying the same about “artisanal brands”: Guidi, a1923, CCP, MA+, etc. probably only Monitor will recognise those over here lol.

But yeah they sell stuff at a *very high* price and often with very questionable finishing, but because it’s “artisanal” it gets a pass for some.

I know this and still like it, though… that stuff is so unique. With Fine Creek I doubt that’s the case. I never really understood the appeal. I think they nail their marketing though.

 

[long218]

@MickeyPunch yeah so far, no one has disprove any of my statement. The ones that talk about jacket makers doing this on purpose fail to mention why these same jacket makers cannot offer Smooth-only, Mixed-only, and UnevenGrain-only. It's not like they have to worry about too many SKUs taking up shelve spaces like an actual manufacturer like Unilever, P&G, etc...

 

[Edward]

@MickeyPunch yeah so far, no one has disprove any of my statement. The ones that talk about jacket makers doing this on purpose fail to mention why these same jacket makers cannot offer Smooth-only, Mixed-only, and UnevenGrain-only. It's not like they have to worry about too many SKUs taking up shelve spaces like an actual manufacturer like Unilever, P&G, etc...

It's clearly a choice based on what they believe they can sell, mixed in with what they want to put their brand to. TBh, I'd be very surprised if much of most brands markets care as much about these things as we do round here.

 

[Aloysius]

I didn’t want to agree with OP but I kind of do…

I’ve been saying the same about “artisanal brands”: Guidi, a1923, CCP, MA+, etc. probably only Monitor will recognise those over here lol.

But yeah they sell stuff at a *very high* price and often with very questionable finishing, but because it’s “artisanal” it gets a pass for some.

I know this and still like it, though… that stuff is so unique. With Fine Creek I doubt that’s the case. I never really understood the appeal. I think they nail their marketing though.

I'm very familiar with those makers and I agree that ultimately they're more compelling.

@MickeyPunch yeah so far, no one has disprove any of my statement. The ones that talk about jacket makers doing this on purpose fail to mention why these same jacket makers cannot offer Smooth-only, Mixed-only, and UnevenGrain-only. It's not like they have to worry about too many SKUs taking up shelve spaces like an actual manufacturer like Unilever, P&G, etc...

What do you mean by "disprove"? There isn't some Japanese cultural imperative for this mismatch. It's just a fashion trend in (one subculture of) Japan and in other countries as well.

The reason those jacket makers do it is because they're catering to that fashion trend. But there are absolutely brands that don't do it, and offer smoother/"better" panels consistently. By the way even some of the biggest proponents of mixed grain like FCL have smooth only jackets too, and I say this as someone who hasn't liked any of their stuff except the denim-based ones.

There are indeed also brands that do all hyper-grainy, in Japan and the US alike.

 

[Canuck Panda]

The typical Double (full) FQHH is about 18 to 22 sq feet, very much like the size of the full cowhide sides. There are smaller hides but mostly are of this size.

Shinki SF horse is "single" fronts because they trim away the mane mark right in the center. So they're smaller, averaging 100 dsm.

For normal double FQHH, the cutting goes something like this,

it's mirrored in an attempt to get maximum symmetry, but horsehides can be wild and hard to predict. cowhide sides are much more stable in this matter.

Some makers specifically use the grainier panels on the under panels like side and under sleeve and collar.

I have no issue with all the photos you've posted grain wise in the first post. I don't think it's about cost cutting but that's just my opinion nothing else.

It's almost 2025 and every maker east or west are pushing expensive jackets now. Jackets that were 1000 and less are now 1500 plus. I don't think it has anything to do with material cost but more to do with labor cost. Again that's just my opinion. I also have a few people on my payroll and it has risen exponential over the past ten years especially, almost doubled.

 

[MickeyPunch]

It's clearly a choice based on what they believe they can sell, mixed in with what they want to put their brand to. TBh, I'd be very surprised if much of most brands markets care as much about these things as we do round here.

Oh I think they very much care. Pretty much every for-profit company in the world does very much care about cutting costs. They have an incentive to use the last bit of hide, and that’s a problem. Just because they tell you a (compelling?) story about how back in the day there were (horse) leather shortages and they had to make uneven/mismatching jackets and they’re trying to mimic that it doesn’t make it true. I don’t assume it’s false necessarily but there’s a cynic inside me that pops up in these cases.

And I say there’s still a chance the story is still true. I believe these brands come from true nerds. The thing is, not all nerds think the pinnacle of design was reached 70 years ago.

 

[Craig from Craigslist]

Idk it’s a cool look to me

 

[navetsea]

The typical Double (full) FQHH is about 18 to 22 sq feet, very much like the size of the full cowhide sides. There are smaller hides but mostly are of this size.

