WW2 repro / detailed jeans

[Dr_Heech]

@MJF9 l agree with @beautiful_FrEaK insomucinsomuch the garment is based off an actual vintage one so the wonkiness is perfect, in a perfect wonky sense. I just think like many that it is now just one manufacturer outdoing the next on the wonky scale. I for one am over this trend by a long shot but can appreciate the draw it still has.

[Maynard Friedman]

“Where can I buy one of those jackets?”

[Duke Mantee]

1 hour ago, beautiful_FrEaK said:

Well, except for the excessive chainstitch run-offs they are a 1:1 copy of an existing Levi's jacket, so I wouldn't say they take it too far... because there is an actual jacket looking like this. No fantasy product. 

So every single piece in every size of this production run is identical in detail?

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Since I haven't seen every piece they made in every size it's hard to say

But yes, that was the plan.

[MJF9]

That's where the modern skill comes in mate 

[Broark]

27 minutes ago, Duke Mantee said:

So every single piece in every size of this production run is identical in detail?

Having seen a few different pairs in person (speaking on the 43 tux, can’t comment on the 46): it’s actually very impressive how nearly identical the wonky, irregular stitching is across each item. Down to the little flecks of weft sticking out. They did a great job of making these as close to their original vintage pieces as possible.

[Duke Mantee]

Isn’t that exactly the opposite of how world war wonkiness works?

[Broark]

Yes that’s correct.  Impressive nonetheless in my opinion.

[MJF9]

Ah but SC are only repro'ing that one wonky model so all the repros need to be the same wonkiness proportionately 😉

[l13902733261]

Much prefer FW approach on the WW2 theme. where in an alternate universe, people still hold their standards even at war.

[reallypeacedoff]

It reminds me of trying to kern text to look badly kerned. There's a skill in trying to make something look bad, but in a good way.

[chicote]

as someone who's always had a hard time sewing in a straight line, i am feeling really validated by these

[julian-wolf]

That approach to wonkiness has always struck me as ultra corny; that was already my main complaint with the early rounds of Warehouse DSB, and it’s wild to see how much farther folks have continued pushing it these days

[AlientoyWorkmachine]

Isn’t this the thing people loved about CSF? Is it just now that it doesn’t seem so unique because you can get erratic stitching from brands that used to use straight lines, so it’s played out? 

I sort of don’t care much either way - as far as bad design goes I’ve seen tons worse from many other brands any time I’m in a regular store - but appreciate that these aren’t so much about the spirit as the letter of the flaws. Japanese industry has been known to make a great copy of something - it doesn’t mean it necessarily cares a whole lot about the origin story of the garment.

[Broark]

I think it’s a bit of over-saturation in the market, it seems like there are so many people offering such a similar product that it’s just not as unique as it once was.
I appreciate the SC ones after seeing them in person and seeing side by side photos of the originals compared to the reproduction. It’s a testament to their ability to train their production team to really hone in on the details. But everyone just letting some runoff extend off their stitches and calling it “wonky” seems a bit lazy and low effort.
All in all I agree with @l13902733261, I’ll take the FW approach to war era denim over most others, but y’all already knew that. 

[AlientoyWorkmachine]

My wardrobe reflects that sentiment also (my only ww2 jeans are OA and FW), but I guess I’m glad the people who liked the CSF angle now have more choices without paying that goofball. 

[Dr_Heech]

4 hours ago, AlientoyWorkmachine said:

Isn’t this the thing people loved about CSF? Is it just now that it doesn’t seem so unique because you can get erratic stitching from brands that used to use straight lines, so it’s played out? 

Couldn't have put it better myself. 

Enough wonkiness,  l'm now looking forward to my non-wonky, straight stitched pre war FW tux. 

Edited May 22 by Dr_Heech

[Talan]

8 hours ago, Duke Mantee said:

Isn’t that exactly the opposite of how world war wonkiness works?

Exactly. Is there such thing as perfect wonkiness? Obviously not, and perfect repetition of the same mistake on different products kills the intent. Just like in jazz improvisation on a standard theme, perfect replication with note-to-note precision is impossible, it will be something new each time.

