Hand quality stitching on a machine

[sbrownn]

I have been trying to come up with a process that would allow me to machine stitch with a result that comes closer to duplicating the appearance of hand stitching.  One of the issues with a machine stitching is the appearance of the backside stitch; it is difficult to repair the damage that the needle does to the backside in the process of going through.  Once the stitch has been made, the backside appearance can be improved with the use of an overstitch wheel or by hammering down but these are time consuming too.  First of all, if you are trying to make a nice machine made backside stitch, start with some sort of needle and awl machine.  Not necessarily because they do a better job, because if improperly set up they don't, but because you have more variables to tweak.  On a Campbell-Randall, which is what I am using, you can mess with the needle and awl sizes, the top and bottom thread tensions and the knot position.  Almost all needle and awl sewing calls for a awl that is sized larger than the needle and the problem with this is that the needle is too small to repair the damage caused by the awl.  What I really want is a needle that is big enough to turn back in the "blow out" that results from the awl punching through the backside and still make a hole big enough for the knot.  First and foremost, make sure that both the needle and awl are sharp.  I hone my awl just like a knife blade so when it pushes through it cuts instead of breaks the leather fibers.  My current process consists of a needle that is one size larger than the awl and pre punching the stitch holes with a pricking iron.  When you use a pricking iron you are usually punching down on a pad and the presence of the pad helps to minimize tear out from the pricking iron.  I use an awl that is a little smaller that the pricking iron but angled to match it and a needle that is bigger.  The pricking iron has already created a hole large enough for the knot and the needle is large enough to fold back the edges of the hole the pricking iron has made.  If the machine weren't awl feed, I could probably get rid of the awl completely but by undersizing the awl I can minimize the damage it does to the backside.  

I realize that this process is not as efficient as machine stitching and I wouldn't use it on something like the stitching on the edge of a belt but I would use it stitching the edge of a wallet or any other place where I wanted to show off the stitching but didn't want to spend the time doing it by hand.    

Can you please move this post to a more appropriate forum?

[chuck123wapati]

That sounds like a great experiment indeed but your wallets will still be machine sewn so showing them off as handsewn? I guess I don't get it, machine stitching looks ok, it is what it is.

[Bert51]

When I first got my Adler 105-6, the needle plate had been rebuilt by the previous owner and had a rather larger hole in the plate and I was not happy with the way the back looked. I found another needle plate on ebay for a Singer 45 with a smaller hole and found it looked some what better on the underside.

I had a friend weld the hole up and re drill it with a smaller hole, but I made it to small, re drilled it a little larger and and although it did not look like hand stitching, it did look a lot better then it did.

If you are using needle on the smaller side try using a needle plate with a smaller hole.

Bert.

[Northmount]

On 1/24/2020 at 3:27 PM, sbrownn said:

Can you please move this post to a more appropriate forum?

Moved to leather sewing machines

Tom

[dikman]

I've been pondering this, and the main issue is the "punch-through" that occurs on the backside of the leather. So, use the machine, with no thread, to pre-punch the stitch holes. Then flip the work piece and do the same thing from the backside, into the same holes. This should even out the "punch-through" and by then when it's run through the machine again, with thread, it should be better on the back (hopefully).

Personally, if I want something to look hand stitched then I'll hand stitch it.

[Wizcrafts]

The best bottom appearance I ever had on a sewing machine was on Union Lockstitch machines using a special narrow slotted throat plate and a 1/2 size difference between the needle and awl. I believe this was doable up to needle size 3.5. Beyond that you have to do full size differences and the slots have to be wider. It is tricky to get the needle perfectly positioned in two planes with only a half size larger awl.

[sbrownn]

On 1/25/2020 at 6:52 AM, chuck123wapati said:

That sounds like a great experiment indeed but your wallets will still be machine sewn so showing them off as handsewn? I guess I don't get it, machine stitching looks ok, it is what it is.

Not selling them as handsewn.  That would be dishonest.  Selling based on quality.  IMHO most machine stitching doesn't look okay on the backside.

[sbrownn]

3 hours ago, Wizcrafts said:

The best bottom appearance I ever had on a sewing machine was on Union Lockstitch machines using a special narrow slotted throat plate and a 1/2 size difference between the needle and awl. I believe this was doable up to needle size 3.5. Beyond that you have to do full size differences and the slots have to be wider. It is tricky to get the needle perfectly positioned in two planes with only a half size larger awl.

