Help with CADs pls

[mrs-b]

I have 3 CADs for a pair of earrings I'm having made, and I'm having problems making a final decision. Looking for all sorts of opinions and arguments for one or the other.

Here they are:







Thanks folks!

 

[josieKat]

For me it feels like the top is too tall, the middle too wide, and the bottom just right. My eye picked that pair immediately, before I studied them to figure out what was different about the construction.

 

[MissGotRocks]

I like the second pair. To my eye, they look the most balanced and would seem the most balanced weight wise (no drooping). I also like the width that they would take up on the lobe; seems to me that width coverage would be more important than length. However, you know your lobes best and what look you hope to achieve with them!

 

[RMOO]

Ok, my opinion only: I like the middle pair the best, but I would tilt the two side pear points up a little instead of straight out to the side. I like the round ends of the pears all touching and framing the top of the round.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

I also really like the spread of the second. It's also a matter of what kind of earlobes do you have and if you have appropriate space? If you do, that would be my pick.

 

[molecule]

If none of them look right to you, I'd consider removing the round and doing 4-5 pear cuts instead to make the earrings more symmetrical.

 

[mrs-b]

Thank you for your comments! <3

I think I'm going to go with the bottom CAD, but with a bezel setting. The prongs make all of the designs a weird sort of human or animal effect - and once you've seen it....

So I'm thinking option 3, but with bezel. These studs will have removable drops, so an elongated stud works well. The drops will be the same as the tops, but with larger rounds, which will just give the design a little extra ballast.

And @RMOO - if I wasn't doing drops, just studs, your "tilt up the sides" is a genius suggestion and I'd definitely do that. I don't know if it shows up discernibly in the CADs, but the bottom CAD is the only one where the pears and the round are all equidistant from each other. That's my issue with the second one. No's 2 and 3 are identical, except that the middle, upward pointing pear has been lifted in the third one, which allows the side pears to move closer to each other, making the equidistant gap that CAD #3 fills with a metal 'dot'.

Such a tiny piece of jewelry, yet so many options and complications! Whew!

Thanks, everyone, for your help, feedback and suggestions!

 

[mrs-b]

For anyone who's interested - the final CADs. The drops will be straight bars, broken by tiny flowers with single point diamonds in them, then an identical diamond display, but with a larger round (about 50% larger in ctw).

 

[RMOO]

I love the bezel! Are the drops going to be removable or fixed? Will the bottom cluster be in the same orientation, or upside down?

These are going to be beautiful, can't wait for the pics!

 

[caf]

For anyone who's interested - the final CADs. The drops will be straight bars, broken by tiny flowers with single point diamonds in them, then an identical diamond display, but with a larger round (about 50% larger in ctw).

Pretty. I have difficulty with envisioning how CADs will turn out but these look great!

 

[Lookinagain]

I like the bezel iteration much better than the ones with prongs, as I confess, they looked a bit like a snowman to me. This CAD doesn't take my mind in that direction. Is there a CAD for the drops? I'd love to see it if you're also working on that now.

 

[mrs-b]

I like the bezel iteration much better than the ones with prongs, as I confess, they looked a bit like a snowman to me. This CAD doesn't take my mind in that direction. Is there a CAD for the drops? I'd love to see it if you're also working on that now.

Hi @Lookinagain.

No - no CAD. But imagine identical, with larger rounds to give it more ballast. I think it will be lovely. (I hope, anyway...)