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Yet everybody (?!) on here loves and favours the more irregular denim which just replicates the imperfections of vintage denim. So we all justify to ourselves what we prefer (and that's what counts I guess).
Is it because to sew badly is easy and to replicate imperfect denim is hard?

We had this topic of the wonky stitching some weeks back but I didn't take part but here is my (obviously) biased view.

When I started with raw denim and repros I favoured the perfect and neat stitching. I would have been disappointed to see sloppy sewing for the price I paid. The first model I really noticed which featured the more wonky stitchwork where the Real McCoys 003 and I didn't like it. Mainly because every pair was the same and the design of the errors wasn't very nice.
I admit CSF started my interest in the badly sewn jeans. Everything was done on period correct machines and the errors were more natural and every pair was kinda different (if I see his newer stuff it's often pretty exaggerated and looks like a bad copy of his early work). From this point though I looked a bit different on sloppy sewing. I've got some old Denime stuff where the sewing is kinda sloppy but not on purpose and I am sure I would have been disappointed when I would have bought those in 2014 or so. Nowadays, I find it pretty neat and it's kinda my favourite part  
Denime in the Orizzonti era as well had their WW2 pair with sloppy sewing (and thus it predates the Real McCoys pair I mentioned earlier) but here again: all errors are the same. Hayashi-san even went so far to replicate the same errors on his Resolute 714. And this feature I still don't like very much. 
Why do I make an exception for Sugar Cane (and here is the justification part)? Because like I wrote earlier it's a 1:1 copy of an existing pair so kinda a perfect repro. Not a fantasy pair copied into oblivion like Denime, Resolute, Real McCoys, SDA or Full Count did in the past and do now. 

 

[CSL]

10 hours ago, beautiful_FrEaK said:

Well, except for the excessive chainstitch run-offs they are a 1:1 copy of an existing Levi's jacket, so I wouldn't say they take it too far... because there is an actual jacket looking like this. No fantasy product. 

Right, beautiful_FrEak. The first time I read the blog post that was my interpretation. Then on the second reading I picked up this in the text [with a focus on faithfully replicating the “character”] and that caused me to question whether it was a full on replica job or more of a philosophical excursion, type of thing. 

If it is a replica, then I find the level of wonkiness rather shocking. Makes me think people must have been pretty desperate to get a denim suit, in order to tolerate that level of slop. Of course I understand denim history fanatics of today being turned on by those elements.

One thing I'm wondering about, I believe Lee (& Wrangler?) were making jeans & jackets in 1944. I've never heard anything about their products having the sloppy sewing element. Perhaps someone here can shed some light on that subject?


 

Edited May 22 by CSL

[beautiful_FrEaK]

@CSL here is some picture material with the vintage pair of which the SC1943 is base on:

https://dig-it.media/clutch/article/799433/

https://bookshelf.wisebook4.jp/html/toyoenterprise/51863/#1

[CSL]

Thanks, beautiful FrEak. 

[Dr_Heech]

1 hour ago, CSL said:

If it is a replica, then I find the level of wonkiness rather shocking. Makes me think people must have been pretty desperate to get a denim suit, in order to tolerate that level of slop. Of course I understand denim history fanatics of today being turned on by those elements.

One thing I'm wondering about, I believe Lee (& Wrangler?) were making jeans & jackets in 1944. I've never heard anything about their products having the sloppy sewing element. Perhaps someone here can shed some light on that subject?
 

I think the level of slop was predominantly worse for Levis products for some of the reasons described earlier - re new factories, whereas Lee already had a number of factories. Only ever seen a few pairs of images of WW2 made cowboy pants and jackets and the only slightly sloppy stitching was on the pleat stitches, even then it's bearly visible. As for Bluebell's Wrangler brand, that wasn't introduced until 1947.