I have tried some 3D printed throat plates tailored to both awl width and stitch length but they didn't seem to make much difference on tear out.  Right now I am using a 0-1/2 awl and a 1 needle on pre pricked holes and it looks pretty good.  Not as good as expert hand stitching but better than my hand stitching.  My needle and awl are not perfectly positioned because I can't seem to move the head enough to accomplish it.  They are close though and the pre pricked holes minimize the problem.  I will post a couple of pictures.

Thanks, as always, for your expert comment.

[sbrownn]

14 hours ago, dikman said:

I've been pondering this, and the main issue is the "punch-through" that occurs on the backside of the leather. So, use the machine, with no thread, to pre-punch the stitch holes. Then flip the work piece and do the same thing from the backside, into the same holes. This should even out the "punch-through" and by then when it's run through the machine again, with thread, it should be better on the back (hopefully).

Personally, if I want something to look hand stitched then I'll hand stitch it.

It's probably not any faster to use the machine and I have found the pricking iron to be more exact than my machine as far as stitch spacing.  I think that once you "blow out" the backside it is difficult to fix.  The pricking irons, because they are bottoming on some sort of pricking pad, do not blow out the backside and neither does the awl that is smaller than both the needle and the pricking iron tooth.  

Work in progress but the results are promising.  Did I mention that I like running the machine but dislike hand stitching? 

18 hours ago, Northmount said:

Moved to leather sewing machines

Tom

Thank you Tom.

[sbrownn]

21 hours ago, Bert51 said:

When I first got my Adler 105-6, the needle plate had been rebuilt by the previous owner and had a rather larger hole in the plate and I was not happy with the way the back looked. I found another needle plate on ebay for a Singer 45 with a smaller hole and found it looked some what better on the underside.

I had a friend weld the hole up and re drill it with a smaller hole, but I made it to small, re drilled it a little larger and and although it did not look like hand stitching, it did look a lot better then it did.

If you are using needle on the smaller side try using a needle plate with a smaller hole.

Bert.

The problem is that on most heavy leather machines the feed is assisted by either the needle or, if a needle and awl machine, the awl.  This requires a slotted plate, not a plate with just a hole.  I couldn't tell about the 105-6 but it looks like a wonderful machine and if anyone wants to sell one I'm in the market.

[sbrownn]

Here are two images of the front and back side sewing.  For this experiment I glued two pieces of 6 oz bridle leather back to back and sewed them at a stitch length of 5mm.  If I had used a recommend size awl one half size larger than the needle and not pre pricked the holes the backside tearout would be obvious (don't ask how I know).  On the backside of this example the appearance of the stitch holes is obviously different but there is no apparent tear out. 

[dikman]

Not bad. I forgot to mention that I was referring to using "ordinary" lockstitch machines, not one of them old-fangled needle and awl thingy's.

Another thought re- my "idea" - use a pointed needle first to pre-punch the holes then use a leather needle to sew with, it should reduce the punch-through. Yes, I know, probably not very practical but just considering possibilities.

[RockyAussie]

Normally if the leather is not to dry and hard I don't seem to have much problems with the underside appearance as long as the tensions are reasonably tight top and bottom. I do use mostly normal lockstitch machines for my work. A good sharp needle does not tear its way through medium to soft temper leathers. If the leather is soft enough (Upholstry type) it can be sometimes hard to tell the top from the bottom stitch. If I was doing a lot of firm temper I just might think about making a spike on the dog foot as a pre hole presser but that may create unwanted marks around the corners and ends. Equally I suppose you could also create a bump at the back of the dog foot at the same stitch spacing that pushed the leather back up and into the knot hole area.

1 hour ago, sbrownn said:

The problem is that on most heavy leather machines the feed is assisted by either the needle or, if a needle and awl machine, the awl.  This requires a slotted plate, not a plate with just a hole.

All the machines I have, have dog feet that have a hole. On the large 441 style there is a long needle plate slot option but as I have a small dog foot and plate set for it I have not needed to use the long slotted plate one to date. I think there are some improvements being worked on for this narrow dog foot/needle plate set up at the moment over here in Aus.

[sbrownn]

21 hours ago, dikman said:

Not bad. I forgot to mention that I was referring to using "ordinary" lockstitch machines, not one of them old-fangled needle and awl thingy's.

Another thought re- my "idea" - use a pointed needle first to pre-punch the holes then use a leather needle to sew with, it should reduce the punch-through. Yes, I know, probably not very practical but just considering possibilities.

I think that is a good suggestion to try.

