Box Calf / Veau Box through the years #boxcalfnerds

So it's not Chamonix either? I live pretty far away from the store, so I will not be able to bring it until late autum. Is it only barnia and vache natural that has this kind of stamp?
Well it's definitely not box and may be best to confirm by showing an Hermes craftsperson/expert. ( not any sales assistant) to confirm precisely what leather it is. Completely different products should be used.
 
I have read through this thread and still have a question.

The only box calf I have are vintage items that have a gloss but not super shiny, the leather is somewhat puffy and velvety to the touch.
IMG_1497650192.312546.jpg
IMG_1497650203.667935.jpg


I have seen vintage box online that seems hard/firm and is very shiny. Is this due to the leather in that era of production, due to aftercare (products applied to it), or a combination?
(Images from google: fashionphile, yoogi's, the 5th collection):
IMG_1497650737.554431.jpg
IMG_1497650747.075327.jpg
(The one on the left)
IMG_1497650761.532556.jpg

Then there are ones that appear almost matte. Again, is this just the leather of that era or is it the aftercare/products applied? What is the difference between this leather and chamonix? I have hear chamonix described as matte box calf. I would describe this box calf as matte in appearance.
(From Instagram sellers):
IMG_1497650977.205087.jpg
IMG_1497651001.279518.jpg
IMG_1497651102.783504.jpg
 
I have read through this thread and still have a question.

The only box calf I have are vintage items that have a gloss but not super shiny, the leather is somewhat puffy and velvety to the touch.
View attachment 3733552
View attachment 3733554


I have seen vintage box online that seems hard/firm and is very shiny. Is this due to the leather in that era of production, due to aftercare (products applied to it), or a combination?
(Images from google: fashionphile, yoogi's, the 5th collection):
View attachment 3733564
View attachment 3733565
(The one on the left)
View attachment 3733566

Then there are ones that appear almost matte. Again, is this just the leather of that era or is it the aftercare/products applied? What is the difference between this leather and chamonix? I have hear chamonix described as matte box calf. I would describe this box calf as matte in appearance.
(From Instagram sellers):
View attachment 3733568
View attachment 3733569
View attachment 3733572
I don't think I understand your question. If you have regular box calf, then Meltonian or Cadillac or Saphir cream will work great. If you have chamonix which is the more matte box calf leather, then you can use these too, but carefully and you don't want to buff hard because you will compromise the matte feature of the leather.
 
I don't think I understand your question. If you have regular box calf, then Meltonian or Cadillac or Saphir cream will work great. If you have chamonix which is the more matte box calf leather, then you can use these too, but carefully and you don't want to buff hard because you will compromise the matte feature of the leather.

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to apply any products, I'm just trying to understand "box calf through the years". I understand that the leather really is different - more or less shiny, thicker/thinner, or softer/firmer. I only know firsthand the quality of box leather that I posted from my own bags, but I often see two other types that I borrowed photos to show as examples. A very shiny, very firm appearing box calf, and a very matte appearing box calf. I suppose my question is whether this variation is mostly due to the difference in leather over the years or due to products applied to them. I personally really like the matte version of box calf. I would like to find a vintage Kelly in matte box calf, so that's one reason for my question. I asked about chamonix, because I wasn't sure if I should really be looking for chamonix, if chamonix is box calf that appears matte.
I hope this makes a little more sense.
 
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to apply any products, I'm just trying to understand "box calf through the years". I understand that the leather really is different - more or less shiny, thicker/thinner, or softer/firmer. I only know firsthand the quality of box leather that I posted from my own bags, but I often see two other types that I borrowed photos to show as examples. A very shiny, very firm appearing box calf, and a very matte appearing box calf. I suppose my question is whether this variation is mostly due to the difference in leather over the years or due to products applied to them. I personally really like the matte version of box calf. I would like to find a vintage Kelly in matte box calf, so that's one reason for my question. I asked about chamonix, because I wasn't sure if I should really be looking for chamonix, if chamonix is box calf that appears matte.
I hope this makes a little more sense.
I think you want to look for chamonix. It has a lovely glow as opposed to a shine. There aren't too many on the resale market so it will be a challenge. Plus you need to find one that some person has not worked on to make it shiny. Chamonix is created in the tanning process as best I understand it. I guess the dying portion may have something to do with it as well.
 
