shape
carat
color
clarity

Major Help needed on setting this ROSE cut PEAR!!!

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Niel|1411840735|3757845 said:
Circe said:
My suggestion - my strong suggestion - is to make sure the stone is cupped, foiled, or somehow otherwise shielded in the back to provide it from becoming a big, beautiful magnifying glass for the back of her finger. I adore rose cuts, but they originated in a period when a jeweler would no more set one unfoiled than a lady would have ventured forth without her farthingale. These days jewelers frequently set them with an open back, and while it can be cool in a pendant or earrings, it's not quite as "sparkly" a look as most ladies expect from their engagement rings.

One of the downsides to foiling or cupping, unfortunately, is that it can be hard to keep the underside of the stone clean. I'd suggest filling in some of the negative space Niel mentioned with a highly polished platinum cup that ends below an open gallery, just to give you the freedom to steam-clean it once in a while.

Congratulations on your upcoming engagement!

P.S. - Link to another rose-cut setting thread, a few pics of my own rose-cut solitaire. I love the look the cup gives ... even with a little tarnish to the foil, the depth is mesmerizing.
May I ask, have you ever seen one that's not fully foiled? What I mean is, something along the lines of a designed filigree, similar to screen mesh or something, but prettier?

I would imagine that would be cool,in my head. And would for cleaning though the open spaces. It must be stupid as I've never seen anyone do it, but in my head it always seems like the solution. Put it a few cm below the stone or cup it so it curves away from the stone so the design isn't clearly visible in the bottom of the stone.

I am totally confused by this cupping, foiling, fancy raised up filigree talk...

Does anyone have any pictures of the under gallery of the suggestions above?
 

LindyLoooo

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
42
David just posted a rose cut on his facebook, maybe it's a sign :love: In my humble opinion, a plate under the stone is much easier for durability and cleaning. Foiling is beautiful but it may need to be redone.
 

Acinom

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
10,535
:love:

_22785.jpg

_22786.jpg
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Acinom|1411928616|3758212 said:
I think u can see the finger straight through the diamond.

It doesn't look like it has any foil backing.
 

LindyLoooo

Rough_Rock
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
42
It has a plate underneath, but with enough space to clean. Durable and easy to clean, this is why I prefer this to foiling. I spoke with an estate jeweler who said it's better to not get the foil wet, I don't know if that's true, but that would be a pain. These are not David's pictures, but I found them floating around:

rose_plate_2.jpg

rose_plate_0.jpg
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
I sent some tweaks and requirements to David and just received a response from him! let me know what you think!

From David Klass:
Here is your design with your modifications.
I arched the struts slightly and brought down the head.



The height off the finger is now 5.4mm's. is this still too high for a rose cut?

The halo measures 17mm's x 12mm's. I am going to bring in the halo if you want a more petite look. will this be too big for my size 4.5 finger?
I think 1.3mm diamonds around the center will be beautiful, right now 1.5mm's fit the design. If you have a halo ring, what size melees are you using?

I can do the modern French Cut pave (fishtail). The cuts do not show on these cads as they are all carved by hand.
Here are the pave detail examples i sent to him. These were taken from JbG's websie


Your ring will be cast in three pieces from a cad, and then put together, set and polished by hand. sounds like a plan

In my opinion you do not need a plate as you have a rose cut stone with depth. It will be easier to keep clean without one.
If you feel your stone lacks brilliance a plate with a hole could help, but it sounds like you have a nice stone by itself. i guess i'll ask david for some pictures once he receives my ring. i'm leaning towards letting him make the judgement call on this one.

There will be no gap between the center stone and the halo once the stone is set, and the girdle will be protected. yay

The shank widths are larger on the cad as with casting and polish the metal shrinks down. I will make sure your shank is 1.8mm's wide finished. 1.8 should be a good width for my finger size. What do you think?

Let me know if you like the new look?

_22799.jpg

shank_pave_details.jpg

halo_modern_fishtail_pave.jpg
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,225
dawnxcui|1411568838|3756280 said:
(Feel free to comment on the diamond below and give your honest opinions on the stone, since i don't know too too much about rose cuts i'm hoping that i made a good choice *fingers crossed*)

...

I am totally confused by this cupping, foiling, fancy raised up filigree talk...
There is an elephant in this room that people are too polite to point out.

