Vote, Please: Best setting for my Cushion?

[Leila]

Hi Reena,
Thanks for the compliments. My wedding band lost nearly all of its milgraining after about a year. I never take it off. I've had my new e-ring for about 6 months and it's still looks the same as the day I got it. But I don't wear it to work because of the type of work I do. Both rings sit flush against each other but the wedding band is not as wide or tall as the e-ring so it doesn't rub against the milgraining. That's another thing to keep in mind. If you want to pair it with a wedding band, the friction might wear on your e-ring, especially if it's encrusted with diamonds.
My vote is for #1. It's not as busy as #2 and it looks like the diamonds are individually prong set so each one stands out. That's the style I initially wanted to get. It'll make your 2 carat stone a real monster. I mean that in a good (though very envious) way.

Forgot to add, my e-ring is an eternity but it has a tiny sizing bar. I was told by a jeweler I can resize my ring up or down 1 size if needed, but I can't imagine that that 2mm of metal space will allow it! They might have to remove the diamonds first and the put them back in. It sounded risky to me.

 

[diamondsbylauren]

I LOVE modern #1 too.
Here's a few points to remember:

1) This ring would look entirely different if the cushion had a different shape.
It looks to me to be a "purpose built" ring- in other words, build around the diamond- the best ( most expensive) way to do it.

2) When it comes to details, every jeweler uses differering parts and techniques.
Therefore, even if you were to supply an actual ring as a sample, the result may have detail differences which might be very important in your eyes.

Here's an example of a framed ring I love- it's quite...delicate in look

We did not manufacture this ring.
We gave it to our best people to re-create
The result was quite nice.
But there is a lot of difference between the two rings

A lot of the difference stemmed from the fact that the order called for bezel set.
Our version was definately a more durable ring.
Anyway, the point is: The version we came up with was different from the model- with a custom made ring, you can't always simply "knock off" a particular design.

 

[reena]

thanks david,

for some reason i cant see the pics you posted (but i would love to!) is there a website on which i can view them?

the shape of my cushion is pretty similar to that in modern #1, so the look should be similar. but im not really trying to duplicate that exact design--i just wanted to give my jeweler some sense of the look i am going for.

any advice as to how to know good micropave workmanship when i see it?

 

[diamondsbylauren]

Let's try again:


The more delicate ring

 

[Todd07]

#1 is my pic

 

[reena]

hmm, now doesn't this puppy look almost like a close up of modern #1? except you can sort of see the prongs. im liking it though. . . .

 

[reena]

and this is what it looks like from the side. at this point the side view is my biggest concern, because while i love most of the pave bezel settings from the top, i generally hate them from the side. generally too bulky/chunky/high. i like that this one is open, so that some light will get to the stone--im worried about reducing the stone's brilliance too much by bezel setting it. BUT, i think i'd like to modify it JUST a bit to make it cathedral style. whaddya think--would that work?

 

[reena]

As such. (But, of course, all pave! and platinum! and a diamond!)

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 8/17/2004 10:34:16 PM reena wrote:

hmm, now doesn't this puppy look almost like a close up of modern #1? ----------------

If the distance is greta enough, everything looks the same! Like those debeers posters where all you see is a little flash of light and they expect you to know that it is a diamond not a flashlight (it could be an add for small flashlights too, I suppoes

).

I do not think this ring looks close to that #1 pic - the "bezel" does not follow the contour of the stone. teh head does not fit the diamond very well (so allot of stone sits on top of the frame and the prongs need to be large to bridge the gap...). The pave is not aligned and the beads holding the paved diamonds are rather large (they look just about as large as the stones). There is substantial space between the diamodns of the pave - something that may not show allot when the ring is new and perfectly polished, but it definitely does as soon as the platinum gets it's patina and the small diamonds seem "sprinkled" on top of a gray surface. Both "looks" are nice - but one needs to know what to expect.

The free metal bit on the back of the ring is what MMM mentioned - this allows substantially more room for sizing than an all-around pave band would. Still, this ring will not be as easily sized as a non-pave band - because the paved parts of the shank cannot be bent. Just one mroe thing to ask the jeweler, I'd say.


As far as I can see, the setting at Walter Arnstein could be quite substantial - those sapphires are rather large and, of course, the size of everything in a photo is relative

However, I like the way they set the pave - the little stones appear perfectly matched and aligned even under *tremendouns* magnification. Rings are not even supposed to look good at 10X and these do - just great!

All is just my 0.2, of couse...

I wish we could see David's photos

Some of the rings they make look very, very carefully crafted despite carying no brand.

Who makes setting #1 ? The picture does not show allot of detail, so I may be just assuming the best about it with no serious reason at all.

 

[valeria101]

I thought I'd give antique rings a chance. It is not just that millgrain that gives the "old" look - but the precission of detail as well. It is just hard to hate them!

Style "B" may be the closest to your idea, but "A" caught my attention with those paved prongs and "C" is definitely an unusual kind of bezel.

...Just to make sure all spices are thrown into this taugh choice

 

[reena]

ooooh, i actually like A best, despite the lack of bezel. i think it realllly showcases the stone, plus it has that antique look. sometimes i think maybe i should go with something simpler like that--especially now that the quotes on my custom bezel setting are all coming back reallllly high . . .

how would you describe the particular kind of pave on A--are those diamonds bead set? mini prong set? or just regular (as opposed to micro) pave?

 

[reena]

in fact the style of A sort of reminds me of these leon rings that i've been admiring for a while (it alllllways comes back to leon, sigh). i like the three sided pave look on the band and the way the stone appears to be sort of "cupped" (but not surrounded by, like in a bezel) a little basket of pave.

so ok: who likes these settings more than any of the original bezels?

 

[reena]

Here's the other. (drool.)

 

[Leila]

Valeria101,
Style B looks almost identical to my original e-ring. Where did you find that picture? Thanks.

 

[ringbling17]

OH my!!!
That last picture you posted is the one I had in mind when LM was making my ring.
The only reason why I didn't get the pave was because I thought that it would not be a match with the anniversary ring I chose, so I got a plain solitaire instead.
Now, I am tempted to get a new setting with pave or have LM add pave to the shank of my ring.........

 

[JC]

Just as everyone else has already said......#1

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 8/18/2004 10:22:15 AM Leila wrote:

Valeria101,
Style B looks almost identical to my original e-ring. Where did you find that picture? Thanks.----------------

Oh! forgot to label them... all come from Faycullen.com - the usual ref for antique rings around here.

As for the accent diamonds on th first ring... I'd still call them "pave" or "bead set" only the shank happens to have some borders protecting those small diamonds which seems practical, btw

 

[reena]

okay, i know i have to stop BUT whaddya think of this one by richard landi? do you think they could do it with a cushion?

 

[reena]

the band and bezel width may be thicker than i was originally thinking. but look--i like the side view.

 

[jewelgal]

Reena,
you have Exquisite taste! I love all of them!
I think you should wait a day and then come back to
all of them and see which one is the best!

Post pics of your beauty cushion!!

 

[linny14]

ok, your going to drive yourself batty!! i know the feeling. i don't think you can go wrong with any of the styles you like because they are all unbelievable. i love them all.