Custom E-Ring Design - Updated Renderings

[ICAA]

Here are the updated renderings from the jeweller. There are a couple things that we discussed regarding these latest renderings.

The first thing is that the bezels were given a "balloon" look and as a result look thick. The excess material on the bezels won''t be there. We explicitly discussed that the bezels would not have that excess material. They were made to look "fat" to simply show that the topline of the bezel will be thin/smooth. This was a result of problems getting the rendering software to do what was wanted.

The second thing is that where the tips of the pears join with the band look sharp and rather disjointed - this will be smoothed out. Also, the "bezel" that is below and sits against the finger will also be smoothed out where it joins the band. Again, this is because of the rendering and the way the shapes were put together. The jeweller will smooth out these junction points to ensure they look seamless and blend with the smooth lines of the rest of the ring.

I am going to see him one more time to drop off the centre stone and approve the matched pears - hopefully Saturday morning.
Any other comments on the design? All are appreciated!

 

[valeria101]

I see the rounded shank and basket and the lowered sides. The new version is a more dainty ring... a tiny bit lower set than the original. The side stones appear smaller, but you explain why is that.
Neither has any "flaw" as much as I can tell - just different looks.

 

[headlight]

Personally, I really love the new version.

 

[valeria101]

Feel free to tell me I''m a pest !

 

[ICAA]

Date: 2/9/2005 2:10:40 AM
Author: valeria101
I see the rounded shank and basket and the lowered sides. The new version is a more dainty ring... a tiny bit lower set than the original. The side stones appear smaller, but you explain why is that.
Neither has any ''flaw'' as much as I can tell - just different looks.

Thank you so much for doing that side by side comparison. I tried to do it in Paint but that program pretty much sucks - I gave up after 15 minutes!

Most of my initial comments were aimed at the old version being very "sharp" or "chunky". The lines were very abrupt/angular. It almost seemed like it was milled on a metal lathe or something and not hand crafted. So, most of my modifications were aimed to make the ring flow more smoothly and not feel as sharp/chunky.

As for the differences, you basically got them all.

It was set lower for ease of everyday wearing.
The shank was rounded and designed to flow smoothly into the tips of the pears.
Bezels were modified slightly so they aren''t so sharp/angular.

Good eye Valeria101!

 

[ICAA]

Very good point Valeria101 ... I think the practical limitation they are encountering is that the ring is going to be a 4.25 size and the centre stone is 6.5mm and each pear is going to be roughly 5.5mm long. So, factor in that the pears are at an angle and they are maybe 4mm long? So, in total we have, if the girdles lined up, 14.5mm. That will basically cover 100% of her finger, top down view. If they were to lower the centre stone so the girdles lined up, it would effectively lengthen the pears and the ring wound be more than 100%!

I suppose the pears could be angled greater and the centre stone lowered so the girdles are more in line. That would possibly minimize any spread changes. Hmm ...

 

[valeria101]

Date: 2/9/2005 2:38:40 AM
Author: ICAA

I suppose the pears could be angled greater and the centre stone lowered so the girdles are more in line. That would possibly minimize any spread changes.

The angle of the sides could be a bit more - the other ring in the picture has it so and you will find lots of others.

I don''t think the stones are too big for the finger size, but yes, that is one issue for the designer to handle. There are solutions for almost anything, althoug they might be relatively intricate. I was trying to attach the profile of a 5 carat round +small pears ring with are lots of details tweacked to accomodate the huge rock on a "normal" ring size... but could not find the relevant picture. Anyway, it showed how the end of the shank turns back at an angle to meet the tips of the pears so that the span of the stones gets a bit larger than the outer ring diameter. I would be surprised if even that would be necesary for your ring.

Anyway, the most I can do is draw these things. I should appologize to the jeweler that actually has to produce the fantasy

 

[Cynthia]

valeria101 - your posts are amazing !

Cindy

 

[Daniela]

I was also thinking what the very knowledgable Val has pointed out about the basket. The basket in both versions doesn''t look like it''s doing it''s job: the stone needs to be seated lower, and if spread is a problem, the pears should be angled. But in other respects I do like the newer version.

 

[valeria101]

Oh, wow

Thanks guys....

Anyway. Leon''s site is working again and I could get back that outrageous roun & pear construction. Even if the ring size was pretty big, it''s still pretty amazing the stones actually fit in the tight place !

Here it is: LINK.

 

[ame]

I still say the stones are up way too high. Valeria''s post shows where I would have the stones, RIGHT above the finger.

 

[headlight]

Date: 2/9/2005 2:26:50 AM
Author: valeria101
Feel free to tell me I''m a pest !