I must ask ... You DO know rose cuts window, don't you?
Windowing is also known as leakage.
That means light goes right through them, as it would a window, instead of reflecting back like it does with 'normal' deeper diamond cuts.
That means you can see your finger through the diamond.
It also means the total light return will be a fraction of that of a diamond that does not leak light out the back.
This leakage is why they put something reflective behind them.
The foil/platinum/white gold backing helps the leaked light reflect back through the diamond and to your eye.

As long as you know this and still like the look of the rose cut, fine.
If you didn't know this please look into it ASAP.
Take your rose cut where you can compare it to a well-cut normal pear with little leakage.
If you decide the rose-cut look is not for you I hope you are within a return period.

There is nothing wrong with the rose cut.
I am not criticizing them.
It is just a cut style that thumbs its nose at the principles of cut-for-light-return we embrace here at Pricescope.

Since rose cuts are flat on one side and very shallow they face up huge for their carat weight/price.
Many people love that about them.
It is a look, a style which I personally find to be beautiful, but you should fully understand what this cut does to light and it sounds like you are admitting that you don't.
Even set over a reflective backing a rose cut will not sparkle the same way a well-cut pear will sparkle.

You asked for honest opinions and admitted to not knwoing much about the rose cut or even why people put cups or foil behind them them.
I hope my post is helpful and is taken in a constructive positive way.
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
I used that ring size website that you did to visualize a 17x12 pear on a 4.5 and its utterly huge. However, I don't know if it bothers me lol. I have a feeling it'll be a statement piece and really sense your sparkle will be more of a subtle glisten, the size will really make it.

As for the mm of the stones, I'd keep them as small as he's comfortable, if he says 1.3 I wouldnt go to 1.5

Did you ask about more prongs?
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Niel|1412029848|3758828 said:
I used that ring size website that you did to visualize a 17x12 pear on a 4.5 and its utterly huge. However, I don't know if it bothers me lol. I have a feeling it'll be a statement piece and really sense your sparkle will be more of a subtle glisten, the size will really make it.

As for the mm of the stones, I'd keep them as small as he's comfortable, if he says 1.3 I wouldnt go to 1.5

Did you ask about more prongs?

this is what i wrote in my email to him. I guess he didn't exactly address the prongs.
" I do like the pointy prongs, since i'm not bezel setting this rose cut, i just want to make sure the girdle is well protected by the halo and the prongs are super secure so i don't lose the diamond."

since he said the girdle will be protected 4 prongs should be enough right?

good call on the ring sizer website...totally forgot about it.

left side is size of the ring with halo and right side is the stone by itself.... it is starting to look a little ridiculously big to me...

ring_sizer.png
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
Better safe than sorry. I'd ask for at least 6. 12 o clock,2 o clock,5 o clock, 7 o clock, 10 o clock or around that. Maybe 3 and 6 o clock.

I'll admit I'll be pretty envious of this. Huge gisteny rose cuts in tiny halos is so somehow understated AND show stopping at the same time.

Oh and I was going to say the height of the ring looks a lot better.
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
kenny|1412029617|3758826 said:
dawnxcui|1411568838|3756280 said:
(Feel free to comment on the diamond below and give your honest opinions on the stone, since i don't know too too much about rose cuts i'm hoping that i made a good choice *fingers crossed*)

...

I am totally confused by this cupping, foiling, fancy raised up filigree talk...
There is an elephant in this room that people are too polite to point out.

I must ask ... You DO know rose cuts window, don't you?
Windowing is also known as leakage.
That means light goes right through them, as it would a window, instead of reflecting back like it does with 'normal' deeper diamond cuts.
That means you can see your finger through the diamond.
It also means the total light return will be a fraction of that of a diamond that does not leak light out the back.
This leakage is why they put something reflective behind them.
The foil/platinum/white gold backing helps the leaked light reflect back through the diamond and to your eye.

As long as you know this and still like the look of the rose cut, fine.
If you didn't know this please look into it ASAP.
Take your rose cut where you can compare it to a well-cut normal pear with little leakage.
If you decide the rose-cut look is not for you I hope you are within a return period.

There is nothing wrong with the rose cut.
I am not criticizing them.
It is just a cut style that thumbs its nose at the principles of cut-for-light-return we embrace here at Pricescope.

Since rose cuts are flat on one side and very shallow they face up huge for their carat weight/price.
Many people love that about them.
It is a look, a style which I personally find to be beautiful, but you should fully understand what this cut does to light and it sounds like you are admitting that you don't.
Even set over a reflective backing a rose cut will not sparkle the same way a well-cut pear will sparkle.

