Detail orientated PSers welcome - cads

[Niel]

I think the yellow will look fine, there isn't enough green in the stone for the metal to bring out heaps of green IMHO, so it should all work colourwise how you want it too!!!

Thanks arkieb1! I was hoping you might chime in. That's exactly what I was hoping- there wouldn't be too much green. There's barely, of any, green to it.

As I know you've got a great eye, is there any detail I'm overlooking that I shouldn't be?

I know the basket itself in the cushion inspiration ring seems to have no taper to it as it goes down to its base. The prongs seem to govapmost strait down. I know that's not what mine does, but I'm not sure I need to copy that part

 

[arkieb1]

Are you happy with the way the prongs look side on? The main prong around the cryso might need thinning out a tiny bit? And do you want two definite prongs in the centre next to each other or prongs and a basket more like the DBL ring with one YG defined centre prong but in the DBL example the white gold prongs next to it are set down behind the main prong around the centre stone cupping it and are what I call "barely there" prongs that aren't as noticeable as yours are.

Do you like bezels? Have you ever thought about going with YG centre prongs and then some type of bezel arrangement around the diamonds that would make all of the stones almost line up horizontally?

 

[Niel]

Are you happy with the way the prongs look side on? The main prong around the cryso might need thinning out a tiny bit? And do you want two definite prongs in the centre next to each other or prongs and a basket more like the DBL ring with one YG defined centre prong but in the DBL example the white gold prongs next to it are set down behind the main prong around the centre stone cupping it and are what I call "barely there" prongs that aren't as noticeable as yours are.

Do you like bezels? Have you ever thought about going with YG centre prongs and then some type of bezel arrangement around the diamonds that would make all of the stones almost line up horizontally?

The stones are too large to bezel and still look appropriate

 

[artdecolover71]

I love these stones together, as you know!

I think you know your gut so well- go with it!

My regret with my own three stone was -
(Hindsight is 20/20)
It was set too high overall
And the traps were on too much of an extreme angle.
You are doing a wax yes?

 

[momhappy]

I'm working on a project and ive up to this point been pretty confident in what I'm looking for, but I've reached a point in which I'd really like a second opinion.
I'm making a three stone colored stone ring with a cushion and half moons. I have the stones, bit I'm concerned about the specifics of the setting.

1. What do you think of the height of the stones
They could be just a tad taller but I like the DBL setting which looks pretty low.
2. Are you pro or anti cathedral
Pro
3. How do you you feel about angle of the side stones.
I think it looks good.
4. How do you feel about the width of the shank. How about the shank in general
I think the shank needs some tapering...or at least the cathedral area does. Just makes it flow better and look more
graceful.

Pics in a moment......

I love everything about the DBL setting. I like the curvy look to the basket area. The ruby basket seems really boxy and I'm not
sure because it's a straight sided stone or if edges on the basket are very straight (kind of like the difference between comfort
fit on a shank and just regular squared off). Could just be the difference between the rounder stone in the DBL setting and
the emerald cut in the other setting.

I agree - the DBL basket has a nice even curve to it, whereas the ruby and your CAD seem to be a bit more square & angled. The overall flow of the DBL ring is most appealing to me. Your CAD looks pretty good though - maybe a slight tweak here or there, but it's looking good

 

[Niel]

I'm working on a project and ive up to this point been pretty confident in what I'm looking for, but I've reached a point in which I'd really like a second opinion.
I'm making a three stone colored stone ring with a cushion and half moons. I have the stones, bit I'm concerned about the specifics of the setting.

1. What do you think of the height of the stones
They could be just a tad taller but I like the DBL setting which looks pretty low.
2. Are you pro or anti cathedral
Pro
3. How do you you feel about angle of the side stones.
I think it looks good.
4. How do you feel about the width of the shank. How about the shank in general
I think the shank needs some tapering...or at least the cathedral area does. Just makes it flow better and look more
graceful.

Pics in a moment......

I love everything about the DBL setting. I like the curvy look to the basket area. The ruby basket seems really boxy and I'm not
sure because it's a straight sided stone or if edges on the basket are very straight (kind of like the difference between comfort
fit on a shank and just regular squared off). Could just be the difference between the rounder stone in the DBL setting and
the emerald cut in the other setting.