[sbrownn]

20 hours ago, RockyAussie said:

Normally if the leather is not to dry and hard I don't seem to have much problems with the underside appearance as long as the tensions are reasonably tight top and bottom. I do use mostly normal lockstitch machines for my work. A good sharp needle does not tear its way through medium to soft temper leathers. If the leather is soft enough (Upholstry type) it can be sometimes hard to tell the top from the bottom stitch. If I was doing a lot of firm temper I just might think about making a spike on the dog foot as a pre hole presser but that may create unwanted marks around the corners and ends. Equally I suppose you could also create a bump at the back of the dog foot at the same stitch spacing that pushed the leather back up and into the knot hole area.

All the machines I have, have dog feet that have a hole. On the large 441 style there is a long needle plate slot option but as I have a small dog foot and plate set for it I have not needed to use the long slotted plate one to date. I think there are some improvements being worked on for this narrow dog foot/needle plate set up at the moment over here in Aus.

I have to admit that my quest is less of a practical nature than an experiment.  Since I only have the one machine I find myself having to use the wrong machine when I'm sewing thinner stuff.  I have seen pictures of your machines and I would love to have one but so far I haven't found one to buy.  I think having just a hole for the needle instead of a slot would help a lot.  I even considered making myself a needle plate that would have a hole that moved with the awl and then spring back to its initial position once the needle let it go.  I have some presser feet with bumps on them for the top but that's not where I need it and they don't work to go around corners.  Almost all of my work is with bridle leather and the stuff I'm making doesn't hide the backside stitch.  A good example is a journal cover.  For a journal cover you need both the front and back side stitches to look good because the user sees them all the time.  

[RockyAussie]

2 hours ago, sbrownn said:

Almost all of my work is with bridle leather and the stuff I'm making doesn't hide the backside stitch.  A good example is a journal cover.  For a journal cover you need both the front and back side stitches to look good because the user sees them all the time.  

Agreed and likewise I am always looking to improve the quality and speed of the work I do. A softer oil tan type leather should give a better result for a journal cover but all the same, one thing that is fairly common in the work I do is padding. Sometimes the padding is foam sometimes a soft leather and sometimes a sort of felt material. What this can do aside from a nice padded feel or structure form is allow the thread to pull down into the leather a little more and this can improve the overall stitch appearance. The foam compresses as the sewing machine goes across and as it uncompresses the stitch is then tighter down in the leather. The padding/foams I use are generally attached a couple of mm short of the edge and sometimes they are skived as well. Below are a couple of pictures to show how foam can give structure and aid to pull in the stitching.

This first one shows the bags before their liners are put in and the foam is visible and stitching is sunken in.

This one shows the liners installed and now stitched up.

I would like to suggest doing the same trials you did with a little padding and compare the results. Sometimes it can take a bit of sorting to get the best results.

 

[Matt S]

From a purely pragmatic approach, using a matching thread colour on the backside does tend to hide a lot of cosmetic issues with the stitches, as does hammering and/or rubbing. Sometimes increasing the needle thread tension pulls the backside stitches in sufficiently to neaten the look on jobs that are being difficult however this is a balancing act, especially if you're using thread sizes that are at the high end for the thickness of leather being sewn.

I've also found that on some leathers, dampening the back of the leather before stitching reduces blowout and allows the stitches to sink in a little more, which neatens their appearance.

[oltoot]

IMHO if a Union Lock is properly adjusted and set up for the work, it makes prettier work, front and back than can be reasonably hand stitched. The 441s took over because they are much easier to mfg and learn to use and better for fabric than N&A

[Wizcrafts]

1 hour ago, oltoot said:

IMHO if a Union Lock is properly adjusted and set up for the work, it makes prettier work, front and back than can be reasonably hand stitched. The 441s took over because they are much easier to mfg and learn to use and better for fabric than N&A

This was my finding also. I've owned two ULS machines and both produced awesome stitches. If one has a "stepping foot, the top stitches get pushed down on the ends,  giving them a rounded appearance. Unfortunately, there is no such attachment for the bottom (wouldn't that be awesome though?).

[sbrownn]

22 hours ago, RockyAussie said:

Agreed and likewise I am always looking to improve the quality and speed of the work I do. A softer oil tan type leather should give a better result for a journal cover but all the same, one thing that is fairly common in the work I do is padding. Sometimes the padding is foam sometimes a soft leather and sometimes a sort of felt material. What this can do aside from a nice padded feel or structure form is allow the thread to pull down into the leather a little more and this can improve the overall stitch appearance. The foam compresses as the sewing machine goes across and as it uncompresses the stitch is then tighter down in the leather. The padding/foams I use are generally attached a couple of mm short of the edge and sometimes they are skived as well. Below are a couple of pictures to show how foam can give structure and aid to pull in the stitching.

