CVB CAD/Rendering Feedback for OMC Stone

[rockysalamander]

I hope I don't derail you...I love the shank. I love the head. I just don't love them together. The shank is all straight and sharp lines, while the head is all curves. I feel like the two parts need to flow better together and maybe that will resolve some of the comments above. For me, I would use double prongs and make the straight our of the shank. Then, I'd look to find a detail to add to the gallery that has less curvy swoopyness.

Prongs like this


Here are a few I thought of.

TGP



CVB



DK

 

[acv123]

It looks very 80s right now. I don’t think that’s necessarily what you’re going for. I do think adding more prongs will help. Not sure what would help the sides look less 80s

Oh no!! definitely not what I'm going for! I think one reason for the 80s look might be that yellow gold/channel set stones give off that vibe, plus the fact that in the renders the french cuts are shown as emerald cuts. Think that could be it? I'm also told there will be less metal around the french cuts and on the shank. The prongs will also be more delicate and rounded off, not clawed like in the rendering. Pretty please, does that help?

 

[quaddio]

I hope you change it, it looks weird as it is now.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

If you look at the CVB emerald cut ring above, that is a ring that could be totally adapted to a cushion shape stone. The double claws in the 4 corners will accentuate the shape of the cushion, just as it does with the emerald cut. I love the head of that ring and the side bars. You could still go with the shank you have in mind, but I really like the shank on the emerald cut, too.

 

[nala]

It doesn’t strike me as antique style

 

[acv123]

I hope I don't derail you...I love the shank. I love the head. I just don't love them together. The shank is all straight and sharp lines, while the head is all curves. I feel like the two parts need to flow better together and maybe that will resolve some of the comments above. For me, I would use double prongs and make the straight our of the shank. Then, I'd look to find a detail to add to the gallery that has less curvy swoopyness.

Prongs like this


Here are a few I thought of.

TGP



CVB



DK

Thank you @rockysalamander, I see what you mean about the contrast between the two. Do you think the band would be more delicate in real life? I like that second TGP detail but I just can't get behind double prongs even though I know thats whats often used with these french cut sides.

 

[acv123]

If you look at the CVB emerald cut ring above, that is a ring that could be totally adapted to a cushion shape stone. The double claws in the 4 corners will accentuate the shape of the cushion, just as it does with the emerald cut. I love the head of that ring and the side bars. You could still go with the shank you have in mind, but I really like the shank on the emerald cut, too.

I was shown those little arrow shoulders but they are a little too delicate and detailed for me, but its a good thought. I'll post an alternate idea in a moment and I'd love to see what you think!

 

[acv123]

@diamondseeker2006 @rockysalamander @quaddio @Niel @nala

What about this? It would require a slight modification to the head--getting rid of the swooped gallery rail basically. I wouldn't do the groove thats in this tiffany ring's band..



or I could just straighten out the bars of the gallery rail and remove the swooped detail at the bottom of the prongs...I don't like the width of the metal on the gallery here but the arrangement could work.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Here's a good example of an antique cushion that Caysie set. Again, you can have the style shank you want. It is the Giselle.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oh, I adore the groove in the shank after the stones! That's an authentic element as you can see from the antique Tiffany ring. You don't like that? I will say the groove in that ring is larger than the ones Caysie does, but I think it adds to the ring. I think she's done it on one or two of mine. I can see it on the Giselle I just posted.

 

[acv123]

Oh, I adore the groove in the shank after the stones! That's an authentic element as you can see from the antique Tiffany ring. You don't like that? (I will say the groove in that ring is larger than the ones Caysie does, but I think it adds to the ring. I think she's done it on one or two of mine.)

The more I look at it the more I do like it...helps transition from the channel set stones to the band I think..I know its a little hard to see from the pictures but do you like that head better with that band? The head looks to be a simple-ish tiffany style. But its got the same prong orientation as my cads and the channel sets of course.

 

[Acinom]

To my eyes the Tifanny looks a bit outdated and the head does not flow with the shank. I love the Giselle just posted by @diamondseeker2006 . It’s classic yet modern and there is a beautiful flow. The double prongs combine very well with the french cut sides

 

[rockysalamander]

I like parts of the TIffany, but I still feel it is not quite the balance I'd like. If you don't want double claws, then lets see what else we can do. If you straighten the prongs, rather than swoops, what if you added sharp upward Vs?

That adds some linear elements to the head.



I also really like these prongs and the gallery detail. This would have linear elements and the prong tips are quite nice if you like tabby ones.


https://www.langantiques.com/vintag...tinum-diamond-engagement-ring-gia-k-vvs2.html

You could also make the tips pointier, but arranged like double claws? So, you'd have to imagine rotating these into the 4-corners. If you keep the groove or something like that in the shank, than the groove shown on these repeat the design element.



As an alternative to a innie groove, you could make an outre groove below the fencies with lines or rows of milgrain that echo the prong grooves like the above.



Or, this rings has really pretty tabby prongs.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The more I look at it the more I do like it...helps transition from the channel set stones to the band I think..I know its a little hard to see from the pictures but do you like that head better with that band? The head looks to be a simple-ish tiffany style. But its got the same prong orientation as my cads and the channel sets of course.

No, I don't like the head of the Tiffany ring at all for a cushion. I don't like that prong orientation for a cushion.

I really think you should look at inspiration rings with a cushion shaped center stone. I am looking to see if I see some with this prong orientation.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Just showing you some examples of antique cushions that don't have the prongs in the 4 corners. I am not necessarily recommending them, I'm just giving them so you can be sure what you like best. Most have single or double prongs at the four corners or else 8 prongs that include the corners. I am okay with all of them except the last one.