[reallypeacedoff]

Since this is based on one jacket (I assume), it's safe to say that another vintage jacket (if found) could display a completely different set of inconsistencies no? Or was the SC collectables jacket based across a few jackets maybe? I mean, wasn't it during one of the most stringent times for material use and skilled workers were far and between, thus why they are so "wonky."

Edited May 22 by reallypeacedoff

[beautiful_FrEaK]

10 minutes ago, reallypeacedoff said:

Since this is based on one jacket (I assume), it's safe to say that another vintage jacket (if found) could display a completely different set of inconsistencies no?

Yes, the 1943 jacket based just on one jacket. Plenty of info in the Sugar Cane thread also plenty of videos on Clutchman TV showing the vintage pieces (2 jackets and 2 jeans, 1943 and 1946).

[Maynard Friedman]

9 hours ago, chicote said:

as someone who's always had a hard time sewing in a straight line, i am feeling really validated by these

In that case, if you tried to replicate a wonkily stitched repro jacket, it might come out perfectly straight! Where will it end?

[Duke Mantee]

1 hour ago, CSL said:

Right, beautiful_FrEak. The first time I read the blog post that was my interpretation. Then on the second reading I picked up this in the text [with a focus on faithfully replicating the “character”] and that caused me to question whether it was a full on replica job or more of a philosophical excursion, type of thing. 

If it is a replica, then I find the level of wonkiness rather shocking. Makes me think people must have been pretty desperate to get a denim suit, in order to tolerate that level of slop. Of course I understand denim history fanatics of today being turned on by those elements.

One thing I'm wondering about, I believe Lee (& Wrangler?) were making jeans & jackets in 1944. I've never heard anything about their products having the sloppy sewing element. Perhaps someone here can shed some light on that subject?


 

Capturing character and spirit is really the position I’ve always adopted.

I really don’t mind the wonky or sloppy stitching so much as I bother about the method of how it is being (re)produced. Why does it take many hours of work to make something that was originally made in a fraction of the time?

An exact replica is a tremendous achievement … further ‘replicas’ starts to diminish that achievement (and it can only be an exact replica on a tag size for tag size, other sizes are not replicas they are approximations).

Mostly though I enjoy reading everyone’s positions on this.

[CSL]

It's certainly been a lively discussion.

[AlientoyWorkmachine]

If I end up grabbing the FC pair, it will be sort of for fun, and because as I said earlier, I quite like the 0105 cut.

Since that cut is a modern concoction it fails in the repro aspect already. But then I’ve never really been interested in the actual replica angle. To my mind there are simply too many variables one can poke holes in and it misses appreciating the thing on its own terms.

To get quasi academic for a second, I like to think of Place as a sort of intersection of time and space. Place can never be recreated because of the time aspect, even if the physical space is the same. So the place that made a thing is gone - this is enough for me to let go of the idea of a repro, full stop. Sure you can try to get closer, but the Place that made it is gone. This is freedom.

I also used to love perfect stitching and while I still do, I also know that it makes really no practical difference for me. Actually, some of my stuff from sugar cane and full count have what seem to be actual factory flaws that I probably would have been irked by were they a cheap Levi’s version if I had bought when I was younger. I don’t care now, and they even become part of the charm - as long as they’re not structural and really do compromise the life or functionality of the garment. 

I certainly understand the “it’s played out” angle, but, at the same time it’s funny to see something that was widely thought as charming come to not be simply because it’s been offered more - and especially in the realm of pants that any of our spouses or if not then certainly friends and neighbors would probably say all basically look the same. 

[Dr_Heech]

I don't think it's just a case of something that was just widely thought of as charming but more of something that had been reproduced further,  in the case of Csf at the time (2016/2017) it was not the wonky stitching that was the charm, it was the capturing of character and spirit that had risen the bar. The use of era specific skills on old sewing machines, materials that were more researched and wonderful denim. Yes the cuts Csf offered and the sizing weren't as well researched, and some of the variations of the original line up were just a bit more than quirky, but no more so than Levis Red or Evisu or some other brands. Again l don't think it's lost its charm because it's been offered more but more likely because we've had quite a few years of it being offered to us, so more like saturation of the market.