CAD''s OpinionPls

[TigerMama]

What do you think about the CAD''s. Lynn B was my inspiration ring, but something seems like it is just not quite right. Any opinions or suggestions. It looks so thick and bulky. I was looking for delicate. Any suggestion on how to explain what is missing? I will send the inspriation pic too.

 

[TigerMama]

Here is another pic of the CAD.

 

[TigerMama]

Here is the inspiration pic. Hope this works!

 

[TigerMama]

Maybe this will work. It is the inspiration pic

 

[D&T]

CADs will look bulky, but IRL it will be a delicate look. What do you mean not quite right? prongs? do you want a claw prong? or something. I think it looks stunning

 

[TigerMama]

Yes, def want the claw prongs. But when I look at my CAD''s the metal looks fat and chunky. When I look at the inspiration pics I see diamond. Now mine is a 1.7 and the inspiration is a 2.3 or 2.2 so maybe is has to do with the size of the diamond.

Don''t know how to say this, but in the inspriation pics the scallop looks like boobs

. Mine looks like a short wave. Maybe I am just crazy looking at this dumb pic too many times!

Maybe the claw prongs will give the scallops the "complete circle" or boob look.

Cant believe I have just posted this........didn''t have the nerve to tell my WF guy "boobs"

 

[beechezz]

TigerMama,

I think the CAD''s look really nice! The top, side, and profile all look very similar to the inspiration pic.

 

[TigerMama]

Thank you both for your comments!

 

[D&T]

lol... boobs...

I''m pretty sure the gallery will be more define once casted and polished did you ask them about claw prongs? did you show them a picture of the inspiration picture? of what you anticipate the gallery to look like?

 

[TigerMama]

Althought the claw prongs were in the inspiration pic, I noticed on the CAD it did not have the claw prongs, so I responded back requesting those. I am sure they will add them. Yes, I did send the inspriation pic to them, so it should be OK.

I think the issues that I have with the CAD are all noted in the special instructions "will look sharp and bulky", but when polished etc...

 

[Lynn B]

Hey, just saw this... so excited to see that I inspired you! LOVELY!

Looks to me like WF nailed the (integrated) head! I love it. I think it will be perfect and very delicate. The CADs are always chunkier, remember?

How thick will the finished shank be, do you know?

 

[TigerMama]

HEY, HEY, HEY!

Thank you for checking in! The width is currently 2.2mm each. You can see a very small space between the e-ring and the w-ring. My WF guy was telling me if I went more narrow, they would not fit exactly flush. But I have asked him to redo the CAD with the 2.1mm each so I can see if it really makes a difference.

I really wanted no larger than 2.0, so feel I am already compromising on the width. I hope IRL it will not look as thick.

What do you think?

By the way I spent too much on my diamond so ran out of money for the fish tail pave.....but one day

 

[Ellen]

I think it looks just as great as I thought it would when you first told me you were going to do this! Love it!

Ditto on the CAD looking bulkier. Here''s a pic of a wax vs. finished product. Same thing basically, bulky vs. sleeker. See?

 

[tigian]

Your ring will look very refined IRL. I''m sure all CAD''s look bulkier. I think the claw prongs will be the finishing touch. It''s going to be gorgeous!

 

[Lynn B]

Date: 8/15/2009 2:41:55 PM
Author: TigerMama
HEY, HEY, HEY!

Thank you for checking in! The width is currently 2.2mm each. You can see a very small space between the e-ring and the w-ring. My WF guy was telling me if I went more narrow, they would not fit exactly flush. But I have asked him to redo the CAD with the 2.1mm each so I can see if it really makes a difference.

I really wanted no larger than 2.0, so feel I am already compromising on the width. I hope IRL it will not look as thick.

What do you think?

By the way I spent too much on my diamond so ran out of money for the fish tail pave.....but one day

That doesn''t make sense to me!

I cannot see what difference it would make. *confuzzled!!!* And besides, I think a small gap between rings is REXY!

Also, I''m with you, I loves me a thin shank

, and some vendors (Leon Mege comes to mind) are doing these killer solitaires in 1.6 -1.8 mm widths, and with pretty big honkin'' stones, too. I think a solid plat shank, with no stones and no holes would be sturdy enough at 2mm or a little less.

Wonder what gives?!!