This first one shows the bags before their liners are put in and the foam is visible and stitching is sunken in.

This one shows the liners installed and now stitched up.

I would like to suggest doing the same trials you did with a little padding and compare the results. Sometimes it can take a bit of sorting to get the best results.

 

Thank you so much for the advice.

8 hours ago, Matt S said:

From a purely pragmatic approach, using a matching thread colour on the backside does tend to hide a lot of cosmetic issues with the stitches, as does hammering and/or rubbing. Sometimes increasing the needle thread tension pulls the backside stitches in sufficiently to neaten the look on jobs that are being difficult however this is a balancing act, especially if you're using thread sizes that are at the high end for the thickness of leather being sewn.

I've also found that on some leathers, dampening the back of the leather before stitching reduces blowout and allows the stitches to sink in a little more, which neatens their appearance.

All good tips, especially the dampening.  I'm sure I read that before somewhere but thanks for reminding me.

[sbrownn]

4 hours ago, Wizcrafts said:

This was my finding also. I've owned two ULS machines and both produced awesome stitches. If one has a "stepping foot, the top stitches get pushed down on the ends,  giving them a rounded appearance. Unfortunately, there is no such attachment for the bottom (wouldn't that be awesome though?).

You can 3D print anything you can think of and I've printed both presser feet and throat plates.  Granted, they don't last as long as steel but it's surprising how long they do last.  The throat plate would probably be perfectly doable with a walking foot only machine; with a needle or awl feed machine probably not so much.  Are there any walking foot only feed machines?

[sbrownn]

6 hours ago, oltoot said:

IMHO if a Union Lock is properly adjusted and set up for the work, it makes prettier work, front and back than can be reasonably hand stitched. The 441s took over because they are much easier to mfg and learn to use and better for fabric than N&A

I would agree but with one caveat:  "reasonably" covers a lot of ground.  The "good guys" at hand stitching can make a stitch no machine can match but they are few and far between and unless they have some sort of reputation and high end clientele they can't make any money at it.  I'm looking for the middle ground; a machine stitch that is better than just pushing the pedal but a lot faster than sewing by hand.

[Wizcrafts]

1 hour ago, sbrownn said:

I would agree but with one caveat:  "reasonably" covers a lot of ground.  The "good guys" at hand stitching can make a stitch no machine can match but they are few and far between and unless they have some sort of reputation and high end clientele they can't make any money at it.  I'm looking for the middle ground; a machine stitch that is better than just pushing the pedal but a lot faster than sewing by hand.

A Union Lockstitch machine sews 800 stitches per minute (15/second), flat out, with thick thread, into as much as 3/4 inch of leather. It gets the job done like few others can. A Campbell-Randall Lockstitch may produce a slightly better looking bottom stitch, but is slower, sewing only 300 or 400 spm.

Truth be told, none of my customers turn the work over to study the bottom stitch appearance.

[oltoot]

Go ULS!

[sbrownn]

19 hours ago, Wizcrafts said:

A Union Lockstitch machine sews 800 stitches per minute (15/second), flat out, with thick thread, into as much as 3/4 inch of leather. It gets the job done like few others can. A Campbell-Randall Lockstitch may produce a slightly better looking bottom stitch, but is slower, sewing only 300 or 400 spm.

Truth be told, none of my customers turn the work over to study the bottom stitch appearance.

I understand.  Anyone looking for a different way to produce a quality of stitch that gets closer to hand stitching with less hand work certainly doesn't care as much about the number of stitches per minute and probably is more concerned with the backside appearance than 95% of our customers.  Most of my stitching, except for long straight runs, is done without using the motor at all.  My machine is over 100 years old and the stitch length control linkage has worn over the years to the point I don't trust it to be as accurate as pricked holes.  Before I make each individual stitch I make sure the awl is perfectly lined up with my pricked pattern.  It is time consuming to be sure but I find that I enjoy running the Campbell-Randall monster by hand and compared to hand stitching, well there really is no comparison on a time basis.  As I was pointing out, I have now progressed from just marking the hole locations with a pricking iron to actually punching them before I sew.  It adds another level of complexity to the process but I can see a difference that I feel makes it worthwhile for me to do on some items.  Do my customers notice?  Absolutely because I make sure I point it out to them.