CAD help for a three stone sapphire and OEC

[Miss Confused]

Hi!

(If you want to see CADS directly scroll down )

Would love to get all of your wise ladies and gents input on my CADs that I just recieved from David Klass. Getting way too excited as this project has literally taken years. Im terrible at making decisions for something I find important so instead of getting this ring done Ive upgraded studs multiple times, had a 30th bday emerald ring made, a pendant, a rose cut bracelet, etc., really need to learn to stop procrastinating haha

Stone details:

• Sapphire 2.68 carats measuring 7.87 x 7.28mm, it's precision cut recieving a complete overhaul by Dan Stair. Its so hard to describe colours so added quite a few photos below, its a medium blue with a little bit of violet indoors
• Side stones are two OEC estimated at G/H VS measuring (5.38mm x 5.25/ 3.44) 0.61ct and (5.41mm x 5.38/ 3.69) 0.69ct

For the setting I wanted an 8 prong with very pronounced arches that swoop out nearly giving it an octagonal shape when viewing from the top and set on a triwire shank with a small detail. The inspiration pictures I sent David were the ones below, I wanted the arches to come out similarly to the Elsa, but with a side view merging that of the earrings (assume based on the Margot's) and the last ring ( I want the arches and the strutes to be more integrated compared to the earring version) - also sent a few other photos on shank and showing the location of prongs



Now for the CADs, first pass and Im really happy (open to see the detail hopefully otherwise Ill put my paint skills to the test haha)

Initial thoughts:

• Overall love it, very close to what I was envisioning
• Originally planned for the side stones to have 8 prongs each as well, now Im starting to wonder if it will be too busy and better with 6? but think the discrepancy may annoy me....
• concerned that once its polished the arches wont protude enough to be visible and give that octagonal shape Im wanting
• I would like to have the arches dip further down and make it more dramatic

What do you guys think? Am I bonkers? Anything else comes to mind?

 

[RayRay]

I’m no help with CADs, but can’t wait to hear the other recommendations! It’ll be gorgeous!

 

[Miss Confused]

An example of the type of setting that started my love affair with these, as you can see the arches are very pronounced but its a different setting style so don't think it can be acomplished to this extent but some more arch would be lovely (this ring also shows thats it doable even with tiny stones haha, they range between 0.25 - 0.08 if I remember correctly)

 

[Miss Confused]

I’m no help with CADs, but can’t wait to hear the other recommendations! It’ll be gorgeous!

Thank you RayRay! Im so excited

 

[Niel]

When I look at it I wonder, is the melee detail on the side too much?
I think it’s going to make a beautiful three stone no just worry that might be gilding the lily
Same with the points in the donuts.

As for the prongs. I like the 6 on the rounds for 2 reasons. I like where the prongs sit so the cathedral has a prongs to go into.
Also your stones are different shapes. I think by having different number of prongs it’s acknowledging that they are different shapes.the same prongs seems like you’re trying to hide the shape of the rounds.

 

[anangel]

No real comments on the CADs, but your stone selection is amazing! That sapphire is such a beautiful soft blue, and those OECs will be little petal-ly fireballs.
Please keep us posted!

 

[Niel]

In lieu of those points I’d just make the donuts thicker

 

[Rfisher]

First of all - I love the look of your stones! The shape, the color, and the proportions!
Regarding the arches protruding enough to be seen from above, peeking out from below the stone, that's what you mean right?
I did that on a previous ring with DK and can show you a cad that didn't have the effect after casting, and the tweak on the cad that did show in the final product. If you want, I can add it here.
As for the 8 prongs on center stone, and 6 prongs on sidestones - that's what I just did on my three stone as well. I love it. To me it doesn't look mis matched.

 

[Rfisher]

Wait.
The centerstone on the cad doesn't seem match the shape of your lovely sapphire.
If this is true, I'd stop tweaking until this was addressed. He needs to scan your stone to get the shape right. If it's done after - it may change proportions in the design. If it's not done, the custom made setting isn't custom made for your unique stone....