You asked for honest opinions and admitted to not knwoing much about the rose cut or even why people put cups or foil behind them them.
I hope my post is helpful and is taken in a constructive positive way.

thanks for your concern. unfortunately JbG is in california and there's no way for me to see the stone in person so my bf and i are taking a big risk in having it set before receiving it.

if the rose cut looks anything like derbygal's old ring or the DK rose cut posted by Acinom OR the new pictures Grace uploaded (see below) i'll be happy with it.

I wouldnt think that the rose cut will look like a window...more so Swarovski crystals like how someone else described it.

I'm hoping that the pear doughnut plus the struts below the diamond will act as a "partial" plate so you'll only see parts of my finger plus some metal that could reflect some light.






Here's a video of it under indoor lighting. Not as sparkly and i think the K color is showing more here than the original photos i had posted. but still doesnt seem like you can see directly through it which i'm okay with :angel: :)
http://jewelsbygrace.smugmug.com/Loose-Diamonds/201-and-larger/253ct-Vintage-Pear-Shaped-Rose/i-szCZmjc/A

044-m.jpg

046-m.jpg

062-m.jpg

067-m.jpg
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
I was just going to mention the struts.... I almost wonder if you might wnat them to be directly below the halo, rather than tapering in toward the center. Like the DK solitiare people were just posting, I might have the struts go strait down and this keeping metal from showing at all under the stone.
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Niel|1412031906|3758845 said:
I was just going to mention the struts.... I almost wonder if you might wnat them to be directly below the halo, rather than tapering in toward the center. Like the DK solitiare people were just posting, I might have the struts go strait down and this keeping mental from showing at all under the stone.
wouldn't i want some metal underneath so it blocks some of my finger? i thought people were worried about the reflective-ness of the rose cut.

unless the plate is raised up, knowing me...it wouldnt feel comfortable having a big plate sitting on my skin.
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
dawnxcui|1412032458|3758850 said:
Niel|1412031906|3758845 said:
I was just going to mention the struts.... I almost wonder if you might wnat them to be directly below the halo, rather than tapering in toward the center. Like the DK solitiare people were just posting, I might have the struts go strait down and this keeping mental from showing at all under the stone.
wouldn't i want some metal underneath so it blocks some of my finger? i thought people were worried about the reflective-ness of the rose cut.

unless the plate is raised up, knowing me...it wouldnt feel comfortable having a big plate sitting on my skin.

See for me I'd want all or nothing I would think.
 

FrekeChild

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 14, 2007
Messages
19,456
dawnxcui|1412031646|3758843 said:
thanks for your concern. unfortunately JbG is in california and there's no way for me to see the stone in person so my bf and i are taking a big risk in having it set before receiving it.

if the rose cut looks anything like derbygal's old ring or the DK rose cut posted by Acinom OR the new pictures Grace uploaded (see below) i'll be happy with it.

I wouldnt think that the rose cut will look like a window...more so Swarovski crystals like how someone else described it.

I'm hoping that the pear doughnut plus the struts below the diamond will act as a "partial" plate so you'll only see parts of my finger plus some metal that could reflect some light.






Here's a video of it under indoor lighting. Not as sparkly and i think the K color is showing more here than the original photos i had posted. but still doesnt seem like you can see directly through it which i'm okay with :angel: :)
http://jewelsbygrace.smugmug.com/Loose-Diamonds/201-and-larger/253ct-Vintage-Pear-Shaped-Rose/i-szCZmjc/A
So, you haven't seen a rose cut in real life?

I'm going to play it straight. You need to see one in real life. That is a huge gamble to not see one before you get it. I happen to love rose cuts, but a lot of people don't. They DO NOT behave the same way that traditionally faceted stones do. Light slides across the outside facets rather than being reflected off of a pavilion.

This is a HUGE risk to take when you have no idea if you will even like the way the stone performs. When you look at the stone straight on, it will be completely see through. It's only in motion that rose cuts are really flashy, and even then, they just aren't the same as a traditional cut pavilion diamond. I think that you need to see a rose cut stone in real life before you can commit to all of this. Even if it's a fakey. If you don't like the pear, that's probably, what? $16k down the toilet? You can't return a custom setting and Grace's return period is 7 days.