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to apply any products, I'm just trying to understand "box calf through the years". I understand that the leather really is different - more or less shiny, thicker/thinner, or softer/firmer. I only know firsthand the quality of box leather that I posted from my own bags, but I often see two other types that I borrowed photos to show as examples. A very shiny, very firm appearing box calf, and a very matte appearing box calf. I suppose my question is whether this variation is mostly due to the difference in leather over the years or due to products applied to them. I personally really like the matte version of box calf. I would like to find a vintage Kelly in matte box calf, so that's one reason for my question. I asked about chamonix, because I wasn't sure if I should really be looking for chamonix, if chamonix is box calf that appears matte.
I hope this makes a little more sense.
gracekelly is right, box rarely appears totally matte, but it doesn't have to be shiny. If you look at my Kellys in the first few posts, the 2000 is a little shimmery/satiny but not shiny; the 1980 is full-on glossy. The 2000 is also softer but I think that's because it is retourné. The Bolide I also posted is quite matte, enough so to have been mistaken for both Chamonix and Barenia.
The very, very shiny patina on some box calf is apparently often a result of scratches blending together, plus polishing...this is often called "mirror-like". None of my box bags have it, so I cannot speak to the development of the patina....I'd love to know, though!
 
I think you want to look for chamonix. It has a lovely glow as opposed to a shine. There aren't too many on the resale market so it will be a challenge. Plus you need to find one that some person has not worked on to make it shiny. Chamonix is created in the tanning process as best I understand it. I guess the dying portion may have something to do with it as well.

Thank you grace, that is so helpful. I looked up some threads here on Chamonix and I am certainly going to try to find one. Of course, almost everything is mislabeled as box, so I will just have to go by photos! Studying photos will be essential, as you pointed out, I don't want a chamonix that has been worked on to become shiny. I would also be happy with a matte box that is actually box. In either case, some digging is in order. Thanks for your help.
 
I do think some decades were more glossy and pillowy than others for boxcalf, particularly the 1970's, late 80's, early 90's. If you want something more matte in box I'd look for it to have been made after 1997.

Thank you for the reference dates! From the ones that have appealed to me most so far as being more of the matte style, they seem to be early 2000s, so that makes sense.
I do also love mine, which are glossy and velvety but not shiny, but I have the matte look in mind this time around.
 
gracekelly is right, box rarely appears totally matte, but it doesn't have to be shiny. If you look at my Kellys in the first few posts, the 2000 is a little shimmery/satiny but not shiny; the 1980 is full-on glossy. The 2000 is also softer but I think that's because it is retourné. The Bolide I also posted is quite matte, enough so to have been mistaken for both Chamonix and Barenia.
The very, very shiny patina on some box calf is apparently often a result of scratches blending together, plus polishing...this is often called "mirror-like". None of my box bags have it, so I cannot speak to the development of the patina....I'd love to know, though!

Thank you QF! I reread your first posts, and I got much more out of them now than I did prior to finishing the thread. I love your 2002 bolide appearance.
My box bags are older than your 2000 Kelly, but they have a similar appearance, plush, velvety, a sheen but not shiny. I love them too, but I am after the matte look for the next one.
It's helpful to know that the very shiny, mirror-like appearance can be developed through patina and polishing. I just sent the Lydie to the spa so maybe that will come back more shiny. I'm glad that I am prepared for that now! I think it will look fine either way.
So now I know to look for either chamonix or for matte box, it does seem from the bags I have liked so far that the early 2000s have a more matte appearance for box.
Thanks for the help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NOIRetMoi