Engagement ring design :)

[LetLoveRule]

Thank you for helping me on my journey so far
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/buying-my-first-diamond.242104/

This is my diamond: mixed/radiant cut, 1.09ct/J/VVS1/XX/XX/NF/6.53*5.40
https://www.jamesallen.com/loose-diamonds/radiant-cut/1.09-carat-j-color-vvs1-clarity-sku-4354317

I have been looking for the perfect ring design to accompany this beautiful diamond. After weeks of looking at rings online and at local jewellers, I've come up with this so far:


Few things I'm not sure about yet:
1. The basket - without a 'bar' or under rail looks good (like the second design above) but I don't know if it's secure enough? The first design looks good but the under rail needs to be thinner and placed higher as I would like to be able to see the culet.

2. I'm not sure how to integrate the princess cut in the bridge other than the ring from above, but don't know if I like the 'tube' that is visible in this view:


3. Alistair emailed the pointed tips on the claws that he uses on his designs but I'm not sure that suits my ring. I haven't looked at other options for radiants yet.


4. As I haven't found a photo of the exact design I want, I'm wondering if I should get a CAD made (not sure which jeweller around here does that) to make sure I love the design before having it made. I don't know if it's possible to change anything before the diamonds are set, if it is, I guess a CAD is not necessary. I have been told that the photos I've found are cast made, whereas I want a handmade ring. I have not done this before, so I don't know the differences in the finalised ring. I do know I want a one of a kind ring, just like my diamond!

Thoughts welcome

 

[LetLoveRule]

This will be the wedding ring I don't want it to sit flush as I want the center diamond to be fully visible, so the band will need to be a bit more curved (have a bigger curve? you know what I mean ).

 

[sledge]

I noticed your spelling of "finalised" and assume you are based outside the USA. Does the locatuon of the jeweler you utilize for the band matter? If so, where are you located so we can make local recoomendations.

Also, are you aware there will likely be a significant cost difference between hand made and cast custom pieces? Are you okay with this and does your budget support it?

FYI the 3D tube with the princess cut is odd. I've seen them without that and agree it's not my preference either.

 

[LetLoveRule]

I noticed your spelling of "finalised" and assume you are based outside the USA. Does the locatuon of the jeweler you utilize for the band matter? If so, where are you located so we can make local recoomendations.

Also, are you aware there will likely be a significant cost difference between hand made and cast custom pieces? Are you okay with this and does your budget support it?

FYI the 3D tube with the princess cut is odd. I've seen them without that and agree it's not my preference either.

I'm located in Australia but English is not my first language. As I've only been here a few years, you might see me use Australian/British/American English

Yes, I'm aware of that and I've received only quotes for handmade rings from local jewellers before I was pointed in the direction of Alistair Kelsey, who's located fairly close by. I would love to have my rings made by him but he's a bit more expensive (others have quoted 2/3 of his quote). I don't know the price difference if it would be cast rather than handmade, but I'm fine with the quotes for handmade rings.

Do you happen to have photos of other ways to integrate the princess cut? I like the front view but not the side view.

 

[rockysalamander]

I think the princess diamond would look better if the prongs for the main stone contained it. Rather than bezel set it, it could be prong set. The total setting height is the same as the inspo ring, but I like the prongs swooping down to include the side-stone. The second version adds a bridge to be sure the sharp bottom of the prongs don't hit your finger. The deep V of the first would only work with a wedding band if it was narrower than the shank so it does not eat your wedding band.

.



Here the prongs meet at the top of the princess so it flows better than the princess under the head of the stone. If you want that princess bezeled, the straight V of the prongs in the below design work better than the curved prongs.



Throwing out a totally diferent look. You just want to make sure the hidden stone does not stick out beyond the shoulders. This shows a round, but a trillion would also look cool.

 

[LetLoveRule]

I think the princess diamond would look better if the prongs for the main stone contained it. Rather than bezel set it, it could be prong set. The total setting height is the same as the inspo ring, but I like the prongs swooping down to include the side-stone. The second version adds a bridge to be sure the sharp bottom of the prongs don't hit your finger. The deep V of the first would only work with a wedding band if it was narrower than the shank so it does not eat your wedding band.

.



Here the prongs meet at the top of the princess so it flows better than the princess under the head of the stone. If you want that princess bezeled, the straight V of the prongs in the below design work better than the curved prongs.



Throwing out a totally diferent look. You just want to make sure the hidden stone does not stick out beyond the shoulders. This shows a round, but a trillion would also look cool.

Thank you for the suggestions I like the second one but think I prefer the bezel. Do you have more views of the third one?

Ooooh I like the fourth one too! Very different but classy with the claws shaped like the bottom of the diamond and placed close to the diamond, it feels more secure than the basket that leaves a lot of room like the rings from my first post (if that makes sense?). Although I like the rounded baskets from the examples, with the amount of room it leaves, I feel like a under rail is needed.

The wedding band won't sit flush, just the outer edges of the engagement ring will sit next to the wedding band (see photo from my second post), so I'm not worried if the bridge is a little wider than the band but it does have to look 'streamlined'.