I agree - the DBL basket has a nice even curve to it, whereas the ruby and your CAD seem to be a bit more square & angled. The overall flow of the DBL ring is most appealing to me. Your CAD looks pretty good though - maybe a slight tweak here or there, but it's looking good

Thank you for chiming in! I appreciate your input, truly!
Ivevtaken some of the suggestions and emailed them. Waiting on a revised cad

 

[arkieb1]

Are you happy with the way the prongs look side on? The main prong around the cryso might need thinning out a tiny bit? And do you want two definite prongs in the centre next to each other or prongs and a basket more like the DBL ring with one YG defined centre prong but in the DBL example the white gold prongs next to it are set down behind the main prong around the centre stone cupping it and are what I call "barely there" prongs that aren't as noticeable as yours are.

Do you like bezels? Have you ever thought about going with YG centre prongs and then some type of bezel arrangement around the diamonds that would make all of the stones almost line up horizontally?

The stones are too large to bezel and still look appropriate

Hmmmm, I wouldn't bezel the whole lot just the outer edge of the half moons and prong set the centre. I like the prongs as well, I would hassle them to make sure that the centre prong isn't overwhelming the side profile and is still fairly delicate looking IRL.

 

[Niel]

Are you happy with the way the prongs look side on? The main prong around the cryso might need thinning out a tiny bit? And do you want two definite prongs in the centre next to each other or prongs and a basket more like the DBL ring with one YG defined centre prong but in the DBL example the white gold prongs next to it are set down behind the main prong around the centre stone cupping it and are what I call "barely there" prongs that aren't as noticeable as yours are.

Do you like bezels? Have you ever thought about going with YG centre prongs and then some type of bezel arrangement around the diamonds that would make all of the stones almost line up horizontally?

The stones are too large to bezel and still look appropriate

Hmmmm, I wouldn't bezel the whole lot just the outer edge of the half moons and prong set the centre. I like the prongs as well, I would hassle them to make sure that the centre prong isn't overwhelming the side profile and is still fairly delicate looking IRL.

What I'd really like to do, though I dont know of its possible, is to ONLY have the two prongs at the end of the half moons and just have the basket hold that part of the moons. I think that's detailed work though I'm not sure it could be accomplished with cads

 

[Niel]

Updated cads
I dont think its reflected in the cads, but he said he could remove something in the half moon baskets to help with how the prongs lay


I told him I'd get my thoughts together before sending my next email about tweaks.

Opinions welcome. I think ive lost some of the "swoopiness" when adding the gaps in the cathedral, so I will see about getting that back

 

[Niel]

Any opinions?

 

[artdecolover71]

I like how the side stones aren't at too severe of an angle.

Is there anything you are seeing in particular that you are unsure about?

 

[Niel]

I like how the side stones aren't at too severe of an angle.

Is there anything you are seeing in particular that you are unsure about?

The prong placement I guess. That and the overall proportions, including shank width.

 

[junebug17]

I'm not an expert but I think it looks really nice Niel! I see what you mean by it not swooping as much so I would change that, I like the swoop too.

 

[Niel]

I'm not an expert but I think it looks really nice Niel! I see what you mean by it not swooping as much so I would change that, I like the swoop too.

Thanks Junebug!
Do you like it better with or without the gaps, assuming the swoop stays the same.

 

[junebug17]

I'm not an expert but I think it looks really nice Niel! I see what you mean by it not swooping as much so I would change that, I like the swoop too.

Thanks Junebug!
Do you like it better with or without the gaps, assuming the swoop stays the same.

You know, it's funny you're asking this, I almost typed in my response that I "think" I prefer it without the gaps lol! But then I looked at the cads again and I'm so on the fence about it I deleted my comments. It looks nice both ways, but I do think I lean a little towards no gap.

 

[Niel]

I'm not an expert but I think it looks really nice Niel! I see what you mean by it not swooping as much so I would change that, I like the swoop too.

Thanks Junebug!
Do you like it better with or without the gaps, assuming the swoop stays the same.

You know, it's funny you're asking this, I almost typed in my response that I "think" I prefer it without the gaps lol! But then I looked at the cads again and I'm so on the fence about it I deleted my comments. It looks nice both ways, but I do think I lean a little towards no gap.

I think I might too! I know I prefer the no gspcof the ruby ring, but I worry the cathedral is taller on mine, so might be too much metal

 

[junebug17]

I'm not an expert but I think it looks really nice Niel! I see what you mean by it not swooping as much so I would change that, I like the swoop too.

Thanks Junebug!
Do you like it better with or without the gaps, assuming the swoop stays the same.