I'm attaching a link of a necklace from an etsy seller of a rose cut pear sapphire. She has many other rose cut stones if you want to poke around her etsy page.
https://www.etsy.com/listing/156478...-diamond-pendant-with?ref=shop_home_active_14

Some images that are less great of some rose cuts (these were mine):
http://loupetroop.com/listings/loose-stones-diamond/reduced-1-dot-0ctw-rose-cut-diamonds

And even some of Grace's pieces:
http://www.jewelsbygrace.com/55ctw-rose-cut-diamond-double-drop-bezel-pendant.html#.VCnrI_ldWSo
http://www.jewelsbygrace.com/2-50ct...diamond-halo-ring-gia-h-si1.html#.VCnrV_ldWSo

Here is a rose cut eternity band from JbEG - see how the front diamond is completely see through? That's what they look like.

_22804.jpg
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,225
I'd hate for you to wear it, love it, but one day sit next to a woman in a restaurant wearing a pear that is a conventional and well-cut.

Hers will have fire, sparkle, contrast and scintillation that far exceed what a rose cut can offer.

If you know this, have seen the difference, but STILL want the look of the rose cut, fine.

Please don't rush into this specialty cut, especially to set it with no return option, and without ever seeing it next to a 'normal' pear.
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
kenny|1412034314|3758870 said:
I'd hate for you to wear it, love it, but one day sit next to a woman in a restaurant wearing a pear that is a conventional and well-cut pear.

Hers will have fire, sparkle, contrast and scintillation that will blow your rose cut out of the room.

If you know this, have seen it, and STILL want the look of the rose cut, fine.

Please don't rush into this specialty cut, especially to set it with no return option without ever seeing it next to a 'normal' pear.

Thats your opinion, it woulnt necessarily be hers. It will have more fire, sparkle, contrast and scintillation, thats a fact, but her opinion of that stone compared to her own will not necessarily be what you assume. Yes you'll probably respond with a "of course 'people vary'" - but i bring it up because I dont want the OP to feel like shes suppose to like a faceted stone better, or that shes suppose to somehow be disappointment in comparison. I just dont want her to go in with a negative expectation.


I completely agree, try and see some in person or at least go to google and look at lots and lots.

But as someone who has had a pear and seen lots of pears... they are ok.... but frankly the uneven sparkle and color make me think a rose cut is a great idea. Get the shape without the many pitfalls of a normal pear.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,225
Yes it is possible that her opinion will be that the astonishing fire, sparkle, contrast, and scintillation of well-cut diamond is not desirable. :roll:
People certainly do vary.

But she's paying a fortune for material that is unique in its ability to put on a light show.
She's buying a Ferrari with no gas tank.
Sure it will be beautiful sitting in the driveway, even though it can't do what Ferraris do so well.

What she is considering is so radically different she really should compare it to a well cut example of a conventional pear in person.
IMO assuming she'll just love it and moving on to the finer points of the setting are doing this poster a disservice.

If this poster started out by telling us she has ideal-cut diamonds and other rose cuts I would not have said anything.
 

Asscherhalo_lover

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
5,703
To the OP, why don't you have the diamond shipped to you in a stone holder so you can see it in person? This way you can return it if it doesn't meet your expectations. Or, you could then send it on to David for setting. You could also always go to Tiffany to see some rose cuts in person. They have them in their cobblestone collection.

I personally have owned rose cuts and love them when they are also set with brilliant cuts. I think the contrast is amazing. If you like the look, it'll make a unique and polarizing ER. Some will love it, others will not. You will have to be happy with it. I think the halo is the right way to go with this, with that said, I would get the thinnest halo possible since the stone measures so large. I would also go with David's suggestions regarding the plate, but I would also want to make sure that I couldn't see any metal through the diamond as in with the struts and even the band going under it. I have attached a photo of what I'm talking about.

endless_love.jpeg
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
Asscherhalo_lover|1412036861|3758888 said:
To the OP, why don't you have the diamond shipped to you in a stone holder so you can see it in person? This way you can return it if it doesn't meet your expectations. Or, you could then send it on to David for setting. You could also always go to Tiffany to see some rose cuts in person. They have them in their cobblestone collection.

I personally have owned rose cuts and love them when they are also set with brilliant cuts. I think the contrast is amazing. If you like the look, it'll make a unique and polarizing ER. Some will love it, others will not. You will have to be happy with it. I think the halo is the right way to go with this, with that said, I would get the thinnest halo possible since the stone measures so large. I would also go with David's suggestions regarding the plate, but I would also want to make sure that I couldn't see any metal through the diamond as in with the struts and even the band going under it. I have attached a photo of what I'm talking about.

I was going to suggest the same setting except for one thing: the wedding band

If there's no basket, when you put a w band with it, the band will go right underneath the center stone. But that's only if you plan to wear it with a wedding band.
 

