Deco''s EARRING Poll (Take 2)

[decodelighted]

Thanks for voting!!! Its a real nail biter ... Totals are close, huh? Sorry I haven''t been able to respond for a couple of days ... Just have my phone with me on a quick holiday trip ... But I''ve been keeping up with the comments and really appreciate everone''s suggestions. Hope to get to Cartier this week and then get this project in motion.... Assuming I''m still as smitten afterwards.

Gosh Ilm a bad texter .. This has taken forever to type on my phone ... LOL

 

[decodelighted]

Thanks for voting!!! Its a real nail biter ... Totals are close, huh? Sorry I haven''t been able to respond for a couple of days ... Just have my phone with me on a quick holiday trip ... But I''ve been keeping up with the comments and really appreciate everone''s suggestions. Hope to get to Cartier this week and then get this project in motion.... Assuming I''m still as smitten afterwards.

Gosh Ilm a bad texter .. This has taken forever to type on my phone ... LOL

 

[decodelighted]

Bad news .... the Cartier store in VA didn''t carry the inspiration earrings. Its either day trip into NYC or move forward w/o that info. Just got back from a week away from my computer ... have a lot to think about. Thanks again for all the input & suggestions!

Will keep y''all posted!

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/9/2009 9:07:03 PM
Author: decodelighted
Bad news .... the Cartier store in VA didn''t carry the inspiration earrings. Its either day trip into NYC or move forward w/o that info. Just got back from a week away from my computer ... have a lot to think about. Thanks again for all the input & suggestions!

Will keep y''all posted!

Day trip to NYC, what''s not to love? Go and take a lookie!

 

[decodelighted]

I swear I didn''t wait until #3 was in the lead so I could say I followed the majority opinion ... but that''s what''s happened!

After consulting with Sally about the "semi-mount"-only idea I realized her plan would be to carve out very precise areas for the stones. The specificity of measurements required re: absent stones & then getting the eventual setting right just seemed fraught with complications that I couldn''t be sure were worth the risk/$$ considering the size of the stones & the nature of the project.

And I''ve decided not to pursue up-close-and-personal examination of the inspiration earrings. My paper fakies will have to do. Is it wrong to be wearing them around town? My rationale: I fell in love with the shape & scale of the original earrings from a blurry distant shot. Had no idea they were any particular brand or any particular flavor of fineness. I''d kind of like whatever I have created to be the first (and possibly only) physical manifestation of the earrings I experience -- to avoid comparison & irrational nitpicking. If the earrings were some out-there crazy shape or size I might feel differently & the pros of a branded try-on session might outweigh the cons ... but especially because I own such a similar pair *already* and have *that* general frame of reference I''m okay with this dice roll.

Yay!

THANK YOU PALS & VOTERS & FELLOW BLING-HOUNDS!!!!!!!!

 

[risingsun]

^^^Did you know that there is a matching necklace

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/11/2009 11:15:04 PM
Author: risingsun
^^^Did you know that there is a matching necklace

Yeppers ... I wrote you back over here earlier today. Are your own blingy senses tingling towards a little a la carte Cartier?

 

[risingsun]

Date: 7/12/2009 12:04:46 AM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 7/11/2009 11:15:04 PM
Author: risingsun
^^^Did you know that there is a matching necklace

Yeppers ... I wrote you back over here earlier today. Are your own blingy senses tingling towards a little a la carte Cartier?

LOL...I read your reply

I just had my wedding rings reset*, so the answer is no way, no how

I'm satisfied with my Trinity ring. Of course, some matching earrings couldn't hurt

You live in VA? Me, too. We're neighbors!

*look for pics in SMTR on Monday...

 

[TravelingGal]

Just had to come back with this...congrats on the decision, and can''t wait to see the results!

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/15/2009 12:44:22 AM
Author: TravelingGal
Just had to come back with this...congrats on the decision, and can''t wait to see the results!

Thanks TG! Meeeee toooo.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/12/2009 1:06:50 AM
Author: risingsun
You live in VA? Me, too. We''re neighbors!

Not since 1992 ... but before that we *were* neighbors!?! Maybe? But most of my family is still there so I visit often. Was just passing through on vacation & decided to pass on directly through the Cartier store at Tysons Galleria. Heh. Love the state that''s for Lovers!

 

[Gypsy]

Can''t wait to see them! YAY!

 

[decodelighted]

********* QUICK UPDATE & A QUESTION ********

Something''s gotta give. The earrings cannot, by any vendor, be *exactly* like the inspiration earrings. Its proving to be a bit of a hiccup in my grand plans here. I think I keep comparing everything to the original & wondering if I''ll like an alternative version as much. The originals are NOT an option -- too expensive & too expensive for what they are. IMHO.

