Settings are not an after thought., What you need to know.
- Thread starter strmrdr
- Start date
- Status
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Prong 1 is oversized compared to the rest and looks like it might not be seated over the top of the stone properly.
Prong 2 is sticking up over the table and not properly seated over the top of the stone.
This is one that will catch on thing
Prong 2 is sticking up over the table and not properly seated over the top of the stone.
This is one that will catch on thing
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Thes prongs as well as some others should have been trimmed.
Also instead of bending one so far out of shape it should have been possible to make less visible adjustments to all the prongs.
Overall the setting just doesnt fit the stones and looks forced.
Id expect a lot better for $2600+
Also instead of bending one so far out of shape it should have been possible to make less visible adjustments to all the prongs.
Overall the setting just doesnt fit the stones and looks forced.
Id expect a lot better for $2600+
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Post by:
PlatinumSmith
Hello Strmrdr,
There is a lot being said here. There is not a lot I can add strmrdr, but I will try.
Any decent setter will know how safe your diamond is and he knows you won''t. Most small shops don''t have an experienced setter; many send their setting jobs out. That setter has too many jobs and not enough time, so where your ring is flawed you should know the setter knew it would be. He may even have had his closed while he did it - not always a bad thing
The last photo you posted, whilst ugly took some skill. It is hard to get the prongs (I have always called them claws) to catch the diamonds edge, especially with claws that size, so he was scared about loosing a stone and brought the claw right over the stone. It is a credit to him the diamonds are lined up so well as the process of moving such weight moves the stones. Also he could have very easily chipped a corner moving so much metal and it looks a clean, secure job. I''d blame the people who made the ring for that one. Small points (terminology: or grains – the end of a claw) on princess cuts are a stupid idea. I did 15 like that for photography with CZ''s. Maybe they are still on the www.dejoria.com website? Well I broke so many CZ''s I felt sure the setting was meant for rounds.
Having said that, reasonably sized prongs are best for princess cuts, if there is enough metal. It is an entirely different kind of setting (for me as I do it) because I drill into the prong a point matching the princess-cut point and carefully close it. Otherwise, I usually force the prong over the top and shape it when every part is touching (the slow and sure way that rounds can be done by), but here I make the hole for the corner and move the prong over. The point of a princess cut is too easy to break/chip to do it any other way. Done right, it is stronger then a split claw, as they move left and right, but a single prong will move only outward. Actually a split claw can be done the same way, and only split over the top.
Enough about that.
What you call ‘hammer setting’, We call: rubbed over. You don''t use a hammer attachment on smaller stones. I have a new kind of hammer attachment that I use on every setting, which I can as the hammer attachment hardens the metal. In small stones I still push/rub the metal by hand as it the fastest way and using a hammer attachment can create messy hammer marks, which take as long again to clean up. Also you can never use a hammer attachment on princess cuts as you have a big chance of chipping a corner, so you MUST let the stone in with care (In rubbed over setting et al). I could set ten rounds that way, by the time I set one princess cut because you have to make your square whole exactly the same size using engravers and a saw frame, etc and princess cuts are rarely a perfectly shaped square. If you get the hole right the setting is easy, just push the edges over. Letting in takes the time, but letting in a round stone just asks for the correct size drill bit.
While this is the surest way of setting they do come out, however the customer need never know that the rubbed over component didn’t involve the setter rubbing over enough metal to hold it, because the ultra-sonic will have spited them out. No setter can see if he has pushed/rubbed enough metal over and the ultra-sonic is the ultimate test. Once it passes this test the only thing that will loosen the stones is a resize. If you have to resize a ring with rubbed over settings, the stones will need to be taken back to the setter to re-rub over, probably at your cost. If you changed the size a lot, you will need a new ring. It is easy enough to set like that, so your jeweller shouldn''t ask a high price for a new band minus the weight of your existing band, wedding bands should not be expensive after the weight of the material is factored in.