Shinki SF horse is "single" fronts because they trim away the mane mark right in the center. So they're smaller, averaging 100 dsm.

For normal double FQHH, the cutting goes something like this,
View attachment 651234
View attachment 651235

it's mirrored in an attempt to get maximum symmetry, but horsehides can be wild and hard to predict. cowhide sides are much more stable in this matter.

Some makers specifically use the grainier panels on the under panels like side and under sleeve and collar.

I have no issue with all the photos you've posted grain wise in the first post. I don't think it's about cost cutting but that's just my opinion nothing else.

It's almost 2025 and every maker east or west are pushing expensive jackets now. Jackets that were 1000 and less are now 1500 plus. I don't think it has anything to do with material cost but more to do with labor cost. Again that's just my opinion. I also have a few people on my payroll and it has risen exponential over the past ten years especially, almost doubled.

very nice pic about pattern clicking

 

[cbez]

Oh I think they very much care. Pretty much every for-profit company in the world does very much care about cutting costs. They have an incentive to use the last bit of hide, and that’s a problem. Just because they tell you a (compelling?) story about how back in the day there were (horse) leather shortages and they had to make uneven/mismatching jackets and they’re trying to mimic that it doesn’t make it true. I don’t assume it’s false necessarily but there’s a cynic inside me that pops up in these cases.

And I say there’s still a chance the story is still true. I believe these brands come from true nerds. The thing is, not all nerds think the pinnacle of design was reached 70 years ago.

Can you show me any example of these 'cost cut' panels that failed? Many extremely grainy panels are still going strong 70+ years later. The ones we are getting now will surely survive our use cases.

It's an aesthetic preference and grainy does not necessarily mean it's a stretchier belly panel. My Chords wallet is tanned super thick, grainy, and practically bulletproof for example.

 

[MickeyPunch]

Can you show me any example of these 'cost cut' panels that failed? Many extremely grainy panels are still going strong 70+ years later. The ones we are getting now will surely survive our use cases.

It's an aesthetic preference and grainy does not necessarily mean it's a stretchier belly panel. My Chords wallet is tanned super thick, grainy, and practically bulletproof for example.

View attachment 651377

I didn’t say those hides fail, I said it’s inherently cheaper for makers to use them vs discarding them.

 

[cbez]

I didn’t say those hides fail, I said it’s inherently cheaper for makers to use them vs discarding them.

Well you're saying it's a problem. If they function equally, then it's an aesthetic difference.

 

[bigmanbigtruck]

The FCL e.g. definitely looks like artificial distressing to bring out the grain and seems to be a deliberate choice on their part. Probably following a trend.

When it comes to made-to-order or custom jobs, I think there’s room to make such a request. Dependent on maker whether they will accommodate it or not. I’ve certainly asked and gotten what I requested for.

 

[MickeyPunch]

Well you're saying it's a problem. If they function equally, then it's an aesthetic difference.

It is indeed a very apparent aesthetic difference, and as I say I want to believe that it’s the genuine maker’s intention to make it look like that and thus everybody wins: the maker produces what they want (and save some money) the buyer hopefully knows what they’re buying and like that aesthetic, and it’s a good thing all around (less waste).

But as I said, the cynic in me tells me that because there’s a cost-cutting incentive to use mismatched hides. Isn’t it you the one who says center back seams are always a cost cutting measure and never due to fit and/or aesthetic choices?

At least I leave the door open for mismatched panels being a genuine, non-cost cutting choice, it’s just that I don’t think it’s the most likely scenario. And FWIW I don’t mind the look or even like it in some cases (not long ago I posted pics of a pair of boots that are incredibly mismatched, and I love them).

 

[bigmanbigtruck]

Using mismatched hides is inherently a cost-cutting technique. It gives the maker more supply of raw materials and enables flexibility in constructing the panels.
And specially dealing with an organic raw-material like leather which shows so much variation.

Panel matching is basically a restrictive measure and would naturally drive costs up.

I know you have a cynical view when it comes to mismatched panels as being a cost-cutting measure, but I think it is more of a default. On the flip-side, you could think of having panel matching is more of a premium service since it drives up the maker’s costs.

But just to reiterate, that FCL example you provided looks too extreme to be representative of what mismatched panels typically look like. It appears to be a “look” they’re going for.

 

[cbez]

The FCL e.g. definitely looks like artificial distressing to bring out the grain and seems to be a deliberate choice on their part. Probably following a trend.

When it comes to made-to-order or custom jobs, I think there’s room to make such a request. Dependent on maker whether they will accommodate it or not. I’ve certainly asked and gotten what I requested for.

Grain isn't 'distressed' and the only artificial grain is embossing.

However they could easily ask the tannery to provide x number of hides with 5% more shrink or smth so they could do mismatched panels.