Asscherhalo_lover

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
5,703
I think it's going to be a little tricky no matter what. The wedding band could also be done as an enhancer type deal rather than a solid band. These are all good things to think about now before the ring is made. Like this. Obviously not really a stand alone ring but it could work nicely for the set if worn together.

notchedweddingband.jpg
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
Asscherhalo_lover|1412037775|3758895 said:
I think it's going to be a little tricky no matter what. The wedding band could also be done as an enhancer type deal rather than a solid band. These are all good things to think about now before the ring is made. Like this. Obviously not really a stand alone ring but it could work nicely for the set if worn together.
it is tricky. That ring youd have to attach to the e ring, as youd never be able to wear it alone, and you couldnt let it move around at all.

I like the way this is done, keeps metal from being under the stone yet blocks the w band from going under it. It wont sit flush, though. I prefer that, but i know it can bother some quite a bit.


if you decide to keep the metal struts under the stone like the current cad version, it wont sit exactly flush, but pretty close

rose_4_032.jpg
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Niel|1412034692|3758875 said:
kenny|1412034314|3758870 said:
I'd hate for you to wear it, love it, but one day sit next to a woman in a restaurant wearing a pear that is a conventional and well-cut pear.

Hers will have fire, sparkle, contrast and scintillation that will blow your rose cut out of the room.

If you know this, have seen it, and STILL want the look of the rose cut, fine.

Please don't rush into this specialty cut, especially to set it with no return option without ever seeing it next to a 'normal' pear.

Thats your opinion, it woulnt necessarily be hers. It will have more fire, sparkle, contrast and scintillation, thats a fact, but her opinion of that stone compared to her own will not necessarily be what you assume. Yes you'll probably respond with a "of course 'people vary'" - but i bring it up because I dont want the OP to feel like shes suppose to like a faceted stone better, or that shes suppose to somehow be disappointment in comparison. I just dont want her to go in with a negative expectation.


I completely agree, try and see some in person or at least go to google and look at lots and lots.

But as someone who has had a pear and seen lots of pears... they are ok.... but frankly the uneven sparkle and color make me think a rose cut is a great idea. Get the shape without the many pitfalls of a normal pear.

i LOVE pear shaped diamonds, not a big fan of the "normal" pear, mostly because i dont like the slightest look of a bow tie.

i've seen round hearts and arrow diamonds, and wasn't very wow'd by the "fire and sparkles" by it. so i dont think i'd be comparing my ring to the girl next to be and be disappointed.

the only thing that i've kinda liked and seen was the AVC by GOG, but even then, the so called "chunky" look wasn't as "chunky" as i had envisioned or wanted. and for it to be as chunky as i want it to be it'll probably had to be a 5ct AVC the size of mom2boys's which will be way out of my budget for the first ring.

thats why when i saw this ring, i thought...this is perfect for me. it doesnt have the bow tie and it's chunky enough. the size is to die for and it wouldnt be super blingy that blinds people.

i've seen small rose cuts but nothing of this size, the "see thru" idea is the same but i dont think it'll look the same as one this size.

there's really no place to go to see one in person...even the tiffany cobblestone is of a much smaller size.
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Asscherhalo_lover|1412037775|3758895 said:
I think it's going to be a little tricky no matter what. The wedding band could also be done as an enhancer type deal rather than a solid band. These are all good things to think about now before the ring is made. Like this. Obviously not really a stand alone ring but it could work nicely for the set if worn together.

that w ring made me LOL. that's so clever but at the same time, i just know that the opening is going to end up the wrong way most of the time and it wont sit the way i want it to sit.
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Niel|1412038507|3758903 said:
Asscherhalo_lover|1412037775|3758895 said:
I think it's going to be a little tricky no matter what. The wedding band could also be done as an enhancer type deal rather than a solid band. These are all good things to think about now before the ring is made. Like this. Obviously not really a stand alone ring but it could work nicely for the set if worn together.
it is tricky. That ring youd have to attach to the e ring, as youd never be able to wear it alone, and you couldnt let it move around at all.

