At what point does a glove repair make it a reproduction?

[bbrah]

I've been thinking about this lately. At what point does a repaired glove become a reproduction (i.e. how much of a glove can you replace and still call it original)? I've got a Goldsmith with a sewn-in web strap. The glove is in really rough condition. I could conceivably replace everything but the tag and button and it still wouldn't be perfect! I understand it's OK to replace lacing (which this model doesn't have) and I've seen threads about replacing the interior felt padding. I've even seen how sometimes people replace linings or straps. But what about edge binding (piping?), stitching, and pieces of the actual glove? Obviously if you just use the old glove as a pattern then it's a repro. The question is: where is the "bright line?" Can you replace every piece of unmarked leather, everything but the palm, etc?

Lastly, and on a slightly different note, is it better to patch an original piece of the exterior leather or replace it entirely?

-BRAH

[BretMan]

Good question.

I've had the same thought when I watch some of those shows on television where they restore classic cars, stripping them down to the frame and replacing everything with new parts.

A perfectly restored '65 Mustang, while still a beautiful car, certainly isn't an original '65 classic.

For an old glove, if you were to sell it, I guess you would have to disclose all of the work to the buyer, then let them make a decision as to the glove's value to them.

If it's just for your own collection, you would have to make the personal choice of how much restoration is acceptable to you.

Replacing laces, stitching or binding would seem to fall into the catagory of "repair" or "restoration" work and the glove might otherwise be considered as original as long as the shell of the glove was all original.

But it does raise the question of how we would classify such gloves. Perhaps we need separate definitions of "original", "repaired", "restored" or "reproduced". Whichever, it seems that full disclosure would be the key if attempting to sell the glove.

If I was going to replace "every piece of leather" on a glove, I'd just go ahead and have a duplicate made and use it to play catch!

[Thudhugger]

In my humble opinion I get nervous about creating alot of classifications on gloves. I'm sure if it becomes a major trend then it would begin to dictate glove prices to a point where we'll start encasing gloves in tamper proof plastic containers and charging thousands for them. (tongue firmly in cheek)

I classify my gloves by their utility. If I can catch a fastball in it without fear of a lace malfunction and a black eye, then I leave the glove alone. If the glove needs relacing to make it functional again --I'll relace it, no matter what the glove is. And if I need to replace the inner lining I'll send it off to have it professionally done. (I know my limits)

I guess my point is that standardizing classifications leads to inflated prices which for a poor schmoe on a budget like me means I can look at the pictures of the gloves, but no buying of the gloves.

Thud