I''ve been presented with a very lovely option that I like even *more* than the inspiration earrings in some ways. (More architectural, less flowery ... a bit more interesting/exotic maybe) But I keep worrying that some elusive, ephemeral magic in my reaction to the originals -- via photograph mind you -- will be lacking once the new design is executed.

A) Am I crazy?
B) Do I have to just keep perspective about this?
C) Is it a sign that nothing will match my expectations & I should abandon this project & select a piece I can see/touch/feel myself for my b-day/anny gift.
D) Am I overreacting and overthinking and I will most probably ADORE the final product - as it will be *mine* and on *my* ears as opposed to in a magazine on some actress.

I''ve attached the designer''s sketch of my favorite option, a photo of the inspiration earrings, and a comparison with both versions scaled down to a more realistic size & desaturated so there''s a more fair comparison of shapes etc w/o distraction.

Very much would like Pscopers thoughts on this. Appreciate any words of advice & relevant personal stories!

 

[chrono]

Deco,
I understand the copyright issue but this one is very different. It feels very stuctured and not feminine at all. Is this the effect you are looking for?

 

[tyty333]

I'm voting D (for deco . You're over analyzing it.

I sort of like the new style better too. My only concern is that the metal around the diamonds have some texture to it (not flat and shiny) or
I think it might start looking more modern then feminine. If you look at the metal between the stones (not on the outside) there is texture
there (probably to hold the stones in but I like that better than flat shiny metal). I hope that makes sense.

EDIT - I looked at the original picture again. I think what I like is it looks like the diamonds were each mounted in 4 seperate roundish
metal disks then the 4 disked were soldered together. It looks like it wasnt one piece of gold to start with
even though it probably was. To me, that is part of the design that I would not want to lose.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/19/2009 4:37:22 PM
Author: Chrono
Deco,
I understand the copyright issue but this one is very different. It feels very stuctured and not feminine at all. Is this the effect you are looking for?

Thanks Chrono ... I think I see what you mean. Maybe that''s what I''m trying to say with "architectural" vs "flowery". The thing I was drawn to most with the inspiration earrings was scale & subtle, asymmetric medieval cross shape. Didn''t know about the more flowery detail until I found the Cartier close-up. Like chicken or egg ... if I''d seen it up close in a case first, not sure I would have picked it out. Seeing it *on someone* from a distance in a photo, I was knocked out. So I guess I just don''t know *which* effect I''m looking for. The far away view? The close up view? The non-me feminine flowery thing? Or the more-me exotic architectural other I''ve never seen from a far away view in a picture to know if IT would knock me out toooooo. Gah.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/19/2009 4:54:17 PM
Author: tyty333
I'm voting D (for deco . You're over analyzing it. I sort of like the new style better too. My only concern is that the metal around the diamonds have some texture to it (not flat and shiny) or I think it might start looking more modern then feminine. If you look at the metal between the stones (not on the outside) there is texture there (probably to hold the stones in but I like that better than flat shiny metal). I hope that makes sense.

EDIT - I looked at the original picture again. I think what I like is it looks like the diamonds were each mounted in 4 seperate roundish metal disks then the 4 disked were soldered together. It looks like it wasnt one piece of gold to start with even though it probably was. To me, that is part of the design that I would not want to lose.

Its interesting that you say that ... because in the designer's first round sketches she had separated the sections a bit and added plenty of texture. I couldn't love it. Started looking too "clovery" and ornate. BUT ... I do keep wondering about the idea I previously rejected of just bezel setting four stones & soldering them into that medieval cross pattern. A four stone bezel cluster (no arches, no flower petal, no balls, just plain bezeled stones smooched together -- where from far away it would have a vague diamond shape similar to how this picture looks far away. My local jewelry designer was game for that plan - and in the ballpark financially. How much detail is too much detail. Seems like I have to pick "Overly Stripped Down" or "Overly Ornate". Gah x 2.

 

[vintagecushion]

Oh! I lusted! after those earrings too! That is, until I tried them on in Cartier. Don't get me wrong, they were LOVELY but my first thought was that Jennifer Garner must have some huge earlobes because the earrings looked giant on me and lost all the subtle, romantic look that appealed in the first place.

Deco, here's an idea. These earrings are shaped like lotuses but they too remind me of medieval designs. How about looking through a design pattern book (think the dover series) and trying to find shapes in piece of medieval tile or architectural element to adapt into earrings? This would pose no copyright issues and in one very real sense stay close to the feeling of the original.

The drawing that you received are also beautiful but looks a little clover-y.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/19/2009 5:55:38 PM
Author: vintagecushion
Oh! I lusted! after those earrings too! That is, until I tried them on in Cartier. Don''t get me wrong, they were LOVELY but my first thought was that Jennifer Garner must have some huge earlobes because the earrings looked giant on me and lost all the subtle, romantic look that appealed in the first place.

