Setting my cuprian tourmaline

[Allison D.]

I''m looking for possible feedback on setting a cuprian tourmaliine, and TL asked if I had photos that better depicted the shape, cut, color of the stone.

Below is a collage of the stone, which came from Gene''s recent parcel. He said the shape is cut in a triplet style shape that lends itself to setting well in a 6-prong, but I hadn''t limited myself to that.

I''ll drag the photos over of settings that I''ve considered so far, but I''d be willing to have suggestions if any of you have seen styles you think would fit this stone well.

 

[Allison D.]

Here are the two setting possibilities I linked in the other thread.

I love the vintage crown-style setting on its own, but I''m not sure it fits this stone.

I feel the more modern one showcases the color much more, but it''s beyond what I really wanted to spend.

If anyone has setting styles they''d like to suggest, I''m all ears.

 

[cellentani]

I was just going to suggest you start a thread for your lovely stone! I made some comments in the other thread....

ETA: I had another look at those settings, and while the second one shows more of the stone, I'm not sure.....does it seem to sit kinda high to you?

 

[Fly Girl]

Hi Allison - I''m pretty sure I recognize that cut. Here is my 9-sided Umbalite garnet cut by Gene. My jeweler mulled it over for weeks before coming up with this custom 14k white gold setting. It is sleek, simple and modern, which he knew would fit my style well.

Lovely stone that you have, and I hope the cut grows on you. I

mine.

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 8/2/2009 11:08:55 PM
Author: cellentani
I was just going to suggest you start a thread for your lovely stone! I made some comments in the other thread....

ETA: I had another look at those settings, and while the second one shows more of the stone, I''m not sure.....does it seem to sit kinda high to you?

I saw your other comments, so I''ll reply here.

I think it''s just a visual that the crown style setting looked big; it wasn''t really bit so much as the stone wouldn''t sit upright in the setting because there was nothing holding it straight (since no prongs to rest on.)

The cuprian measures in the 8mm range. The umbalite garnet is bigger - just over 9mm. However, I had the setting FIXED (YAY!) on the garnet (pic below), and I''m in LOVE with it now. Why it wasn''t set this way to begin with escapes me, but it''s fixed, so it''s all good!

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 8/2/2009 11:08:55 PM
Author: cellentani

ETA: I had another look at those settings, and while the second one shows more of the stone, I''m not sure.....does it seem to sit kinda high to you?

The ring itself is a high setting style, which is one of the drawbacks. It''s intentional to the setting; it has the small ring of melee in the gallery to raise the stone up, but it does sit well in there. That does make it a bit higher than I''d like it to sit, but truthfully the stone looked good in the setting in person. However, it was about $250 over the budget I was trying to stick to, so I didn''t do it.

 

[Allison D.]

I also considered this setting...........

 

[marcy]

What a lovely color and gemstone. The stone is so unique I would go with a solitaire or maybe a thin band with diamonds so the stone really shines on it''s own.

 

[Allison D.]

.....until I came to my senses and realized that this setting was meant for my OEC. Swoon! I was fortunate to have three ladies with me (including 2 PSers) to get expert counsel from.

This stone is 2.18 and quite warm (L/M vicinity), but we all agreed this setting helped to mask the warmth quite a bit. The photos are still able to detect the warmth, but in person, this looks AMAZING. This setting should arrive on Tuesday - can''t wait!

 

[blinkydoll]

Your OEC will be amazing in that setting! I saw it on person-- and it is perfect for it!
Can u post the closer pic I took?
I''m on the phone posting this -lol

 

[litebrite]

Wow, I love that setting. It''s so elegant and there''s a perfect amount of airspace. Where did you find that beaut?

 

[Allison D.]

I also tried this setting for the cuprian, but found it was better suited to my cushion malaya garnet (which I''ve been hunting high and low for a suitable setting for a while now).

So, this still leaves me looking for a workable setting for the cuprian.

 

[T L]

Wow, you have some gorgeous settings!

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 8/2/2009 11:31:45 PM
Author: blinkydoll
Your OEC will be amazing in that setting! I saw it on person-- and it is perfect for it!
Can u post the closer pic I took?

This one?

 

[cellentani]

STOP IT!!!!!

Each one of those settings is amazing - I''m so green with envy I''m gonna have to get some fresh air!! When I return, I''ll try to be more helpful...

 

[Allison D.]

