Graduated Five Stone Votes....

[Gypsy]

This is going to be a slow project. I'm going to be buying the stones in pairs (then the center) and then getting them set. But before I do that... I do need to know what size stones I'm looking for! So, thanks to our own StoneCold's generosity with his time I have a CAD image of the various combinations under consideration.


Please vote on the one you like the best. Thank you! Layla

Here's the picture. I've numbered the rings so that you can track them through the various views.

1. ..20 .30 .50 .30 .20

2. .20 .30 .40 .30 .20

3. .15 .30 .45 .30 .15

4. .15 .25 .40 .25 .15

 

[elrohwen]

I like #4 a lot, but I can''t quite put my finger on why.

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 12/11/2009 11:58:28 AM
Author: elrohwen
I like #4 a lot, but I can''t quite put my finger on why.

I think it has the nicest gradation while still looking like a band, instead of a five stone engagement ring. It''s the way I''m leaning too. But I did want more carat weight (size whore over here).

 

[Kismet]

I like the proportions on 4 the best.

 

[Gypsy]

(Stonecold is very good at this

)

 

[stone-cold11]

Actually, got the numbering wrong. :p

My bad, didn''t say it clearly.
front to back, bottom to top, and left to right arrangement.

0.15/0.25/0.40, 0.15/0.30/0.45, 0.20/0.30/0.40. 0.20/0.30/0.50

 

[Gypsy]

So, which one (head on view) is the one I''ve numbered as four?

 

[stone-cold11]

There are three views, perspective, top and right. The number for the top is correct. The top view meant that it is viewed from the top of the perspective view, and the right view meant that it is viewed from the right side. So both the perspective and right view are in the opposite order.

The number 4 for the top view is the 0.15/0.25/0.40/0.25/0.15 set which you labeled it as 1 in the perspective and right view.

Hope that is clearer?

 

[Gypsy]

Ahh. Okay. So the one on the top view labelled as 4 is the same ring that in the perspective view is labelled as one. Got it.

And it is the .15 .25 .40 arrangement. Got it. Thanks StoneCold... which do you like best, BTW?

 

[stone-cold11]

4 also. Probably you should re-label the images and start again?

 

[kenny]

4

 

[Gypsy]

Okay so... is this correct now?

 

[stone-cold11]

ya, now it is correct.

 

[Circe]

#4, definitely - I like the more pronounced taper.

 

[Gypsy]

Thank you again.

Any ideas on how to keep the exact proportions (as in each stone in relation to one another) of number 4.. but increase total carat weight (and therefore the size of the stones)

 

[stone-cold11]

the present diameter ratio of the .15/.25/.40 carat is 3.4/4.1/4.8mm, so becomes 1/1.21/1.41. So if we increase the smallest carat size to 0.2c, the new ratio 0.20/0.38/0.60, roughly.

 

[Kaleigh]

Another vote here for #4!!

 

[jet2ks]

I like 3 & 4. For some reason I like 3 just a little better, just don''t ask me to explain why.

(Nice job SC)

 

[lilyfoot]

I voted for #4, and it''s definitely the proportions of the stones to each other that made me vote that way.

 

[lyra]

I have a 5 stone in the #4 size, but I voted for #1. You really can''t see much detail in the stones at that size (#4). Mine is semi-bezel set inspired by the older Tiffany design, and is about 12 years old now. Just doesn''t do anything for me anymore.

 

[geckodani]

Date: 12/11/2009 11:58:28 AM
Author: elrohwen
I like #4 a lot, but I can''t quite put my finger on why.

I was thinking the same thing. I''m drawn to #4, but not sure why.

 

[D&T]

I like # 3 or #4 I like the .10 - .15 gradation

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/11/2009 1:08:26 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
the present diameter ratio of the .15/.25/.40 carat is 3.4/4.1/4.8mm, so becomes 1/1.21/1.41. So if we increase the smallest carat size to 0.2c, the new ratio 0.20/0.38/0.60, roughly.

ooh I''d like to see one that is .2, .4, .6

 

[E B]

I also like #4 the most.

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 12/11/2009 1:08:26 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
the present diameter ratio of the .15/.25/.40 carat is 3.4/4.1/4.8mm, so becomes 1/1.21/1.41. So if we increase the smallest carat size to 0.2c, the new ratio 0.20/0.38/0.60, roughly.

That would be fabulous. But also out of budget. Still wouldn't mind seeing a CAD of it, next to nnumber 4.

Lyra, yeah I'm worried about that. But on the plus side-- I'm pretty sure I'll be able to get a full upgrade from BGD (who I'm leaning toward using for this) on all the stones. So if I want to go bigger later I can.

 

[mrssalvo]

i voted number 4 too.

 

[Callisto]

I like #4. Number 1 and 2 look like a a 5 stone to me. And number 3 looks like a three stone with side stones (which I know doesn''t really exist - but thats what it makes me think of)

 

[stone-cold11]

Date: 12/11/2009 3:09:52 PM
Author: Gypsy

Date: 12/11/2009 1:08:26 PM

Author: Stone-cold11

the present diameter ratio of the .15/.25/.40 carat is 3.4/4.1/4.8mm, so becomes 1/1.21/1.41. So if we increase the smallest carat size to 0.2c, the new ratio 0.20/0.38/0.60, roughly.

That would be fabulous. But also out of budget. Still wouldn''t mind seeing a CAD of it, next to nnumber 4.

Lyra, yeah I''m worried about that. But on the plus side-- I''m pretty sure I''ll be able to get a full upgrade from BGD (who I''m leaning toward using for this) on all the stones. So if I want to go bigger later I can.

From bottom to top, left to right, front to back.

left bottom, previous set : 0.15/0.25/0.40
center : 0.2/0.4/0.6
top right : 0.17/0.33/0.50

 

[Cehrabehra]

stone-cold you rock - I think if it were me, I would do .2, .35, and .6 - but I really like the 2/4/6 best of those so far.

 

[MonkeyPants]

Date: 12/11/2009 12:35:45 PM
Author: Circe
#4, definitely - I like the more pronounced taper.

+1