New E-ring CAD's - what do you think?

CAD's:

Attachments

New e-ring front

image 3.jpg (72.84 KiB) Viewed 1024 times

New e-ring side

image 4.jpg (69.58 KiB) Viewed 1024 times

Old e-ring pics:

Attachments

Original e-ring front.JPG (178.71 KiB) Viewed 1024 times

Original e-ring side.JPG (157.34 KiB) Viewed 1024 times

In the first picture you can see that the inside finger hole of the ring isn't round, is this what you want?

Hi Talamasca, I'm not familiar with your original story so I apologize if I am asking something that has been discussed to death already but have you asked the original jeweler to fix the ring (I guess remake it) to make it less thin with sturdier shoulders? It looks like he did a nice job but for that.

I like the Daniel M CAD though- very sleek and modern. Just a different feel than your original I think. Also I see what Mike is talking about re the roundness.

Hi Mike R - yes it is. I prefer both the inside and outside of the band to be flat as I find it more comfortable than other styles.

Hi Missy - I can't bring myself to go back to the original Jeweller and I wouldn't trust them to do a good job. When my ring was finally ready, after going back on 3 separate occassions, the response I got was something along the lines of I can't expect it to be perfect because it's been altered by hand. The shank and setting were off the shelf stock settings which the Jeweller said they could alter to my spec, but in the end the shoulders were uneven and because the stone was already set they said all they could do was file down the shoulders so they were even and this left the shoulders weak, thin and slightly misshapen - when I did finally pick it up I just wanted to get out of the shop and take my stone home! I did grow to like the ring, but accidentally caught it and bent the ring and loosened the stone hence the re-make.

Missy, I know what you mean about the different feel, but I can't put my finger on it.....

Written by talamasca » April 17th, 2012, 4:41 am:Hi Mike R - yes it is. I prefer both the inside and outside of the band to be flat as I find it more comfortable than other styles.

Hi Missy - I can't bring myself to go back to the original Jeweller and I wouldn't trust them to do a good job. When my ring was finally ready, after going back on 3 separate occassions, the response I got was something along the lines of I can't expect it to be perfect because it's been altered by hand. The shank and setting were off the shelf stock settings which the Jeweller said they could alter to my spec, but in the end the shoulders were uneven and because the stone was already set they said all they could do was file down the shoulders so they were even and this left the shoulders weak, thin and slightly misshapen - when I did finally pick it up I just wanted to get out of the shop and take my stone home! I did grow to like the ring, but accidentally caught it and bent the ring and loosened the stone hence the re-make.

Missy, I know what you mean about the different feel, but I can't put my finger on it.....

Hi, I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying, if you were to lay most new rings on a flat piece of paper and trace the inside of the ring with a pencil you would end up with a perfect circle. With this design you would end up with an egg shapped outline.

Written by Mike R » April 17th, 2012, 5:04 am:Hi, I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying, if you were to lay most new rings on a flat piece of paper and trace the inside of the ring with a pencil you would end up with a perfect circle. With this design you would end up with an egg shapped outline.

Oh yes I see what you mean now. Hmm, do you think there's a reason for it? I wonder if that's to give extra height since I want the shoulders really high. I've only seen rings with really high shoulders when the stone's been about 0.50 carat so with my stone being larger (9 x 7mm) they're probably not able to get the height without lifting the stone/setting up......???

ETA, but then I suppose that could still be done but rounded instead of flat. I'll ask about it - thank you.

Written by talamasca » April 17th, 2012, 5:20 am:

Written by Mike R » April 17th, 2012, 5:04 am:Hi, I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying, if you were to lay most new rings on a flat piece of paper and trace the inside of the ring with a pencil you would end up with a perfect circle. With this design you would end up with an egg shapped outline.

Oh yes I see what you mean now. Hmm, do you think there's a reason for it? I wonder if that's to give extra height since I want the shoulders really high. I've only seen rings with really high shoulders when the stone's been about 0.50 carat so with my stone being larger (9 x 7mm) they're probably not able to get the height without lifting the stone/setting up......???

ETA, but then I suppose that could still be done but rounded instead of flat. I'll ask about it - thank you.

