Edwardian setting-all input welcome-thoughts & ideas?

[tlfiore]

Shoulders match, gallery not quite as cupping of stone.
http://www.beverleyk.com/vintage/r3010-r3010.html

Not at all what you pinned, but I thought were pretty and might work with your asesthetic.
http://www.beverleyk.com/vintage/r9655-a-d-d-cz-r9655-a-d-d-cz-r9655-a-d-d-cz.html
http://www.beverleyk.com/vintage/r9664-a-d-d-cz-r9664-a-d-d-cz-r9664-a-d-d-cz.html
http://www.beverleyk.com/floral-engagement-rings/r10841-r10841.html

@rockysalamander thanks again for helping out so much! I like the Beverly K settings. I especially like the ring cited in the first link. The shoulders, cuffs & shank are nearly identical to what I'm looking for. Wish I could see more of the head, basket and gallery. I've never liked high or cathedral like settings...they feel too youthful & bridal to me-smile. And I've explore bezel, hexagonal, etc settings 'cause I really love the low-set look, especially with OEC diamonds. I think the lower settings speak to the bespoke vintage OECs. Thanks! You are the best. I'll keep giving this some thought. All your help is really appreciated 'cause I have zero people to help with this IRL.

 

[tlfiore]

Oh...forgot to mention...I think I'm trying to steer away from overly blingy stuff because despite its beauty, it just doesn't seem to work for me.

 

[MollyMalone]

I imagine this is blingier than you like, but I thought you'd nevertheless get a kick out of seeing the Whitehouse Brothers' die-struck Daniela, the WB ring that's most similar to the ring in your first post that Isaiah Rose described as an estate ring (unlike "antique," there is no legal definition of "estate" so it can be a very elastic term):
https://www.whitehousebrothers.com/...13c2-487f-4f66-adee-a73e3bf136d8?category=all


Rats, the WB file for the first pic was HUGE, but my reduction of the size resulted in a loss of detail.

 

[Rfisher]

Something about the low & elegant profile, the simple & timeless design, the NSEW prongs, swooping shoulders, the tri-wires...something draws me to this setting design. I low the tri-prongs, which coordinate beautifully with the tri-wire shank. The prongs and the lowness of the head give the ring (almost) a bezel look but without totally containing the diamond. The setting seems authentic to the era, elegant, timeless ...it's got je'ne sai quo, IMHO!

Do folks know anything about this setting? Thanks in advance for any help!!

I LOVE this setting!
It is somewhat similar to the inspiration pic of Kroshka's ring I sent to DK for one of my rings last year.

( @Maisie, because I almost added this upcoming bit to your thread)
Because my stone was a totally different cut and shape of stone of the original, I felt confident asking DK to replicate this knowing full well I'd change certain aspects so the end result wouldn't be a direct "copy". First CAD I received was totally unsimiliar.

I would have my job (and less work for them) had I been one of the people he totally replicated CADs for. I wish!
And back to your statement, Tlfiore, about loving that the sides of basket "hug" the stone girdle like somewhat of a bezel - so do I.
I will add this cad shows the effect-

But it did NOT show up in real life - the shrinkage that is often discussed with cad to casting made it disappear. But it was redone and all is well.
Best wishes with your project!

 

[purplesilk]

Since you have already experienced the bad feeling of wasting a large amount of money, buy a cheap setting that appeals to you, wear it for a reasonable time and eventually go the custom route.
I think these are really interesting:
https://ivyandrose.com/products/eng...u-filigree-round-cushion-solitaire-14k-w-gold
https://ivyandrose.com/products/art...aire-semi-mount-filigree-round-edwardian-7534

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Thank you so much for taking the time out to reply to my post...and for giving things so much thought! Yes, I see what you are saying about the head's low profile and where the shank or band connects.

I imagine this is a relatively easy fix by raising the head and angling or sloping the shoulders a bit more, I suppose.

I do not mind a bit of a gap between any solitaire and my Eternity Band. I actually do not like when a beautiful solitaire stacks perfectly up with a band or other ring. That look is too matchy-match for me. But yes...I wouldn't want any band to rise halfway up the basket/head of the setting. That wouldn't be good.

BTW...the height of my eternity band, that is the rise from the top of my left ring finger to the top of the band is only 2.3 mm. And I'd have to remeasure the width again but I think the band is about 3.5 mm wide.

I value your input a lot. Do you mind sharing why you do not see this as a good match with my eternity band? I recognize this ring is very plain, not embellished, not engraved or etched. I guess I want something that's not too flashy or too much bling to wear with my eternity band (if/when I choose to wear them together).

Thanks in advance for your help. Also any design ideas you have about raising the head up and designing the shank/band to articulate a bit better (with anything) would be most welcome!!