I like what you’re saying about polishing. There are polishing companies I know that charge £2 per item and that is what you get. (Look at Marks work and see his polishing for the ideal, as I am sure he spends a lot of time on his products). Your jeweller should polish your bought item for free. I don’t know of any who don’t. I know some that charge £5 (both prices are for the trade) and that was considered expensive, in the UK (a great deal for plat – if he cares about the result, but they never prepare the piece so emerying the ring etc is the job of somebody else!). I am back in Australia and, ok pounds again £10 is not unusual, but I am, happy to see that because I often spent 1/2 an hour polishing a ring and spent many moments blaming the mounter etc for not prepping the ring right. Polishing in gold or silver is another story, it takes seconds by the mop and not long by hand (by the drill), but in plat you have to prepare it right using emery paper from course down to the finest grade. I use fibreglass sticks, which I fashion to the right shapes and before I start polishing and until it is glassy. The mops you mention do nothing much unless you have the right compounds. Because of that, plat designs have sharper edges. I made a ring and posted it in rocky talk. It was silver. It was very hard to get fine edges on the silver model. I polished it by hand using attachments for my drill. In plat the result would be much sharper as once prepping is done the polishing aspect can''t smooth the edges, as with gold and silver.
Finally, about settings. Go with conventional designs, or heavily consult a good jeweller. I hope when you buy an e- ring your thinking of your grandchildren. I have seen very many of my pieces come back for resizing with scratches all over, as if they wear it while gardening, so know yourself and your lifestyle. Some people can handle fragile jewellery others can''t. You will wear your e-ring every day, so take that into account.
The ring I posted on rocky talk has a poor setting design. I knew that only after I made it; so don''t blame us poor jewellers too much because we don’t always know what to expect. It would ruin the look, but if it is not strong enough when it has been cast in plat, (and if my customer goes with it), I will add bars to the bottom of the setting - one would do keep it secure.
I am not sure money equates to good jewellery and the mounting as you suggest, though it is as an indication, (sorry our terminology is different; I mount the setting onto the ring and I set the stone - my terminology). The problems you’re having are criminal. I have worked with some poor mounters who leave saw marks on round bezels which drives me crazy, but pin-holes and not complete joins is not acceptable. In plat you must make your joins much closer then in gold; gold is so forgiving, but even in mass-production that is really bad. You are definitely dealing with a novice, if that happens and let him know!
About how many claws...
I always steered clients away from 4 claws but I don''t anymore. Bought 4 claw settings are often too week, but hand-made settings can be as strong as you like. You need never worry about a good plat 4 claw, say tiffany setting.
The point of the stone can be set as well. This takes extra time for the setter. It can increase the setting time 4 fold, though. One of the photos here is considered dangerous, but if the point had a seat, and I suspect it does, it won’t move a fraction. The design I am talking about is what is considered tension set in the UK, even though it has a base (can''t see from here, which one - but ask me if your interested, as it is very well set). If you can at least touch the point the rest of the stone wont want to move. Most setters shy away from this, as it is extra work, getting the top to match the bottom in the metal. It is actually very hard to do because you don''t know how far the stone will lower when you push the claws/edge(s) over.
Hope this helps. Hope I wasn''t too technical. I know this tediously long.
Still going…
I noticed I missed saying about channel setting. Get bigger stones then the usual and you have real WOW factor; princess cuts are the best, but rounds in a plat setting rhodium plated and pre-polished look amazing too. They should never come out.
I myself err towards larger grains on my claws. I have re-tipped too many rings in my lifetime and go for strength all the way.
The ring you showed as the poorest example was a poor casting with poor materials – the setter had no chance, as was your point. I would have borked at that.
I don’t do real tension settings. I seem to be forever putting a base on them. I have tried to fix illusion settings with poor results and though they look good, where 50pt can look like 1ct they are not real jewellery to me, given the hand-me-down rule.