This is how mine is done, basically, except that my baskets (the air space under the stones) are very small, as I wanted a really low setting.
And, my stones are all set on the same plane, as is illustrated in these photos by Valeria, or as she called it lining up all girdles. This creates a really nice "flow" that is seamless. IMO, this is how a proper three-stone should be done, but there is really no right or wrong, just how the owner prefers it. But, it is my belief that the three-stone ring was designed/intended to be this continuous, seamless flow of three stones, no matter what the combination of shapes used are.
I have a friend who has a lovely oval center with the pears sides; she has her center stone raised higher -- personally, I don''t care for that style but I must admit that her ring is quite a beauty and very well done. I know that many women do prefer to have the center stone sit higher to stand out from the side stones and this is just a personal choice.
Keep in mind that even if you place them all on the same plane, by virtue of the fact that the center stone is larger than the side stones, it will sit higher for that reason alone. Mine does this, and my center round doesn''t have a deep crown angle and it also has a large table, so my diamond is relatively "flat" on top by comparison to an ideal cut and mine still sits higher than my side stones.
I constantly receive compliments on how great my ring looks because of its seamless flow and all stones on same plane.
When I commented on the revised rendering, I didn''t realize that this was how the center was going to sit -- I thought that was just part of the cad-cam imaging like the stone just "resting" on top of the prongs, but not yet "set" in them.

 

[ICAA]

I am going to email that picture done by Valeria101 showing the sidebar being higher up on the Tiffany ring and get my jeweller''s comments. You guys have me all worried the centre stone will fall out!

 

[ame]

I think the position of ALL the stones on the Tiffany image is much better than the jewelers. I think he still has the stones up WAAAAAAY too high

 

[valeria101]

Date: 2/9/2005 11:32:13 AM
Author: ICAA

You guys have me all worried the centre stone will fall out!

I don''t think so... Perhaps the pictures & all look "serious" but that took 30 seconds to make just to save a few words.

Long prongs bend easier than short ones, but that doesn''t really say the jeweler''s version is not sound. I could not know that.

 

[ICAA]

I have attached the Lucida three stone ring by Tiffany. This is a bit more the look I was going for, as compared to the one presented above where the girdles lined up. I like the idea of the centre stone being more prominent. The Tiffany one does sit lower than the rendering - the crossbar is low like mine but their prongs appear more beefy than my rendering. So tough to weigh all these things together!

 

[valeria101]

Date: 2/9/2005 12:32:59 PM
Author: ICAA

This is a bit more the look I was going for, as compared to the one presented above where the girdles lined up

You (and the wearer) should be the one to choose. It is not sure at all the prongs on the ring would have been too thin or what not. This can't be the first ring that jeweler has ever made and he couldn't know that some crazy internet poster (me) will download half of Tiffany's site to compare his bona fide drawing with.

The Lucida diamonds are really deep - the culet of that one in the photo touches the finger even if the stone is set high. I am surprised they posted such an examples. That diamond is probably deeper than it's wide! There wasn't much choise for setting it.

If this look is your favorite, and it's made safely, why not.

 

[headlight]

I wouldn''t worry that the stone will fall out -- it really doesn''t have anything to do with the security of thestone as to the preference of it being set above the "line" of the side stones or on the same line.

Personally, I think that Lucida three-stone is not appealing. However, I LOVE the design your jeweler created. The Lucida three-stone is VERY bulky and masculine looking, IMO. Your design is very feminine and delicate, which I love and I would think any lady would love to wear (i.e. your girl), yet it makes it mark on being unique by placing those pears in bezels.

Men, for some reason, always have this "thing" about the center stone standing out in the mounting, and not becoming "lost" amongst the other stones -- trust me, if you set the round on the same level as the pears, it will most certainly not blend in! I can tell you, coming from one who has had many a diamond ring, given that my current one is my 5th setting (same guy!), that the low set rings are the most comfortable to wear and if the stones are all on the same "plane", it reduces it''s spin factor.

 

[ICAA]

Date: 2/9/2005 4

1:29 PM
Author: headlight
I wouldn''t worry that the stone will fall out -- it really doesn''t have anything to do with the security of thestone as to the preference of it being set above the ''line'' of the side stones or on the same line.

Personally, I think that Lucida three-stone is not appealing. However, I LOVE the design your jeweler created. The Lucida three-stone is VERY bulky and masculine looking, IMO. Your design is very feminine and delicate, which I love and I would think any lady would love to wear (i.e. your girl), yet it makes it mark on being unique by placing those pears in bezels.

Men, for some reason, always have this ''thing'' about the center stone standing out in the mounting, and not becoming ''lost'' amongst the other stones -- trust me, if you set the round on the same level as the pears, it will most certainly not blend in! I can tell you, coming from one who has had many a diamond ring, given that my current one is my 5th setting (same guy!), that the low set rings are the most comfortable to wear and if the stones are all on the same ''plane'', it reduces it''s spin factor.