Okay, your band is 2.3mm high, which means the shank of the engagement ring is going to need to be close to that height. If two rings have the same height off the finger, then one is not going to stick out from the sides farther than the other, which doesn't look good. My Vatche setting has the head so that the bottom of my diamond is set at or above 2mm, which is the approximate height of my wedding band. Therefore, the wedding band cannot cut into (rub) the prongs of my e-ring. You'd be fine with a thin shank (in width) that is as high as your wedding band.

 

[msop04]

As an aside, if I can have this ring custom-made (with modifications, if it is a proprietary design), I will do that if I must. Any help???

Unless you just want a true antique, I would definitely have this ring remade by DK, with all the changes you'd like. What he'll need is a lot of photos for the initial CAD... as many as you can find, especially showing different angles. After the initial CAD is done, you can go from there. He did a remake of an older style for my U-V faint brown OEC, and he pretty much got it right on the very first CAD bc I sent a ton of photos.

Here's the original (I photoshopped the center with my stone in the collage):


Non-photoshopped ring:



DK's CADs:


Finished ring:
n

 

[msop04]

Yikes! Sorry for the super huge photos...

 

[msop04]

This setting reminds me a bit of the "signature antique setting" the Ring Concierge has... however, it's not an original setting, as it's been copied from an antique style many times over. It is a really pretty style... understated and delicate with just enough bling.



RC's setting:
[URL='https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj8iKmpv4vdAhURw1kKHVS5A_oQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pinterest.com%2Fpin%2F349732727306264293%2F&psig=AOvVaw3r2BYeogz1LFe5-nBwK5v4&ust=1535399418799327'][/URL]

 

[diamondseeker2006]

@msop04 I love all these designs, too, but the problem is, she wants to wear it with a fairly large eternity that is 2.3mm high and around 3mm wide. These very low set ring designs are not going to work with a substantial wedding band like that. Everyone I have seen with these rings or even CVB similar solitaires wears them with thin, low set bands.

@tlfiore I am going to repost your photo from another thread that shows your band, if that's ok! I think it will help for people to see what band you want your ring to go with.

Well, the picture wouldn't transfer, so maybe you can post it. But here's the link:

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...rench-cut-diamonds-setting-semi-mount.242681/

 

[msop04]

@msop04 I love all these designs, too, but the problem is, she wants to wear it with a fairly large eternity that is 2.3mm high and around 3mm wide. These very low set ring designs are not going to work with a substantial wedding band like that. Everyone I have seen with these rings or even CVB similar solitaires wears them with thin, low set bands.

@tlfiore I am going to repost your photo from another thread that shows your band, if that's ok! I think it will help for people to see what band you want your ring to go with.

Well, the picture wouldn't transfer, so maybe you can post it. But here's the link:

https://www.pricescope.com/communit...rench-cut-diamonds-setting-semi-mount.242681/

Hmmmm.... yeah, that band's going to be a problem for that type setting.

Absolutely! Post away! If you copy and paste, it works better. Let's see if I can get it up here.

 

[msop04]

@diamondseeker2006, which band of mine (or photo) did you want me to post? The tri-wire?

 

[msop04]

Maybe these will help... Notice the height of the bands in relation to the ring they are stacked beside...

 

[msop04]

Here's another... see how the height is pretty much the same when you look at the sides?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

@msop04 I was just trying to show her band that she wants to wear with the proposed ring. But your pics show exactly the point I was trying to make, that the bands have to be low enough to not harm the e-ring prongs. Thanks for posting them!!! I don't think a dainty low set e-ring is going to work at all with a large eternity.

 

[msop04]

@msop04 I was just trying to show her band that she wants to wear with the proposed ring. But your pics show exactly the point I was trying to make, that the bands have to be low enough to not harm the e-ring prongs. Thanks for posting them!!! I don't think a dainty low set e-ring is going to work at all with a large eternity.

No, it will not.

I'm not sure if this has been asked, but would you (@tlfiore) consider moving that big band to the right hand to wear alone?

 

[Wewechew]

Unless you just want a true antique, I would definitely have this ring remade by DK, with all the changes you'd like. What he'll need is a lot of photos for the initial CAD... as many as you can find, especially showing different angles. After the initial CAD is done, you can go from there. He did a remake of an older style for my U-V faint brown OEC, and he pretty much got it right on the very first CAD bc I sent a ton of photos.

Here's the original (I photoshopped the center with my stone in the collage):


Non-photoshopped ring:



DK's CADs:


Finished ring:
n

You have one of my favorite collections

 

[msop04]

You have one of my favorite collections

Thank you very much!

 

[tlfiore]

@purplesilk...thanks so much for taking the time to troll for settings and post them! I've seen the Ivy & Rose settings...they are nice. And YES @Rfisher...your ring design is very similar to the Edwardian Ring I posted...thank you!