8 prongs

Below is an antique cushion Tifffany ring. This 6 prong orientation is usually used on rounds and just makes the stone look like a round that is out-of-round.

 

[acv123]

Just showing you some examples of antique cushions that don't have the prongs in the 4 corners. I am not necessarily recommending them, I'm just giving them so you can be sure what you like best. Most have single or double prongs at the four corners or else 8 prongs that include the corners. I am okay with all of them except the last one.

8 prongs

Below is an antique cushion Tifffany ring. This 6 prong orientation is usually used on rounds and just makes the stone look like a round that is out-of-round.

Thank you for all of these! that top one has been one of my favorites but I don't think theres a way to get more prongs.. what do you think about this? With 6 prongs instead of 8 and no pave on the gallery rail and no split prong. I think if I straighten out the gallery rail on my render and somehow find a way to make the band/shoulders less linear and straight (more flowy) that could resolve some of the issue people are seeing.

 

[KiloSierra]

I like the first photo above that DS posted. It’s similar to the mock up from earlier.

Caysie can’t modify the 6 to 8?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thank you for all of these! that top one has been one of my favorites but I don't think theres a way to get more prongs.. what do you think about this? With 6 prongs instead of 8 and no pave on the gallery rail and no split prong. I think if I straighten out the gallery rail on my render and somehow find a way to make the band/shoulders less linear and straight (more flowy) that could resolve some of the issue people are seeing.

I love everything about this ring. Are you against 8 prongs because of the size of your diamond? Is there some reason you don't like 4 double prongs in the corners? I'm just not clear on why you want a prong design for a round.

 

[acv123]

I love everything about this ring. Are you against 8 prongs because of the size of your diamond? Is there some reason you don't like 4 double prongs in the corners? I'm just not clear on why you want a prong design for a round.

I’m not against 8 prongs (that’s what I originally wanted) but CVB said it has to be 3 because they are aligned with the crown facets of my stone, I don’t think it’s big enough for 8. I guess I’m not totally against split prongs in the 4 corners, I guess I just thought split prongs are kinda busy. Do you think it’s possible to adjust my setting to make it flow similar to the split prong ring but with single prongs? Here they are side by side.. they aren’t THAT different but besides the obvious (millgrain, straight gallery rail) I can’t put my finger on what’s different. Is it the wider donut?

 

[LLJsmom]

Prongs at 12 and 6 fight the shape of the cushion. That is the biggest visual issue. Two prongs spaced out across the top, not at the corners, makes the stone look smaller. Just IMHO.

 

[rockysalamander]

I really love this newer inspiration. Yes, it is quite close to your CAD, but it think it resolves to me the visual disconnect to *my* eye. I think there are too many prongs for your stone and I'd personally eliminate, at least, the prongs at 12 and 6. I really like the shoulder and the V detail echos the gallery.

I think these could be cousin rings in many ways, but there are subtle differnce that make me prefer the LEFT. I scaled these two to the be same ring size and added some lines. I find this helps me see where setting are the same or different. Starting from the bottom of the head, the donut on the left is about 1.5 time wider (it is also a bigger stone). That gives more room for the lower swoop to be curved (LEFT) and not V-shaped at the bottom (CAD) and the wider/flatter straight rail (LEFT). The rail is finished to have a flat face (LEFT), not be curved (CAD). The prongs and the lower swoop are two "part" on the LEFT, while Caysie has them flowing as a single piece of metal (CAD) of uniform width. The LEFT start thin out of the swoop and then are fat at the girdle. The prong tip can still be single, even with the prong itself having the overall shape and groove like the LEFT.

The cutout in the shoulder extends longer along the shank. The circle is just support and kinda aesthetic. From the side, the shoulder has two small rounds and a tiny V cutout. I think that ties it better to the gallery and I'd keep those, but replace the graduated rounds with the frenchies.

 

[acv123]

I really love this newer inspiration. Yes, it is quite close to your CAD, but it think it resolves to me the visual disconnect to *my* eye. I think there are too many prongs for your stone and I'd personally eliminate, at least, the prongs at 12 and 6. I really like the shoulder and the V detail echos the gallery.

I think these could be cousin rings in many ways, but there are subtle differnce that make me prefer the LEFT. I scaled these two to the be same ring size and added some lines. I find this helps me see where setting are the same or different. Starting from the bottom of the head, the donut on the left is about 1.5 time wider (it is also a bigger stone). That gives more room for the lower swoop to be curved (LEFT) and not V-shaped at the bottom (CAD) and the wider/flatter straight rail (LEFT). The rail is finished to have a flat face (LEFT), not be curved (CAD). The prongs and the lower swoop are two "part" on the LEFT, while Caysie has them flowing as a single piece of metal (CAD) of uniform width. The LEFT start thin out of the swoop and then are fat at the girdle. The prong tip can still be single, even with the prong itself having the overall shape and groove like the LEFT.

The cutout in the shoulder extends longer along the shank. The circle is just support and kinda aesthetic. From the side, the shoulder has two small rounds and a tiny V cutout. I think that ties it better to the gallery and I'd keep those, but replace the graduated rounds with the frenchies.

hi @rockysalamander thank you so much for putting this together--this really helps visualize the differences. Making inquiries about straightening the rail/prong bar. I don't think the donut can be made wider because the side stones have been ordered. The area on the prongs where they meet the base will be more rounded. I'll report back soon!