WOW! You figured out they were Cartier too?!!! The Instyle I saw didn''t list it as such - just as "her own". It took some sleuthing! I''m happy to hear I wasn''t the only bling stalker ... hee! Sooooo ... you tried them on at Cartier! But they were too big. I''m 5'' 9'' and biiiiggg boned (chubs) -- pretty sure I have fat earlobes to boot. Am hoping something a similar scale as the originals will work on my ears. Are you petite, average, plus sized? Thin lobes? Do tell!!! Were they LOVE E LY??? Was it the Manhattan store? Was the rose gold a nice shade? Oh inquiring minds!

Deco, here''s an idea. These earrings are shaped like lotuses but they too remind me of medieval designs. How about looking through a design pattern book (think the dover series) and trying to find shapes in piece of medieval tile or architectural element to adapt into earrings? This would pose no copyright issues and in one very real sense stay close to the feeling of the original. The drawing that you received are also beautiful but looks a little clover-y.

Good suggestion. And thanks for your honest take on the drawing. I''m still seeing a wee bit of "clover" too -- maybe its those curved sides, or the fact that the middle two stones are snuggled up against each other tightly enough. Maybe that could be refined somehow. Would you ever just "give up" and go for the four bezeled stones in that medieval formation?

 

[D&T]

Date: 7/19/2009 4:37:22 PM
Author: Chrono
Deco,
I understand the copyright issue but this one is very different. It feels very stuctured and not feminine at all. Is this the effect you are looking for?

Totally agree with Chrono here.
I really like the inspirational piece, and when I tried a ring on at the mall...love love love, and thought my custom piece would be the same, well it wasn't and I was very sad...it ended up a RHR (very expensive RHR) I hate to be an advocate, that if you want it to be the same thing, even though over priced, get it. If once you get it, and doesn't look right, you can still return correct?

 

[decodelighted]

What if I went an entirely different direction with the design ... back to my first love: Art Deco. Somewhat based on my wedding band design, picture below.

Maybe in *white gold*? The same medieval cross layout for the stones, but all four "points" would end like the tapered ends of my wedding band?

I will will will figure this out somehow. I''m a real "off the shelf" buyer & now I know why. This is HARD.

 

[decodelighted]

Oops, didn''t attach.

 

[vintagecushion]

Oh I''m so embarrassed because I''m really so not a celebrity stalker but I actually called the magazine to ask for the designer of the earrings. When they said Cartier I put it out of my mind because I knew it would be mega $$ and my thriftiness said no but one day I was in the store and thought ok, let''s see these things and honestly? it was not instant lust.

I would describe myself as fairly petite with medium earlobes (ok, that is so a sentence one can only write on PS). It wasn''t so much that the earrings were big, but that they looked sculptural rather than delicate. At 5'' 9" you could probably wear anything but I''ve seen Jennifer Garner in person and she is not only tall but has a kind of angularity that demands substantial pieces. She wears a Tank Americaine and it looks truly tiny on her, like a vintage watch. Keep in mind, though, I love delicate jewelry and for reference, I used to admire Cathy Waterman a lot before I got tired of seeing it on my friends all the time.

You are in the worst predicament! It sucks to fall in love with copyrighted design when it''s really expensive, not quite the scale one wants, or both! I did think about replicating it with a different kind of flower. Also, since you love art deco and lotus shapes you''re not going for the round look so I vote no on clover shapes. The bezel could work but you would lose the look of the beautiful rose gold extending past the diamonds unless you make the bezel thick and that would result in a completely different look.

So, just re-reading what I wrote, I sound seriously indecisive and I am but I blame my design background.

 

[hlmr]

Date: 7/19/2009 8:38:53 PM
Author: vintagecushion
Oh I''m so embarrassed because I''m really so not a celebrity stalker but I actually called the magazine to ask for the designer of the earrings. When they said Cartier I put it out of my mind because I knew it would be mega $$ and my thriftiness said no but one day I was in the store and thought ok, let''s see these things and honestly? it was not instant lust.

I would describe myself as fairly petite with medium earlobes (ok, that is so a sentence one can only write on PS). It wasn''t so much that the earrings were big, but that they looked sculptural rather than delicate. At 5'' 9'' you could probably wear anything but I''ve seen Jennifer Garner in person and she is not only tall but has a kind of angularity that demands substantial pieces. She wears a Tank Americaine and it looks truly tiny on her, like a vintage watch. Keep in mind, though, I love delicate jewelry and for reference, I used to admire Cathy Waterman a lot before I got tired of seeing it on my friends all the time.