@diamondseeker2006 @msop04...I am so grateful for all the work you put into helping me and for all the links & photos! I was speechless when I jumped on PS today...thank you! You cannot imagine how helpful your thoughts and ideas have been 'cause as I've mentioned, I don't really have anyone to run this stuff by...

@msop04 David Klass nailed your project and your ring is gorgeous.

@diamondseeker2006 I totally get what you are saying now about the stacking or articulation of my big eternity band with the Edwardian piece. All the photos and links have been so helpful! I completely understand now. The visuals are so helpful for me.

Regarding the Ring Concierge...I have frequently visited her site and I LOVE the ring @msop cited. It IS practically identical to my Edwardian inspiration ring and I've ooohed and ahhhhed over the RC's photos of the ring (not recognizing it as a similar or identical setting as my inspiration ring)! I am so slow, I never realized the multiple rings on the RC's fingers are the exact same setting with OECs, cushion cuts, MRBs, etc.

One of the RC's photos shows the Edwardian (she calls it Antique) setting paired with a very substantial & thick half (or full) eternity band...so I DO totally get the look and the stacking now. I completely see the specifics of the shank/head settings on the solitaire and how changing those up will totally change the look of the Edwardian NSEW inspiration ring that I love.

And the Whitehouse Brothers setting is beautiful. I've also previously viewed THIS setting on WB! Thank you for linking this. I totally get how this type of shank and head will neatly articulate/stack with my Eternity Band.

As I think about things more and more, and I cannot thank everyone enough for this, I think it makes the most sense to go with a setting I really love, one that may not perfectly stack with my EB but look good enough, a ring I can wear with other wee bands I have, perhaps one I can wear with my big eternity band (or not). I think I should go with something that speaks to me as a "new" ring, not just settle for something so I can stack it with my eternity band.

I think continuing to try "matching" something with my eternity band is going to be a mistake. That's what initially brought me down the road with the CvB custom setting that didn't work out.

I think with such limited real-estate on my fingers, plus my discomfort with lots of bling, a stack for my EB may just not be doable. I'll change things up a bit (which was my initial thoughts with the CvB Casablanca Setting...that setting proved to be simply way too blingy for me). I can wear by eternity band alone, which is what I've done for a long time.

Ohhhh...just remembered I also have a wee 1.5 mm little platinum band I can use as a "spacer" with my Eternity Band and the Edwardian Ring...

A million thanks to everyone! Please keep all the thoughts and ideas, comments coming!!

 

[tlfiore]

Funny...I've always loved this Antique/Edwardian ring on RC. Didn't realize at all it is identical to the rings with Israel Rose. And please check this out...it's a full hipster look. I used to be hip but no more, no more.

No seriously...check out this photo with the Edwardian and other stuff. I don't think the Edwardian looks too bad with the huge eternity band. I totally see how it will sit (or not) with a substantial eternity.

Now the carat weight on this gal's solitaire diamond is much larger than mine and/or this ring shows a gorgeous cushion cut. But the eternity band is waaaay larger, too. Just a thought Me like!

 

[tlfiore]

And here's that same ring, which appears to be a rather hefty cushion cut with another massive eternity band and a spacer band (almost identical to the platinum 1.5 mm I own0. And as I look closely at the spacer, mine is rounded (not flat-ish) and DEFINITELY thinner.

 

[msop04]

As I think about things more and more, and I cannot thank everyone enough for this, [B][COLOR=#ff4d4d]I think it makes the most sense to go with a setting I really love[/COLOR][/B], one that may not perfectly stack with my EB but look good enough, [B][COLOR=#ff4d4d]a ring I can wear with other wee bands I have[/COLOR][/B], perhaps one I can wear with my big eternity band (or not). I think I should [B][COLOR=#ff4d4d]go with something that speaks to me as a "new" ring, not just settle for something so I can stack it with my eternity band.[/COLOR][/B]

[B][COLOR=#ff4d4d]I think continuing to try "matching" something with my eternity band is going to be a mistake.[/COLOR][/B] That's what initially brought me down the road with the CvB custom setting that didn't work out.

[SIZE=5]BINGO!!!![/SIZE]

This is exactly what I'd do if I were you... with the larger eternity by itself on the other hand.

 

[msop04]

@tlfiore, I don't have the real estate for thick bands or to stack much... which is one of the reasons why I love thinner shanks. If you love that antique style (like RC's), then I would have it made. I think it would look amazing!

 

[pearaffair]

@Matthews1127 you are a special lady! You have patiently followed my journey now for nearly two years. You have never passed judgment and you are always helpful and kind! I feel foolish about all my mishaps but...there are many worse things in life, for sure. Thank you!