I won’t match your ‘good jeweller’ criteria. A guy just asked to see what I could do, and I offered to bring in my laptop. I save a lot of money for the customer by not having stock. I am not a member of the AJA as I don’t yet have enough contacts in Australia and the BJA in the UK are pure evil. The executive there is also the head of a casting company who demanded that a centre punch be used on 100’s of dies to prevent competition. I shared my UK workspace with also with a dia-sinker whose work is pure art – he is 70 and after him there is nobody, so I cringe at the loss of those dies. I have never given a reference of my artisanship in my life as all my work has been from small ads and word of mouth. So please, spare a thought for us small time craftsmen J
Cheers,
PS
Platinum - there is nothing better
PlatinumSmith
Hello Strmrdr,
There is a lot being said here. There is not a lot I can add strmrdr, but I will try.
Any decent setter will know how safe your diamond is and he knows you won''t. Most small shops don''t have an experienced setter; many send their setting jobs out. That setter has too many jobs and not enough time, so where your ring is flawed you should know the setter knew it would be. He may even have had his closed while he did it - not always a bad thing
The last photo you posted, whilst ugly took some skill. It is hard to get the prongs (I have always called them claws) to catch the diamonds edge, especially with claws that size, so he was scared about loosing a stone and brought the claw right over the stone. It is a credit to him the diamonds are lined up so well as the process of moving such weight moves the stones. Also he could have very easily chipped a corner moving so much metal and it looks a clean, secure job. I''d blame the people who made the ring for that one. Small points (terminology: or grains – the end of a claw) on princess cuts are a stupid idea. I did 15 like that for photography with CZ''s. Maybe they are still on the www.dejoria.com website? Well I broke so many CZ''s I felt sure the setting was meant for rounds.
Having said that, reasonably sized prongs are best for princess cuts, if there is enough metal. It is an entirely different kind of setting (for me as I do it) because I drill into the prong a point matching the princess-cut point and carefully close it. Otherwise, I usually force the prong over the top and shape it when every part is touching (the slow and sure way that rounds can be done by), but here I make the hole for the corner and move the prong over. The point of a princess cut is too easy to break/chip to do it any other way. Done right, it is stronger then a split claw, as they move left and right, but a single prong will move only outward. Actually a split claw can be done the same way, and only split over the top.
Enough about that.
What you call ‘hammer setting’, We call: rubbed over. You don''t use a hammer attachment on smaller stones. I have a new kind of hammer attachment that I use on every setting, which I can as the hammer attachment hardens the metal. In small stones I still push/rub the metal by hand as it the fastest way and using a hammer attachment can create messy hammer marks, which take as long again to clean up. Also you can never use a hammer attachment on princess cuts as you have a big chance of chipping a corner, so you MUST let the stone in with care (In rubbed over setting et al). I could set ten rounds that way, by the time I set one princess cut because you have to make your square whole exactly the same size using engravers and a saw frame, etc and princess cuts are rarely a perfectly shaped square. If you get the hole right the setting is easy, just push the edges over. Letting in takes the time, but letting in a round stone just asks for the correct size drill bit.
While this is the surest way of setting they do come out, however the customer need never know that the rubbed over component didn’t involve the setter rubbing over enough metal to hold it, because the ultra-sonic will have spited them out. No setter can see if he has pushed/rubbed enough metal over and the ultra-sonic is the ultimate test. Once it passes this test the only thing that will loosen the stones is a resize. If you have to resize a ring with rubbed over settings, the stones will need to be taken back to the setter to re-rub over, probably at your cost. If you changed the size a lot, you will need a new ring. It is easy enough to set like that, so your jeweller shouldn''t ask a high price for a new band minus the weight of your existing band, wedding bands should not be expensive after the weight of the material is factored in.