 

[rockysalamander]

I can't find any other images of #3. I think its Scott Kay.

 

[LetLoveRule]

I've been looking at different options for the under rail and found this ring last night


Photoshopped it a little bit to this


It's not perfect as I don't know if the princess cut will fit like that. It also leaves no view of the culet but it did bring some ideas that I can work with

Plus where the band reaches the center stone is a bit messy with the band "multiplying" into 3 strands (don't know how else to explain it.. )

 

[sledge]

I really like the side profile you found/modified last night.

Here's a thought, could you move the whole thing up a bit so that the cutlet of the main diamond forms the princess cut? An optical illusion of sorts.

My chicken scratch...

 

[sledge]

Saw this just a second ago. While not identical to what I mentioned above, you can see how the cutlet is being used in a similar fashion.

 

[LetLoveRule]

I really like the side profile you found/modified last night.

Here's a thought, could you move the whole thing up a bit so that the cutlet of the main diamond forms the princess cut? An optical illusion of sorts.

My chicken scratch...

That's a great idea! I want the princess cut though but that would be an option for the shank maybe? That way the culet would be visible from the side? I'll try and Photoshop it after work. I like to visualise it

 

[LetLoveRule]

Before I saw the photo of the curved under rail, I found a less heavy version of the second design I found. The basket doesn't leave as much room like the other does. I really like the curved under rail though, but it's good to visualise what it could look like. A combination of the two would be good.

 

[LetLoveRule]

Saw this just a second ago. While not identical to what I mentioned above, you can see how the cutlet is being used in a similar fashion.

That's so funny, I actually saved a very similar design from WF to my phone last night too. I really like that design but somehow want to incorporate the princess cut in there. As my diamond is rectangle, there will be more room on the long side (where the shank is). I'll try and find a way to use this design and have the culet visible from the side rather than profile.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

That's so funny, I actually saved a very similar design from WF to my phone last night too. I really like that design but somehow want to incorporate the princess cut in there. As my diamond is rectangle, there will be more room on the long side (where the shank is). I'll try and find a way to use this design and have the culet visible from the side rather than profile.

That one has 6 prongs and would just not be the right design to adapt. Stick with what you were doing, which was looking at 4 prong settings. You will see the N-S ends of the ring more than the E-W sides, so I would stick with having the princess cuts on the two ends.

Ritani is a good site to get ideas, because they show what radiants look like in their settings. You have to hover your cursor over each one to get a profile view, but it does help, I think.

https://www.ritani.com/engagement-rings/solitaire?sortField=style_rank&sortOrder=asc&page=1&from_days_to_build=0&to_days_to_build=&search[tags]=Classic|Solitaire&search[shape]=RA&search[metal]=&from_minimum_total_carat_weight_as_float=0.0&to_minimum_total_carat_weight_as_float=1.17&from_price=245&to_price=8240&sorting=Best+sellers

 

[LetLoveRule]

That one has 6 prongs and would just not be the right design to adapt. Stick with what you were doing, which was looking at 4 prong settings. You will see the N-S ends of the ring more than the E-W sides, so I would stick with having the princess cuts on the two ends.

Ritani is a good site to get ideas, because they show what radiants look like in their settings. You have to hover your cursor over each one to get a profile view, but it does help, I think.

https://www.ritani.com/engagement-rings/solitaire?sortField=style_rank&sortOrder=asc&page=1&from_days_to_build=0&to_days_to_build=&search[tags]=Classic|Solitaire&search[shape]=RA&search[metal]=&from_minimum_total_carat_weight_as_float=0.0&to_minimum_total_carat_weight_as_float=1.17&from_price=245&to_price=8240&sorting=Best+sellers

Yes, definitely 4 prongs for my diamond. I'm imagining the middle prong from the photo to not have a claw but just the look of that curved under rail. I think it should be possible to have that under rail on all four sides (without a split shank) and have a princess cut on N & S. I'll check Ritani and play around with some ideas later today and upload them here.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Just make sure you have good access to cleaning the pavilion, so don't make the sides hard to access. Step cuts need to be kept clean, and they have to be brushed on the pavilions.

 

[LetLoveRule]

I've played around a little bit with designs, didn't have much time so will continue tomorrow

Original:


Photoshopped:

 

[LetLoveRule]

Just make sure you have good access to cleaning the pavilion, so don't make the sides hard to access. Step cuts need to be kept clean, and they have to be brushed on the pavilions.

Thanks for the tip. I'm trying to keep West and East accessible as North and South will be blocked by the princess cut. Not sure if the culet will be accessible from the bottom.

 

[rockysalamander]

Thanks for the tip. I'm trying to keep West and East accessible as North and South will be blocked by the princess cut. Not sure if the culet will be accessible from the bottom.