 

[diamondseeker2006]

What pretty stones! I have a sapphire very close to the same color!

I usually don't give CAD opinions, but after seeing your post, I had to stop in to say that I am also working on a three stone ring with a tri-wire shank and shoulder detail (with CVB, mostly combining elements from her existing designs)! I was just so surprised to see someone else trying to combine these elements! My stones will be a different size and/or shape than yours (mine are all rounds), and I am really trying to decide if it will all fit on my finger! I can see in your CADs that your shank and shoulder petal will not be visible from the top view of your finger, and I think that may be one reason Niel mentioned possibly eliminating that. I have decided that I am keeping that but will eliminate my side stones, if necessary, because I want the tri-wire shank and shoulder element to be seen from the top view.

I'll look forward to seeing your finished ring! I am finishing up something else before I have my ring actually made, so I imagine your ring will be ready before mine. I just wanted it to be on record that I am not copying your design if I do go forward with mine! (There are many differences, though!)

 

[Miss Confused]

When I look at it I wonder, is the melee detail on the side too much?
I think it’s going to make a beautiful three stone no just worry that might be gilding the lily
Same with the points in the donuts.

As for the prongs. I like the 6 on the rounds for 2 reasons. I like where the prongs sit so the cathedral has a prongs to go into.
Also your stones are different shapes. I think by having different number of prongs it’s acknowledging that they are different shapes.the same prongs seems like you’re trying to hide the shape of the rounds.

Great point Niel, hadnt really thought about the issue with the shank not forming a point with the prong if I go for 8 prongs on the side stones, will have to see some more examples but I think you are right that I should keep them at 6

As for the melee detail this is just me being excessive and wanting a little detail on the side just for me If I removed that and the points on the donuts this ring would essentially look like a three stone of multiple rings Ive already had / still have (have had various iterations of the style in a solitaire, a toi et moi and a 5 stone) so I was trying to give it something extra in the gallery view without taking away too much light. Any ideas on alternatives for giving it something special?

 

[Miss Confused]

No real comments on the CADs, but your stone selection is amazing! That sapphire is such a beautiful soft blue, and those OECs will be little petal-ly fireballs.
Please keep us posted!

Thank you! Really makes me happy to read this and soft is exactly what I was going for colourwise (originally wanted a periwinkle but finding that was very hard since I didnt want it to shift to violet indoors). This one is most of the time a lovely blue with hints of violet mixed in indoors but with the right mixed lighting it goes periwinkle

 

[Miss Confused]

First of all - I love the look of your stones! The shape, the color, and the proportions!
Regarding the arches protruding enough to be seen from above, peeking out from below the stone, that's what you mean right?
I did that on a previous ring with DK and can show you a cad that didn't have the effect after casting, and the tweak on the cad that did show in the final product. If you want, I can add it here.
As for the 8 prongs on center stone, and 6 prongs on sidestones - that's what I just did on my three stone as well. I love it. To me it doesn't look mis matched.

Wait.
The centerstone on the cad doesn't seem match the shape of your lovely sapphire.
If this is true, I'd stop tweaking until this was addressed. He needs to scan your stone to get the shape right. If it's done after - it may change proportions in the design. If it's not done, the custom made setting isn't custom made for your unique stone....

Rfisher!!! Please, please do attach any cads / photos you have. That is exactly what I mean regarding having the arches peeking out from below the stone, Im looking for the soft look of having a bezel with prongs from the top view but arches from the side view. Also planning to have them milgrained (as you will notice I think milgrain should go on everything hahaha). Do you have any further details on achieving this look especially since you worked with David on CADs for it? So happy you replied

While I was waiting to get started with this ring I saw your come out on Instagram and it is stunning, gives me comfort in going with the combo of 8 and 6 prongs (hadnt even noticed that it was different in yours, they work so well together)

Thank you for pointing out the potential stone concern! Will ask David.

 

[Miss Confused]

What pretty stones! I have a sapphire very close to the same color!