I like what you’re saying about polishing. There are polishing companies I know that charge £2 per item and that is what you get. (Look at Marks work and see his polishing for the ideal, as I am sure he spends a lot of time on his products). Your jeweller should polish your bought item for free. I don’t know of any who don’t. I know some that charge £5 (both prices are for the trade) and that was considered expensive, in the UK (a great deal for plat – if he cares about the result, but they never prepare the piece so emerying the ring etc is the job of somebody else!). I am back in Australia and, ok pounds again £10 is not unusual, but I am, happy to see that because I often spent 1/2 an hour polishing a ring and spent many moments blaming the mounter etc for not prepping the ring right. Polishing in gold or silver is another story, it takes seconds by the mop and not long by hand (by the drill), but in plat you have to prepare it right using emery paper from course down to the finest grade. I use fibreglass sticks, which I fashion to the right shapes and before I start polishing and until it is glassy. The mops you mention do nothing much unless you have the right compounds. Because of that, plat designs have sharper edges. I made a ring and posted it in rocky talk. It was silver. It was very hard to get fine edges on the silver model. I polished it by hand using attachments for my drill. In plat the result would be much sharper as once prepping is done the polishing aspect can''t smooth the edges, as with gold and silver.
Finally, about settings. Go with conventional designs, or heavily consult a good jeweller. I hope when you buy an e- ring your thinking of your grandchildren. I have seen very many of my pieces come back for resizing with scratches all over, as if they wear it while gardening, so know yourself and your lifestyle. Some people can handle fragile jewellery others can''t. You will wear your e-ring every day, so take that into account.
The ring I posted on rocky talk has a poor setting design. I knew that only after I made it; so don''t blame us poor jewellers too much because we don’t always know what to expect. It would ruin the look, but if it is not strong enough when it has been cast in plat, (and if my customer goes with it), I will add bars to the bottom of the setting - one would do keep it secure.
I am not sure money equates to good jewellery and the mounting as you suggest, though it is as an indication, (sorry our terminology is different; I mount the setting onto the ring and I set the stone - my terminology). The problems you’re having are criminal. I have worked with some poor mounters who leave saw marks on round bezels which drives me crazy, but pin-holes and not complete joins is not acceptable. In plat you must make your joins much closer then in gold; gold is so forgiving, but even in mass-production that is really bad. You are definitely dealing with a novice, if that happens and let him know!
About how many claws...
I always steered clients away from 4 claws but I don''t anymore. Bought 4 claw settings are often too week, but hand-made settings can be as strong as you like. You need never worry about a good plat 4 claw, say tiffany setting.
The point of the stone can be set as well. This takes extra time for the setter. It can increase the setting time 4 fold, though. One of the photos here is considered dangerous, but if the point had a seat, and I suspect it does, it won’t move a fraction. The design I am talking about is what is considered tension set in the UK, even though it has a base (can''t see from here, which one - but ask me if your interested, as it is very well set). If you can at least touch the point the rest of the stone wont want to move. Most setters shy away from this, as it is extra work, getting the top to match the bottom in the metal. It is actually very hard to do because you don''t know how far the stone will lower when you push the claws/edge(s) over.
Hope this helps. Hope I wasn''t too technical. I know this tediously long.
Still going…
I noticed I missed saying about channel setting. Get bigger stones then the usual and you have real WOW factor; princess cuts are the best, but rounds in a plat setting rhodium plated and pre-polished look amazing too. They should never come out.
I myself err towards larger grains on my claws. I have re-tipped too many rings in my lifetime and go for strength all the way.
The ring you showed as the poorest example was a poor casting with poor materials – the setter had no chance, as was your point. I would have borked at that.
I don’t do real tension settings. I seem to be forever putting a base on them. I have tried to fix illusion settings with poor results and though they look good, where 50pt can look like 1ct they are not real jewellery to me, given the hand-me-down rule.
I won’t match your ‘good jeweller’ criteria. A guy just asked to see what I could do, and I offered to bring in my laptop. I save a lot of money for the customer by not having stock. I am not a member of the AJA as I don’t yet have enough contacts in Australia and the BJA in the UK are pure evil. The executive there is also the head of a casting company who demanded that a centre punch be used on 100’s of dies to prevent competition. I shared my UK workspace with also with a dia-sinker whose work is pure art – he is 70 and after him there is nobody, so I cringe at the loss of those dies. I have never given a reference of my artisanship in my life as all my work has been from small ads and word of mouth. So please, spare a thought for us small time craftsmen J
Cheers,
PS
Platinum - there is nothing better
- Status
300x240.png)