Tlfiore, I just want to remind you: experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted. You’ve learned so much about jewellery and about yourself! It’s been a journey, for sure, but don’t discount yourself because we’re all human and sometimes you don’t know until you try.

 

[tlfiore]

@msop04 @pearaffair and everyone...THANK YOU!

 

[msop04]

@msop04 @pearaffair and everyone...THANK YOU!

No problem! Can't wait to see what you decide - I'm sure it will be fabulous!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Funny...I've always loved this Antique/Edwardian ring on RC. Didn't realize at all it is identical to the rings with Israel Rose. And please check this out...it's a full hipster look. I used to be hip but no more, no more.

No seriously...check out this photo with the Edwardian and other stuff. I don't think the Edwardian looks too bad with the huge eternity band. I totally see how it will sit (or not) with a substantial eternity.

Now the carat weight on this gal's solitaire diamond is much larger than mine and/or this ring shows a gorgeous cushion cut. But the eternity band is waaaay larger, too. Just a thought Me like!

It's hard to see at that angle how far that eternity sticks out compared to the e-ring. But my point is, if that person really wears the rings like that, the band is going to rub against the prongs of the e-ring and cut a dent into it over time. At the very least, the e-ring sides will be all scratched up. I am only telling you this so you don't make another mistake! I think that e-ringdesign made a little thicker is fabulous if you decide to wear it with thinner and lower bands.

 

[rockysalamander]

Loads of good ideas. But, looking at the RC ring and your ring, there really only need to be some tweaks to get it to have the flexibility to stack or not. But, you don't have to make that decision yet...if you go custom. If you want a stock ring, just take this as some ideas on the geometry to consider.

Just throwing out some ideas. If you liked a wide and simply shank like this Erika Winters, you would raise the head up and suck in the bottom of the gallery.



If you like wire under the head like the RC ring, you'd need to change the angle of the wire (blue) so that it did not scoop inward. You'd change the shoulder to a egg-shape, not scooped in. Then, fiddle with the angle of that wire.



in the BGD design, you'd flare the top of the shoulder to be wider than the prongs. Then, adjust the height of that flare. Again, suck in the bottom of the prongs and widen the bottom of the shank. The cupping gallery you like would be above that flare.



This EW setting shows a nice cupped prong and wider shoulder. The trick for a level band (level vertically) is that bottom under the finger is not too thin. The band won't be perfect level, but if that donut is well placed to ride on the rails of the wedding band...its not impossible.



This is easier to sort out if you go with a custom version, but I just wanted to show you that there are solutions to many of the common issues. It takes trading design elements. We can totally help you there!

 

[tlfiore]

@rockysalamander you are really something! Thank you for the design ideas. I am obviously not adept at custom diamond ring designs but way back somewhere in the beginning of this thread, I assumed if customized, the Edwardian Ring could be designed to stack relatively nicely with my Eternity Band...not totally flush...a look I really do not like at all...but aesthetically pleasing at least.

And all the above options are great. I'd say my favorite would be photo#4, followed by photo#1. I prefer a very integrated head/shank design (vs what looks like more of a change-out head). But the ring in your last photo is beautiful. So, the shank is more substantial AND it appears that the head is beautifully designed on/into a bottom donut of sorts...hard for me to see.

Thank you for the ideas! I appreciate you a whole lot!

 

[rockysalamander]

@rockysalamander you are really something! Thank you for the design ideas. I am obviously not adept at custom diamond ring designs but way back somewhere in the beginning of this thread, I assumed if customized, the Edwardian Ring could be designed to stack relatively nicely with my Eternity Band...not totally flush...a look I really do not like at all...but aesthetically pleasing at least.

And all the above options are great. I'd say my favorite would be photo#4, followed by photo#1. I prefer a very integrated head/shank design (vs what looks like more of a change-out head). But the ring in your last photo is beautiful. So, the shank is more substantial AND it appears that the head is beautifully designed on/into a bottom donut of sorts...hard for me to see.

Thank you for the ideas! I appreciate you a whole lot!

Happy to help. Just find things you like...that make you excited and that you love. That first ring you posted could be made to work with your wedding band. That might mean some changes to the under-structure, but if you have some flexibility in that...you'll get there. Make sure the designer you choose has the height of your ring and then see where the measurement fall. They will project the band in the CAD and you can see how they relate. Just note that#4 is very expensive due to the frenchies.

I love vintage rings, so I'm posting another of my favorite newly designed vintage settings.
https://erstwhilejewelry.com/collections/by-erstwhile-engagement-rings/products/prism-shifter

In a ring like this, you'd want the girdles of your ring to float over the shank and raise the head to avoid contact with the prongs. Might still benefit from a tiny spacer that becomes the sacrificial lamb.