I like the way this is done, keeps metal from being under the stone yet blocks the w band from going under it. It wont sit flush, though. I prefer that, but i know it can bother some quite a bit.


if you decide to keep the metal struts under the stone like the current cad version, it wont sit exactly flush, but pretty close

ya...having a giant plate sitting on my finger will annoy the crap out of me.
i dont mind if the w band doesnt sit flush with my e ring. i think it's nice to have a little gap between them.
i could always make the pear doughnut bigger so it's almost the same size as the halo but smaller so the struts are still a little slanted rather than straight up and down.
that way the future w band will sit against the doughnut but be below the halo and not the center diamond.

what do you think?
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Asscherhalo_lover|1412036861|3758888 said:
I would also go with David's suggestions regarding the plate, but I would also want to make sure that I couldn't see any metal through the diamond as in with the struts and even the band going under it. I have attached a photo of what I'm talking about.

haha this achieves the purpose of not seeing any metal below but really not a fan of that setting. the angles are just too harsh for my likings. clever tho! :lol:
 

Niel

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
20,044
dawnxcui said:
Niel|1412038507|3758903 said:
Asscherhalo_lover|1412037775|3758895 said:
I think it's going to be a little tricky no matter what. The wedding band could also be done as an enhancer type deal rather than a solid band. These are all good things to think about now before the ring is made. Like this. Obviously not really a stand alone ring but it could work nicely for the set if worn together.
it is tricky. That ring youd have to attach to the e ring, as youd never be able to wear it alone, and you couldnt let it move around at all.

I like the way this is done, keeps metal from being under the stone yet blocks the w band from going under it. It wont sit flush, though. I prefer that, but i know it can bother some quite a bit.


if you decide to keep the metal struts under the stone like the current cad version, it wont sit exactly flush, but pretty close

ya...having a giant plate sitting on my finger will annoy the crap out of me.
i dont mind if the w band doesnt sit flush with my e ring. i think it's nice to have a little gap between them.
i could always make the pear doughnut bigger so it's almost the same size as the halo but smaller so the struts are still a little slanted rather than straight up and down.
that way the future w band will sit against the doughnut but be below the halo and not the center diamond.

what do you think?
The side view pick I attached doesn't have any plate on your skin,so that's nothing to worry about, it's essentially a huge donut, if you want to look at it that say. It essentially has the donut the size of the stone, that way there isn't any metal directly under it. It would still be smaller than the halo that way. And it would keep any wedding band from slipping under the stone
 

dawnxcui

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
341
Niel|1412040781|3758926 said:
dawnxcui said:
Niel|1412038507|3758903 said:
Asscherhalo_lover|1412037775|3758895 said:
I think it's going to be a little tricky no matter what. The wedding band could also be done as an enhancer type deal rather than a solid band. These are all good things to think about now before the ring is made. Like this. Obviously not really a stand alone ring but it could work nicely for the set if worn together.
it is tricky. That ring youd have to attach to the e ring, as youd never be able to wear it alone, and you couldnt let it move around at all.

I like the way this is done, keeps metal from being under the stone yet blocks the w band from going under it. It wont sit flush, though. I prefer that, but i know it can bother some quite a bit.


if you decide to keep the metal struts under the stone like the current cad version, it wont sit exactly flush, but pretty close

ya...having a giant plate sitting on my finger will annoy the crap out of me.
i dont mind if the w band doesnt sit flush with my e ring. i think it's nice to have a little gap between them.
i could always make the pear doughnut bigger so it's almost the same size as the halo but smaller so the struts are still a little slanted rather than straight up and down.
that way the future w band will sit against the doughnut but be below the halo and not the center diamond.

what do you think?
The side view pick I attached doesn't have any plate on your skin,so that's nothing to worry about, it's essentially a huge donut, if you want to look at it that say. It essentially has the donut the size of the stone, that way there isn't any metal directly under it. It would still be smaller than the halo that way. And it would keep any wedding band from slipping under the stone

we're making progress!! :dance: :dance: :dance: :mrgreen:
is this the same ring? if so i'm fine with the doughnut being just slightly smaller than the halo so it sits there to prevent the w band from slipping under the diamond.


totally digging the slanted band look if that's how mine will end up with. :lol:

rose_4_0.jpg

_22807.jpg

10421111_701653033250837_8188409806983317397_n.jpg

69a34564b2ef479c0b4ce079d8980515.jpg
 

drk14

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
1,061
kenny|1412035722|3758881 said:
Yes it is possible that her opinion will be that the astonishing fire, sparkle, contrast, and scintillation of well-cut diamond is not desirable. :roll:
People certainly do vary.

But she's paying a fortune for material that is unique in its ability to put on a light show.
She's buying a Ferrari with no gas tank.

There are clearly people out there who love rose cut diamonds, and obviously, such individuals appreciate qualities other than those that are prized in modern brilliant cuts (i.e., scintillation, brightness, contrast, et al.).

She's not buying a Ferrari, she's buying a Model T Ford...
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top