I don''t really like the Lucida shown either, I was just trying to show the effect so to say. I was doing some measuring and by my measurements, the top of the centre stone will stand 6mm from the top of the finger. Does this seem too high? Perhaps it is on a 4.25 size ring. The inside diameter will be 15-16mm. The stone by itself has a depth of 3.94mm so that space and the band would be 2 mm. If anyone could take measurements of how high their stone stands above their finger, that would be great.

 

[ICAA]

Date: 2/9/2005 12:46:53 PM
Author: valeria101

You (and the wearer) should be the one to choose. It is not sure at all the prongs on the ring would have been too thin or what not. This can''t be the first ring that jeweler has ever made and he couldn''t know that some crazy internet poster (me) will download half of Tiffany''s site to compare his bona fide drawing with.

The Lucida diamonds are really deep - the culet of that one in the photo touches the finger even if the stone is set high. I am surprised they posted such an examples. That diamond is probably deeper than it''s wide! There wasn''t much choise for setting it.

If this look is your favorite, and it''s made safely, why not.

I told the jeweller from the start that I want a dainty look but will not sacrifice the strength of the ring. I guess there is a point where I have to trust the jeweller and that he knows what he is doing. I will mention the crossbar/sidebar and prong length to him and see what he says. The ring is being made my a company in Canada that does precious metalwork, platinum specifically, so I trust the ring will turn out fantastic.

 

[ICAA]

Date: 2/10/2005 7:22:26 PM
Author: Feydakin
Hmm, I had written a reply but appraently fubared something up -

I would prefer to see the lower galery gap reduced by at least half.. As it sits now it tricks your eye into thinking that your stones are flat.. Reducing that gap should fix that problem..

Thanks for the response, much appreciated.

I will discuss with my jeweller to see the effect of lowering it by 1/2 on the total height of the ring.

 

[headlight]

Date: 2/10/2005 9:21:19 PM
Author: ICAA

Date: 2/10/2005 7:22:26 PM
Author: Feydakin
Hmm, I had written a reply but appraently fubared something up -

I would prefer to see the lower galery gap reduced by at least half.. As it sits now it tricks your eye into thinking that your stones are flat.. Reducing that gap should fix that problem..

Thanks for the response, much appreciated.

I will discuss with my jeweller to see the effect of lowering it by 1/2 on the total height of the ring.

Lowering it to have the basket space from what you have now would make it approx. the same as mine. I can tell you that I LOVE it like this. It just seems like it is a part of my hand. Very comfortable and really helps in keeping it balanced so you don''t have ring spin, which just annoys me to no end! Also, I think it is less "pretentious" to keep it low, like there is no need to be waving those stones around in the air, it is already obvious that she is wearing three diamonds on one finger! (Yeah, I know with my 3+ stone I have no place talking about pretentious....)

 

[ICAA]

Date: 2/10/2005 9:33:57 PM
Author: headlight

Lowering it to have the basket space from what you have now would make it approx. the same as mine. I can tell you that I LOVE it like this. It just seems like it is a part of my hand. Very comfortable and really helps in keeping it balanced so you don''t have ring spin, which just annoys me to no end! Also, I think it is less ''pretentious'' to keep it low, like there is no need to be waving those stones around in the air, it is already obvious that she is wearing three diamonds on one finger! (Yeah, I know with my 3+ stone I have no place talking about pretentious....)

Prententious ... interesting choice of words. I know what you mean, perhaps conservative or understated would be an appropriate way to describe what you mean.

Lower settings can give the impression of one being less prententious but I have to think, if you have a beatiful stone, people will notice regardless if its a low set bezel or a cathedral setting. The pain of having a nice ring hey?

 

[headlight]

Okay, no need to split hairs over it! You know what I mean!
Your ring is going to be gorgeous, no matter which way/height you do it.
I can''t wait to see the finished piece.

 

[ICAA]

Date: 2/12/2005 12:28:41 AM
Author: headlight
Okay, no need to split hairs over it! You know what I mean!

I am just joking around with you, I understand completely.

Date: 2/12/2005 12:28:41 AM
Author: headlight

Your ring is going to be gorgeous, no matter which way/height you do it.
I can''t wait to see the finished piece.

I certainly hope you are right. I did see this $16,000 piece today that was made by the company that is going to create my ring. It was awesome. A pendant with a 2 carat princess, bezeled in platinum and then this cool 18K gold other stuff and chain. The bezel was perfect. I couldn''t see a flaw in it. But, I am still anxious about it all!

 

[headlight]

Oh, I knew you were joking around, no problem.
I know the anticipation is difficult; I''m just having my ring re-sized right now and I''m anxious!