No problem, the inside of the ring does not have to be that way (design wise) because of the shoulder hight, the shoulders could be twice as high and you could still have a perfectly round ring.

I don't know anything about cad, it might just be a flaw in the programe.

Written by Talamasca:Hi Mike R - yes it is. I prefer both the inside and outside of the band to be flat as I find it more comfortable than other styles.

If I've understood Mike's question - and what I think I see - I think he was referring to the fact that the ring isn't round, but more of a pear shape towards the top? That the inside circle of a ring (the hole where your finger goes) should be a perfectly round.

Hmmm, I think it's the prongs. I know CAD's are generally chunkier, but the bottom of the prongs look a bit thick may be.......

Written by Starzin » April 17th, 2012, 6:11 am:

Written by Talamasca:Hi Mike R - yes it is. I prefer both the inside and outside of the band to be flat as I find it more comfortable than other styles.

If I've understood Mike's question - and what I think I see - I think he was referring to the fact that the ring isn't round, but more of a pear shape towards the top? That the inside circle of a ring (the hole where your finger goes) should be a perfectly round.

Yes, you got it!
Sorry I can't comment on the design specifically because of PS rules, I can only ask questions that will lead you to see what I'm seeing.

I'm not sure either but want you to be - if that makes sense. I tried to show the top area by drawing a clip circle inside the ring and pointing some arrows at the area I'm not sure about. Hope it helps.

Thanks Mike - saw your next post come in while I was doing this....you did well

Written by talamasca » April 17th, 2012, 7:59 am:Hmmm, I think it's the prongs. I know CAD's are generally chunkier, but the bottom of the prongs look a bit thick may be.......

this comment was a bit out of no where! I think it's the prongs that are making me hesitate as the ring doesn't look as delicate as the original and whilst I def want it to be more substantial I'd still like it to flow and not be chunky, if you see what I mean!

Thanks for the picture Starzin.

Not to worry Talamasca, I've just realised that I missed 3 posts between you and Mike where you grasped what he was saying so my pic was probably not needed after all

Obviously time for me to go to bed....

Written by Mike R » April 17th, 2012, 5:47 am:I don't know anything about cad, it might just be a flaw in the programe.

It is not. I got my CADs for a ring I commissioned by the same maker this week, and the inside of mine is perfectly round.

Talamasca - it's difficult to judge prongs from a CAD because they are always chunkier when you see them like this and you don't see the folded over look. There are a couple of other issues that I don't know whether they're important to you or not but I've marked on the photo what I see. These may be nothing to worry about but it's better to point them out and then you can decide - or ask questions of DanielM. I totally understand why you're hesitating. If you've been disappointed before, you want to avoid that this time around.

Attachments

Ring for Talamasca.jpg (77.63 KiB) Viewed 872 times

So is the cad exact? Is a machine going to spit out an exact replica or something? Or is this more of a guide that can be tweaked? How does this work.

Written by LD » April 17th, 2012, 12:35 pm:Talamasca - it's difficult to judge prongs from a CAD because they are always chunkier when you see them like this and you don't see the folded over look. There are a couple of other issues that I don't know whether they're important to you or not but I've marked on the photo what I see. These may be nothing to worry about but it's better to point them out and then you can decide - or ask questions of DanielM. I totally understand why you're hesitating. If you've been disappointed before, you want to avoid that this time around.

I saw this too, I think it is more noticeable in the other cad image posted, especially on the left hand side. ( same area that LD marked)

Written by innerkitten » April 17th, 2012, 12:43 pm:So is the cad exact? Is a machine going to spit out an exact replica or something? Or is this more of a guide that can be tweaked? How does this work.

Yes, a machine will either print or cut an exact model of the computer design. Some things can be tweaked after casting but it is much easier to fix these problems in the cad. Tweaking lumpy bands and other things require a certain skill that not all jewelers have an eye for, if the cad is perfect then all the ring will need after casting is polishing.

I imagine after casting it would be a major pain in the booty.

Written by innerkitten » April 17th, 2012, 1:26 pm:I imagine after casting it would be a major pain in the booty.

it's not really that difficult, it just requires "handmade" skills rather than "CAD/cast" skills. Some jewelers will have both skill sets while others not so much.