I usually don't give CAD opinions, but after seeing your post, I had to stop in to say that I am also working on a three stone ring with a tri-wire shank and shoulder detail (with CVB, mostly combining elements from her existing designs)! I was just so surprised to see someone else trying to combine these elements! My stones will be a different size and/or shape than yours (mine are all rounds), and I am really trying to decide if it will all fit on my finger! I can see in your CADs that your shank and shoulder petal will not be visible from the top view of your finger, and I think that may be one reason Niel mentioned possibly eliminating that. I have decided that I am keeping that but will eliminate my side stones, if necessary, because I want the tri-wire shank and shoulder element to be seen from the top view.

I'll look forward to seeing your finished ring! I am finishing up something else before I have my ring actually made, so I imagine your ring will be ready before mine. I just wanted it to be on record that I am not copying your design if I do go forward with mine! (There are many differences, though!)

Thank you for posting diamondseeker! You have great taste so definitivly would love your input. And first of all I wouldnt have thought for a second you were copying, these are all beautiful elements that have been in rings for hundreds of years. And even if I had helped inspire you I would view it as a compliment

Fitting a three stone and being able to view the triwire and detail from the top sounds tricky, in my case Im going for the 3 stones giving full coverage from the top view with the shank and detailing being more for my personal enjoyment. I already have another ring in the works with a triwire and detailing visible but then its a solitare with carre halo. From that experience if you have similar real estate to me (size 6 on my rhs, 5.25 on lhs)then you will likely want to keep the center piece to 8mm, maybe 9 but anything beyond that and you start to have the detail slanted to much to be appreciated from a top view.

Do you have a thread or any other details? Would love to hear your thinking processes and any issues you have discovered

 

[Rfisher]

It will be a bit - but I will for sure show you the CADs I have that show /don't show the gallery peeking out in the finished product.
Your stone seems to look more squared off than the stone depicted in the CADs. It could be just a trick of the eye, but good to check. That's why he scans the stones instead of just going off of measurements. If it's off, it might alter the effects you are going for. And having the basket the same shape as your stone, and the prongs in the right place, is one of the reasons we go custom, right?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I have had my AVR (in avatar picture) in a temporary setting for almost 6 years! I knew from the beginning that it needed an antique style setting. My top two choices all along have remained a solitaire with tri-wire shank and shoulder petals and a three stone ring with small sides. I've worked on this before with Caysie and even did CADs of the first idea, but I didn't feel 100% sure about going forward! So I just went on with projects I was 100% sure about and delayed my main ring! I told her at the beginning of this year I wanted to pick up this project again, and we discussed trying to combine the two ideas into one ring! She loves the idea and so do I, but I am still not sure about it all fitting with all the elements visible! lol! (My lhr size is 5.5, so my sizes are very close to yours.) I'll be using very small sides if we do it. Her Ivy ring has the shank and petals that I love, but I'd use another style head for a solitaire or three stone. In your case, I totally get it that you are satisfied with some of the elements being just for yourself! I just have to make a final decision on whether I want to choose one style, the other, or the combination of elements!

 

[Niel]

Great point Niel, hadnt really thought about the issue with the shank not forming a point with the prong if I go for 8 prongs on the side stones, will have to see some more examples but I think you are right that I should keep them at 6

As for the melee detail this is just me being excessive and wanting a little detail on the side just for me If I removed that and the points on the donuts this ring would essentially look like a three stone of multiple rings Ive already had / still have (have had various iterations of the style in a solitaire, a toi et moi and a 5 stone) so I was trying to give it something extra in the gallery view without taking away too much light. Any ideas on alternatives for giving it something special?