Date: 8/2/2009 11:17:15 PM
Author: Fly Girl
Hi Allison - I''m pretty sure I recognize that cut. Here is my 9-sided Umbalite garnet cut by Gene. My jeweler mulled it over for weeks before coming up with this custom 14k white gold setting. It is sleek, simple and modern, which he knew would fit my style well.

Lovely stone that you have, and I hope the cut grows on you. I

mine.

Hi, Fly:

Yes, you do recognize the cut, and no need for it to grow on me; I already love it. I bought the PGStar 80 from Gene a few months ago and fell in love immediately with the style of cut. I had actually wanted something different on cuprian; I was hoping for more of a square cut with straight edges as I had hoped to flank it with traps. However, my top priority for this stone was the color so I deferred to whichever stone Gene thought would produce the best results.

While I love your setting, I tend to lean a bit more toward the vintage side of things but I''m not sure this stone will lend itself well to a vintage setting. Not sure yet, which is why I''m seeking counsel from you ladies here.

I''m completely happy with how the garnet came out, but part of the fun in colored stones for me is being able to have a variety of looks, so I''m trying not to halo everything.

Hence, the challenge.

 

[Allison D.]

Thanks, TL.

That setting for the cushion was a fortunate find because it really wasn''t terribly expensive; it was probably comparable in price to the upgraded LOGR setting price, but it seems like there''s a lot more detail to it and the stones are really decent quality. I was quite surprised.

The OEC setting is through a gentlemen that Blinkydoll met at the antique show in Miami a few years ago; he lives outside NYC, so we were able to stop and see him during our roadtrip to the antique show in the city.

 

[Fly Girl]

Date: 8/2/2009 11:49:13 PM
Author: Allison D.

Date: 8/2/2009 11:17:15 PM
Author: Fly Girl
Hi Allison - I''m pretty sure I recognize that cut. Here is my 9-sided Umbalite garnet cut by Gene. My jeweler mulled it over for weeks before coming up with this custom 14k white gold setting. It is sleek, simple and modern, which he knew would fit my style well.

Lovely stone that you have, and I hope the cut grows on you. I

mine.

Hi, Fly:

Yes, you do recognize the cut, and no need for it to grow on me; I already love it. I bought the PGStar 80 from Gene a few months ago and fell in love immediately with the style of cut. I had actually wanted something different on cuprian; I was hoping for more of a square cut with straight edges as I had hoped to flank it with traps. However, my top priority for this stone was the color so I deferred to whichever stone Gene thought would produce the best results.

While I love your setting, I tend to lean a bit more toward the vintage side of things but I''m not sure this stone will lend itself well to a vintage setting. Not sure yet, which is why I''m seeking counsel from you ladies here.

I''m completely happy with how the garnet came out, but part of the fun in colored stones for me is being able to have a variety of looks, so I''m trying not to halo everything.

Hence, the challenge.

I figured you wanted vintage, but it seems to me that most of those lovely settings (and they are very beautiful) are ignoring the cut rather than enhancing it. When I first brought my stone to my jeweler I figured we would end up with some sort of triangular shape. That might be a way to go, if there is such a thing as triangular vintage.

 

[Allison D.]

So, the trick for this cuprian is to find a setting that showcases the color of the stone and maybe even enhances the shape.

I''m thinking it won''t be well suited to bezel (due to the shape), but I''d still like to stay toward the more classic side. I already wear a 3-stone e-ring (rounds), so I''d rather not go that route. Maybe I should consider thin baguettes, or perhaps just an engraved shank with kites pointing up to the stone. Dunno.

 

[T L]

I also think yellow gold will bring out more blue in the stone. This color is very similar to my minty beryl that I recently set in yellow gold. It looks great in there. Yellow gold is really great for minty green stones IMHO. I also have a minty green grossular that looks great in yellow gold. My stone is more green than this one, but the yellow gold really brings out the blue.

 

[chrono]

TL,
You are making Alj’s day by suggesting yellow gold as I think she has a fondness for yellow metals if I recall correctly. I have also seen your cuprians really pop in a yellow metal setting.

 

[princessplease]

I LOVE the 2nd setting!!!! It''s so pretty!

 

[Kismet]

I rather like how the crown setting looks but I think it masks the shape rather than accentuates it, so I guess it depends on what you want. I agree with TL about the yellow gold or perhaps rose gold.