The egg shape to the inside of the band would be difficult to repair after casting, an uneven band is an easy fix for a good jeweler.
It's best to have the cad image perfect to begin with, it's much easier and will save time, and there will be no surprises when viewing the finished piece.

I agree with Mike. If you have a "perfect" CAD then you're pretty assured of what you're going to get - albeit a skinnier version! I would be worried that the finishing off to the final product wouldn't be to a standard I would expect if I saw a CAD like this. However, as Mike said, CAD skill is completely different and it maybe that the vendor hasn't been using it for very long.

Written by LD » April 17th, 2012, 12:35 pm:Talamasca - it's difficult to judge prongs from a CAD because they are always chunkier when you see them like this and you don't see the folded over look. There are a couple of other issues that I don't know whether they're important to you or not but I've marked on the photo what I see. These may be nothing to worry about but it's better to point them out and then you can decide - or ask questions of DanielM. I totally understand why you're hesitating. If you've been disappointed before, you want to avoid that this time around.

LD: Some day I will get around to a bespoke ring just for me and when I do, I want you first in line to help me out! You have an unbelievable eye - I'll make sure to stay on your good side hehe

Written by minousbijoux » April 17th, 2012, 2:19 pm:

Written by LD » April 17th, 2012, 12:35 pm:Talamasca - it's difficult to judge prongs from a CAD because they are always chunkier when you see them like this and you don't see the folded over look. There are a couple of other issues that I don't know whether they're important to you or not but I've marked on the photo what I see. These may be nothing to worry about but it's better to point them out and then you can decide - or ask questions of DanielM. I totally understand why you're hesitating. If you've been disappointed before, you want to avoid that this time around.

LD: Some day I will get around to a bespoke ring just for me and when I do, I want you first in line to help me out! You have an unbelievable eye - I'll make sure to stay on your good side hehe

Minous, I'd be honoured to help and something tells me that we're going to be friends for a long time!

Oh and sorry Talamasca for not adding anything constructive. Now I'll try! What I liked about your first ring was the delicacy in the way the basket met the shank and the graceful flow of the shank. However, when I saw it from the side angle (the profile of the profile?), it became apparent just how thin the shank was. I wish there was a way of retaining the delicacy while reinforcing with more metal. For me, CADs are hard to understand because they seem to be bulkier than the finished product, but its hard to tell if you'll still have that graceful connection. Know what I mean?

Written by LD » April 17th, 2012, 2:21 pm:
Minous, I'd be honoured to help and something tells me that we're going to be friends for a long time!

[[blushing]]

Whilst I understand CADs are bulkier than the real thing, it seems to me as though the setting is eating up the poor little stone. I don't think it is just the prongs either. If you are adding height to the top, can it be narrowed down a little more where it meets the head? Not a lot, just a smidge. The other thing is the straightness of the basket versus the slight curvature of the 1st/original setting. Well, I know it's not exactly straight but the swoopiness looks "stiff" for the lack of a better word. The original has a basket that curves and hugs the stone in a very feminine manner.

Hi everyone, thanks so much for your help/advice which I've relayed to Dan. He's going to make some tweaks and re-send the CAD's in a few days

I didn't mean to desert you (I've had an interstate visitor all day/evening) but I see you're in good hands. I would second Chrono's comment about the curvy-ness of the prongs and also the height - particularly if, in making the "hole" round, more metal is added to smooth out the egg shape at the top under the basket. However let's wait for the new cads to arrive.

Written by Starzin » April 18th, 2012, 7:06 am:I didn't mean to desert you (I've had an interstate visitor all day/evening) but I see you're in good hands. I would second Chrono's comment about the curvy-ness of the prongs and also the height - particularly if, in making the "hole" round, more metal is added to smooth out the egg shape at the top under the basket. However let's wait for the new cads to arrive.

aww thanks. With regard to the height, I'm not sure I know what you and Chrono mean ([quote="Chrono|1334724176|3173966"]If you are adding height to the top, can it be narrowed down a little more where it meets the head? Not a lot, just a smidge. quote])

I definitely want curvy prongs as I love the original setting, but when it comes to the height of the shoulder, the higher the better for me