You are in the worst predicament! It sucks to fall in love with copyrighted design when it''s really expensive, not quite the scale one wants, or both! I did think about replicating it with a different kind of flower. Also, since you love art deco and lotus shapes you''re not going for the round look so I vote no on clover shapes. The bezel could work but you would lose the look of the beautiful rose gold extending past the diamonds unless you make the bezel thick and that would result in a completely different look.

So, just re-reading what I wrote, I sound seriously indecisive and I am but I blame my design background.

See Deco! I told you your earlobes were cuter than hers.....

 

[hlmr]

Date: 7/19/2009 4:27:47 PM
Author: decodelighted
********* QUICK UPDATE & A QUESTION ********

I've been presented with a very lovely option that I like even *more* than the inspiration earrings in some ways.

(More architectural, less flowery ... a bit more interesting/exotic maybe)

But I keep worrying that some elusive, ephemeral magic in my reaction to the originals -- via photograph mind you -- will be lacking once the new design is executed. Don't worry!

A) Am I crazy? No
B) Do I have to just keep perspective about this? Yes
C) Is it a sign that nothing will match my expectations & I should abandon this project & select a piece I can see/touch/feel myself for my b-day/anny gift. No
D) Am I overreacting and overthinking and I will most probably ADORE the final product - as it will be *mine* and on *my* ears as opposed to in a magazine on some actress. Yes, Yes and Yes!!

 

[risingsun]

I want to say I like the new design, but I''m a little iffy

What would you think of a pair of hoop earrings that replicate the design of your beautiful wedding band? They don''t have to be heavy hoops, as I know that you have newishly pierced ears. If you want to stay with the original idea, maybe the designer can more closely follow the delicacy of the Cartier design. And, Deco, do not ask us to determine if you crazy

That is leaving yourself wide open for the motherlode of PS snarkdom

 

[Gypsy]

D for Deco overthinking. I love the sketch-- more than the original design actually. You are going to love them in person. Just do it. That''s the hard part of custom, you have to go on faith. I think if that''s Sally''s sketch they are going to beyond lovely. And I think you will be astounded with you open the box. At some point in custom you have to let go, trust your vendor and go on faith. You just have to. I don''t like the other direction as much, honestly, based on that band. I don''t think you will either.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/19/2009 9:02:30 PM
Author: Gypsy
D for Deco overthinking. I love the sketch-- more than the original design actually. You are going to love them in person. Just do it. That''s the hard part of custom, you have to go on faith. I think if that''s Sally''s sketch they are going to beyond lovely. And I think you will be astounded with you open the box. At some point in custom you have to let go, trust your vendor and go on faith. You just have to. I don''t like the other direction as much, honestly, based on that band. I don''t think you will either.

Thanks Gypsy -- your opinion means a lot to me. I know we share an "overthinking" gene or something. LOL!

And you have experience in custom that I lack.

When you talk about not liking "the other direction" & thinking I won''t like it -- do you mean the four bezeled stone grouping direction ... or the white gold Art Deco direction? Or both!

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 7/19/2009 8:38:53 PM
Author: vintagecushion
Oh I''m so embarrassed because I''m really so not a celebrity stalker but I actually called the magazine to ask for the designer of the earrings.

Don''t be embarrassed. You''re way more clever than I. I used to work at Vogue & figured if they *knew* who the designer was *surely* they would have used the opportunity to pimp them in the mag for cred with the brand. I''m surprised they didn''t!

You are in the worst predicament! It sucks to fall in love with copyrighted design when it''s really expensive, not quite the scale one wants, or both! I did think about replicating it with a different kind of flower. Also, since you love art deco and lotus shapes you''re not going for the round look so I vote no on clover shapes. The bezel could work but you would lose the look of the beautiful rose gold extending past the diamonds unless you make the bezel thick and that would result in a completely different look.

Lots of good points. Its been a while since I''ve been so thunderstruck by something. I''m wishing very hard for it to work out somehow & be awesome in execution. Hey, maybe it''ll end up being a smaller scale & you can pick a pair up too!

 

[decodelighted]

Hi Himr & Rising Sun ...

LOL re: the earlobe cuteness factor. I plead the fifth. Thanks for your feedback, Himr. Lots to think about!

And I know what you mean, Rising Sun. I feel a bit *iffy* too. Mostly happy w/it ... but a teensy bit iffy. I'm not really a hoop gal but that's a fun suggestion. Have been pondering octagonal bead-set mini-huggy-scale hoops *one day*. Saw a pair at Takishymaya back when they had a jewelry case -- went back to get more info & they were gone. Don't even know the designer. But I'm pretty sure I could sketch them from memory. Its not what I'm craving right now though ... *sigh*