You could definitely keep the points if you wanted.m if you were concerned. However, I don’t think having somewhat similar basket elements will make this ring look like all your other rings. It’s quire unique in its own.
Here’s an example of what I would do specifically with the shank. See how the top of the triwire just becomes the cathedral itself and then it becomes 2 wires under that meets the donut. I think it would me more comfortable considering this will take up your whole hand, and it won’t seem like an excess of design elements
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/gray-spinel-three-stone-by-dk.231258/

 

[Niel]

Here’s another cool way to End the tri wire. Have the two bottom wire slip to each side and add a wrap

And of course if you like the diamond melee detail leave it I just worry it’s a bit clunky.

 

[Rfisher]

These two above show the CAD and finished product. The CAD actually shows some of the basket peeking out, but the finished product doesn't.

This was the revised CAD and finished product.

I hope this helps you, but I can't say it's strictly a case of shrinkage that's associated with CAD to polished cast.
I do know in my case the basket peeking out was a strong "want" that I communicated from the beginning. It may be one of those things that you just don't know how it interprets exactly until it's all said and done. Don't know for sure?
Good thing is - DK is pretty amazing to work with in aspects like this.

 

[msop04]

Wait.
The centerstone on the cad doesn't seem match the shape of your lovely sapphire.
If this is true, I'd stop tweaking until this was addressed. He needs to scan your stone to get the shape right. If it's done after - it may change proportions in the design. If it's not done, the custom made setting isn't custom made for your unique stone....

This is the first thing I noticed. The shape of the center in the CADs is reading as much rounder than your stone.

 

[Miss Confused]

These two above show the CAD and finished product. The CAD actually shows some of the basket peeking out, but the finished product doesn't.

This was the revised CAD and finished product.

I hope this helps you, but I can't say it's strictly a case of shrinkage that's associated with CAD to polished cast.
I do know in my case the basket peeking out was a strong "want" that I communicated from the beginning. It may be one of those things that you just don't know how it interprets exactly until it's all said and done. Don't know for sure?
Good thing is - DK is pretty amazing to work with in aspects like this.

This is so helpful!!! I definitivly want the basket to be visible (actually the main reason for going completly custom) so I will make sure to express it again. Its very helpful to see your example as anything less than what your final example is would leave me dissapointed, yet I would have expected that effect from your first cads and not thought they would dissapear as much in the casting and polishing as they did. Also can I just say I adore the basket of that ring? Nearly made me doubt my own gallery plans haha

 

[Miss Confused]

You could definitely keep the points if you wanted.m if you were concerned. However, I don’t think having somewhat similar basket elements will make this ring look like all your other rings. It’s quire unique in its own.
Here’s an example of what I would do specifically with the shank. See how the top of the triwire just becomes the cathedral itself and then it becomes 2 wires under that meets the donut. I think it would me more comfortable considering this will take up your whole hand, and it won’t seem like an excess of design elements
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/gray-spinel-three-stone-by-dk.231258/

Here’s another cool way to End the tri wire. Have the two bottom wire slip to each side and add a wrap

And of course if you like the diamond melee detail leave it I just worry it’s a bit clunky.

Thank you! I definitivly want something to finish off the point where the wires seperate, looking at your examples and my other triwire setting Im realizing that the melee detail is probably a tad big on this one, to be fair the inspiration picture had a bigger one and I asked for a smaller version but didnt specify I meant something like a 2 pointer max

What do you think of the shank width? Normally I like 1.8-2mm but with it being a triwire and a three stone thought a bit more robust may be needed

This is the first thing I noticed. The shape of the center in the CADs is reading as much rounder than your stone.

Thank you msop! I'm definitly asking David to double check, so hard to tell on these images but considering the amount of effort put into determining the ideal shape for this stone I dont want it to be smudged into a non-fitting setting (not that I believe David would let that happen, but better safe than sorry)

Just going to fangirl your ring for a moment, the center and the proportions are just amazing. I love the colour and the shape and of course the setting itself

 

[Miss Confused]