You know, it's funny you're asking this, I almost typed in my response that I "think" I prefer it without the gaps lol! But then I looked at the cads again and I'm so on the fence about it I deleted my comments. It looks nice both ways, but I do think I lean a little towards no gap.

I think I might too! I know I prefer the no gspcof the ruby ring, but I worry the cathedral is taller on mine, so might be too much metal

Yep, now that you say that, I think that's why I changed my post, I thought maybe the gap broke things up a bit, otherwise maybe too much metal? Not sure though, it might look perfectly fine IRL.

 

[msop04]

Don't kill me for saying this, but...

...I think I like it better without the cathedral. If the shank was pinched in (think rounded knife edge-ish) with that swoop, it would be

 

[Niel]

Don't kill me for saying this, but...

...I think I like it better without the cathedral. If the shank was pinched in (think rounded knife edge-ish) with that swoop, it would be

Just so I'm following, you like the cathedral without the gap? Or we should get rid of it?

 

[Niel]

If this helps, its a terrible Photoshop to represent the colors in the ring.

 

[mrs-b]

Well that was incredibly annoying. I just typed out a long response and PS crashed for me.

So - to give you the shortened version - I definitely prefer the ring with no gaps. I've had a three stone ring with a cathedral but no gaps, and I far preferred it. I do think, though, that a taper would be good. It keeps the metal to a minimum and it looks balanced; as though the width you lose in the taper is taken up in the extra depth in the ‘no gap area’ (for want of a better term).

When I was doing my no-gap three stone I looked at the photo I’m attaching quite a lot. You’ll see what I mean about how the taper balances out the no-gap area, so the amount of metal stays basically constant, just redistributed. I agree, too, that putting in the gap straightens out the shank and cuts the swoopy effect – and I love the swoopy effect and was looking for that myself on my own ring.

Re the prongs, I think they look fine. But I know VC does a 3 stone style without inner prongs. I believe he uses some kind of channel method instead for the inside of the side stones, so it looks as though each outer stone only has 2 prongs - both on the outside of the stone. I know you’ll want to avoid VC’s prices, but I just thought I’d mention it so you’d know it was possible and perhaps something you could discuss with your jeweler.

So – no gaps, but tapered. Other than that, I think it's lovely!

 

[Niel]

Thanks you for your response.dont you hate when ps eats your stuff!

To your point about the channel set thing vs does. I knew he did that and I really like it, but I dont know if dk can replicate that and I'd be sad if he tried and failed. Should I ask?

As for the no gap/ gap. I love the pic you posted. That and the ruby ring both have the aesthetic I prefer, but those side stones are much more angled than mine will be,think it'll be the same?

 

[mrs-b]

I'd definitely ask DK about the channel set thingy; if he can't do it, he'll say, and if he can do it - what a bonus that would be to your setting! Definitely worth asking the question!

Re your side stones not being as angled - I think the less angled they are, the more important it is to have a definite swoop. I don't think the angle will make a difference to whether it can be done or not - but I do think that, if the side stones are straighter, the straighter the cathedral arms will be, and the bulkier they'll look because they'll have to travel so much farther to meet the side stones. When the side stones are angled, they're tilted down towards the cathedral arms, ergo the arms are shorter. But if the stones are less angled, and if you remove a distinct swoop, the arms will look very 'substantial' - which might overpower your side stones.

Just a thought. Can't wait to see it!

 

[mrs-b]

Niel -

FWIW - here's two photos of my 3 stone. It was set low, no air gaps, and tapered sides. I ended up pulling it apart and trading up on the center stone - but I loved this ring while I had it.

Might just provide another perspective.

 

[arkieb1]

I'm a jewellery cynic if it were me I'd go no gaps otherwise it's just one more area to attract gunk that will need to be cleaned.

 

[msop04]

Don't kill me for saying this, but...

...I think I like it better without the cathedral. If the shank was pinched in (think rounded knife edge-ish) with that swoop, it would be

Just so I'm following, you like the cathedral without the gap? Or we should get rid of it?

Yes... the swoopy cathedral without the gap is my favorite (like the right side photo you just posted).

 

[Niel]

A few more opinions. I photoshopped the most recent cads to pair it down to about 2.2mm. Which do you prefer

 

[artdecolover71]

I like it narrower. Yes.

 

[Niel]

I like it narrower. Yes.

Its not too thin?

 

[artdecolover71]

My GOG three stone was 2.2 mm and I loved the width.