 

[cellentani]

Date: 8/2/2009 11:20:05 PM
Author: Allison D.

I saw your other comments, so I''ll reply here.

I think it''s just a visual that the crown style setting looked big; it wasn''t really bit so much as the stone wouldn''t sit upright in the setting because there was nothing holding it straight (since no prongs to rest on.)

The cuprian measures in the 8mm range. The umbalite garnet is bigger - just over 9mm. However, I had the setting FIXED (YAY!) on the garnet (pic below), and I''m in LOVE with it now. Why it wasn''t set this way to begin with escapes me, but it''s fixed, so it''s all good!

Allison, that is one gorgeous ring, and it''s just stunning paired with your eternity band (is it bezel set with milgrain? It almost looks bead set.)! Slight thread jack, but how was it set before? Glad you got it fixed to your liking. I''m still waiting to have my umbalite setting fixed.

I think I''m similar to you in liking antique settings, so I''m still drawn more to the first setting, but don''t know how 8 prongs would work with a 9-sided stone. My jeweler had a hard time setting my star80 in 4 prongs.

What do you think about a thin eternity band with a low, 6-prong head - would it look too much like an ER? You could do it in yellow gold. I always want to throw all my stones in a halo, so it''s really hard for me to get away from that. If I could have chosen my dream setting for my umbalite, it would have been a thin cushion halo.

And I don''t see you as an LOGR-girl (all your settings are far classier and much better quality), but here''s a style I like that''s very simple (and no halo!). The "donut" at the base of the prongs has diamonds on the side, so the profile has a little sparkle too. Obviously, it would need to be made in a round, but you get the idea. What a fun project - I''m going to enjoy following this one.

 

[packrat]

Could someone do a thin bezel? I thought that would highlight the 8 sidedness..maybe that would be expensive tho. The only other idea I have is, McTeigue and McClelland have a setting that looks like petals around the stone. They''re arm and a leg expensive, but I wonder if someone could do something similar, so that there was a petal on each of the 8 sides, and didn''t come down all the way to the bottom of the stone like the M&M setting does, and like your crown setting does. I don''t know if that makes sense or not. Both ideas are probably uber spendy so heck..I''m no help!

Pretty stone tho!

 

[innerkitten]

You have great taste in settings! I love the color of your new stone and that OEC ring is amazing.

 

[Upgradable]

My keyboard will not let me say anthing until I say YOUR OEC IS MAKING ME

!

Now I can comment on the gorgeous cuprian! Love the color, and the shape. I think most of the vintage types mountings do distract from the shape. This is the one I love! It has sleeker lines and allows the stone to almost look like a cleftless heart. It also lets the stone play centerstage. I think this one is beautiful!!!

 

[Fly Girl]

Date: 8/3/2009 11:08:36 AM
Author: packrat
Could someone do a thin bezel? I thought that would highlight the 8 sidedness..maybe that would be expensive tho. The only other idea I have is, McTeigue and McClelland have a setting that looks like petals around the stone. They''re arm and a leg expensive, but I wonder if someone could do something similar, so that there was a petal on each of the 8 sides, and didn''t come down all the way to the bottom of the stone like the M&M setting does, and like your crown setting does. I don''t know if that makes sense or not. Both ideas are probably uber spendy so heck..I''m no help!

Pretty stone tho!

packrat - The cuprian is a 9-sided stone, and the 9 sides are of two different lengths. Six longer sides and three shorter sides. I think putting it into a four or eight sided mount would be visually jarring, and would do Gene''s cut a great disservice.

I''m not sure how a jeweler would bezel such a stone. The craftmanship of the nine sides would need to be on par with the precision of the cut, or else it would look awful.

 

[LD]

Alison - I think you don''t need our help! That second setting is perfect! The Cuprian is just a tad on the dark side so by putting it in an open high setting it''ll really be spectacular and show the colour best. If it were me, to emphasize the cut of the stone, I''d made the prongs as invisible as possible (so possibly sharpen them off?). Of course that means over time they''ll snag on everything but they''ll look sooooooo pretty! You have some wonderful ideas so I can''t wait to see the finished result!

 

[jstarfireb]

I like the second setting you posted (especially the profile). At first I was going to say the first setting; however, when I saw the stone had 9 sides and the setting had 8, I changed my mind. I don''t like the mismatch. If the stone were octagonal, the first setting would be perfect.