I have had my AVR (in avatar picture) in a temporary setting for almost 6 years! I knew from the beginning that it needed an antique style setting. My top two choices all along have remained a solitaire with tri-wire shank and shoulder petals and a three stone ring with small sides. I've worked on this before with Caysie and even did CADs of the first idea, but I didn't feel 100% sure about going forward! So I just went on with projects I was 100% sure about and delayed my main ring! I told her at the beginning of this year I wanted to pick up this project again, and we discussed trying to combine the two ideas into one ring! She loves the idea and so do I, but I am still not sure about it all fitting with all the elements visible! lol! (My lhr size is 5.5, so my sizes are very close to yours.) I'll be using very small sides if we do it. Her Ivy ring has the shank and petals that I love, but I'd use another style head for a solitaire or three stone. In your case, I totally get it that you are satisfied with some of the elements being just for yourself! I just have to make a final decision on whether I want to choose one style, the other, or the combination of elements!

I had never seen that ring by cvb so thank you for pointing it out, its lovely.

Considering your center and your ring size maybe doing a quasi option like this would work? (not sure whose ring this is so apologies in advance). Something like this with a different head of course and adding cuffs and potentially small melee to the sides to give it more of a petal shape could give you a combination of side stones with the petal details

 

[msop04]

Thank you msop! I'm definitly asking David to double check, so hard to tell on these images but considering the amount of effort put into determining the ideal shape for this stone I dont want it to be smudged into a non-fitting setting (not that I believe David would let that happen, but better safe than sorry)

Just going to fangirl your ring for a moment, the center and the proportions are just amazing. I love the colour and the shape and of course the setting itself

Thanks, @Miss Confused!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

That's a really pretty ring and definitely along the lines of the style I am aiming for! At this moment (after spending a few hours looking at ring pictures and trying little stones next to my current ring!!!), I am probably leaning toward doing the diamond petals only. As much as I'd like to do a three stone ring, I just don't think I have room to combine all the elements in one ring with an 8.4mm center. I think I will end up eventually making two rings! I can always make a three stone ring with a colored gem center like you are doing and just make this ring with my tri-wire, cuff, and petal shoulders.

I LOVE @msop04 's ring, too! It's definitely saved in my 3 stone inspiration folder!

 

[Miss Confused]

New CADs!

Edit: Whoops, went out too quickly!

So asked about the shape of the stone and he confirmed it is the shape of my stone, what throws it off visually in the cad is keeping the arches the same distance (which I want, as I want it to give an octagonal shape from the top)

I think at this point the difficulty is "seeing beyond the prongs" so to say, as Im aiming for small petit tucked in ones that of course are a post cad effort. I guess the two points I am still mulling is:
- the amount of visible arch - whats visible in the cad is the level I want to see IRL, but doesnt that mean it needs to be more exagerated in the cads?
- the side detail, definitly want to keep something but wanted a smaller version of the shank detail posted above, but this is more elongated ... wondering if its even possible to bring it down to scale of if Im wanting something impossible. Any other ideas for a shank detail?

 

[Miss Confused]

Think I need to get some sleep then compare the CADs side by side (in Europe so quite late already) as right now feels like the second CAD is a clunkier version of the first... am I going nuts?

 

[Rfisher]

As Niel stated earlier, maybe have the one triwire extend up and merge with the prong, instead of the current shoulder detail? But of course you can just ask him to make it smaller.
As for the basket being visible from above, I'd just reiterate that desire as being important to you and ask if they think the finished product will translate. I'd have a verbal conversation on this part (to be clear) and then follow up with written. But really, DK is known for in the past for re-casting in instances like this- easy peasey. But businesses do change their practices, don't rely on my word only.
And, the new cad really looks like the 'wire' in the basket/gallery construction beefed up noticeably? Was that your intention?

 

[Rfisher]

Think I need to get some sleep then compare the CADs side by side (in Europe so quite late already) as right now feels like the second CAD is a clunkier version of the first... am I going nuts?

YES! I was noticing the same thing as stated above.

 

[Rfisher]

One more thought.
The way DK is achieving the basket to peek out from above, by horizontally widening the swoops, is not how I would choose.
But that's personal choice. It's not 'wrong'.