Rather than the princess only in the gallery, why not add princess cuts to the shoulders? That would provide much better flow and work with the angles/point...or just 1 or 3 at the top of the shoulder and then blend into rounds. Like the shank on this Tacori. This shows ECs, but you could have princess cuts at the top and then blend into rounds.

https://www.since1910.com/item.aspx?key=tacori-35pr-princess-cut--diamond-engagement-ring



Or the reverse crescent.
https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...erse-crescent-graduated-for-princess-2980.htm

The double shank make these look thicker than they would be if you used the more typical single shank.

 

[sledge]

Look at the side view below and you will see where the main shank is terminating BELOW the diamond. I drew an orange line to highlight that point.

Now go the lower right view and look at that rendering. The shank cannot extend up as high as what is currently shown. It would terminate more in line with the red lines I drew, so that it matches up with the orange line (same position as the other view).

 

[LetLoveRule]

Look at the side view below and you will see where the main shank is terminating BELOW the diamond. I drew an orange line to highlight that point.

Now go the lower right view and look at that rendering. The shank cannot extend up as high as what is currently shown. It would terminate more in line with the red lines I drew, so that it matches up with the orange line (same position as the other view).

Thanks for pointing that out, I've noticed that too. The pics show what I had in mind, so I thought I'd upload it here. I don't think I can have both the princess cut plus the culet visible from the side unless I raise the whole basket which kind of defeats the purpose.

I have a few more ideas that I'll work on later and upload again (don't have them on my phone).

 

[LetLoveRule]

Rather than the princess only in the gallery, why not add princess cuts to the shoulders? That would provide much better flow and work with the angles/point...or just 1 or 3 at the top of the shoulder and then blend into rounds. Like the shank on this Tacori. This shows ECs, but you could have princess cuts at the top and then blend into rounds.

https://www.since1910.com/item.aspx?key=tacori-35pr-princess-cut--diamond-engagement-ring



Or the reverse crescent.
https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...erse-crescent-graduated-for-princess-2980.htm

The double shank make these look thicker than they would be if you used the more typical single shank.

Thanks for the suggestions how would princess blend into round? With prongs around the rounds to make it look like square/princess?

 

[rockysalamander]

The settings you been posting are bead set, not prong set. In any case, you just put a few of the squares at the top (I like odd numbers) and then finish with rounds. My idea was like this, but with princess at the top and followed by rounds.

 

[LetLoveRule]

The settings you been posting are bead set, not prong set. In any case, you just put a few of the squares at the top (I like odd numbers) and then finish with rounds. My idea was like this, but with princess at the top and followed by rounds.

You reckon that the princess cut on N & S is going to flow better with 2 more princess cut in the band like your photo? That's an idea that I haven't thought of. And yes, I do like the round shape visibility with the bead set

 

[LetLoveRule]

Okay, here's a few options! Opinions?

1A Band into under rail > under rail W & E
1B Band into under rail > no under rail W & E

2A Princess cut in bridge > under rail W & E
2B Princess cut in bridge > no under rail W & E

3A Princess cut below under rail > under rail W & E
3B Princess cut below under rail > no under rail W & E

4 Princess cut in bridge > no under rail



(keep in mind that my diamond is rectangle instead of round like the designs)


PS don't mind my mad Photoshop skills

 

[yssie]

Your PS skills are pretty snazzy!

I have to be honest, I’m really liking side profile (1) and E/W view (A). The design elements themselves are lovely, curvy, and feminine, and they flow into adjacent design elements perfectly - there’s no disjointedness at all. That is... every design element is explicable and “a natural progression” of proximal design elements...

Edit - I do like AK’s prongs! They’re perfectly shaped and sized, and IMO pointed claw prongs would work well with the flowy designs you’re looking at. I default to tab prongs for step cuts and claws for (non-princess) brilliants anyway, though

 

[LetLoveRule]

Your PS skills are pretty snazzy!

I have to be honest, I’m really liking side profile (1) and E/W view (A). The design elements themselves are lovely, curvy, and feminine, and they flow into adjacent design elements perfectly - there’s no disjointedness at all. That is... every design element is explicable and “a natural progression” of proximal design elements...

Edit - I do like AK’s prongs! They’re perfectly shaped and sized, and IMO pointed claw prongs would work well with the flowy designs you’re looking at. I default to tab prongs for step cuts and claws for (non-princess) brilliants anyway, though

A looks a little bit like a flower just added that my diamond is rectangle, so the shape will be a different but I think it still gives a good visual.

Yes, the pointy claws would work well with these design. In the designs from my first post it probably would have looked different.
Funny how the new designs are very different from what I started with

 

[LetLoveRule]

Also, imagine the under rail from 2 to be in line with the band (higher than the above design) so it will flow better. The under rail can be a different width as well.

 

[sledge]

Combo 1A looks sexy.

 

[Lykame]

I like 1A and 3A the most. They look really nice.

What about having TWO princess cuts from the side? Instead of blocking the cutlet, you could put one on either side of the cutlet in the gaps that are there from the cathedral setting itself? Because those are already diamond (princess cut) shaped. Unfortunately I cannot mimic a picture for you especially from my phone but you would get the best of all worlds then? Cutlet from front, side AND the princess cuts?

Just a thought.