Help with jewelry Design Ideas

[ClownFishFunk]

Hey everyone. I just purchased this Sky Blue Topaz from ebay - posted below. It is 9x7 mm. I really like the cut of the stone - not something I have seen before in blue topaz. But now what should I do with it? I was thinking either a ring or a pendant, but I''m not sure what would look good with this sort of cut, other than that I would like it in white gold. Any ideas? I love antique styles, as well as sleek flowing styles. I''d really appreciate any help! Feel free to post pictures of any ideas/settings too! Thanks!

 

[Nicrez]

One good suggestion deserves another (at least I hope it's good)




First, how big are your fingers, do you like large rings? I would think it would make a beautiful pendant set East to West as it is shown...You could give it shape by adding a sort of tiny melee or pavee diamond triangle above it leading up to the chain.




I would suggest that if it were a pendant, that it hang closer to the neck, so it doesn't flop around so much, as it's rather large, and perhaps heavy? Even a setting that captures the stone to the necklace on it's East ans West sides, and it's by itself, or at the point where the chain attaches to the gen, it can have a little thin band of melee diamonds to jazz it up...?

 

[Matata]

Here's two ideas -- one simple and elegant, one slightly enhanced with some sparklies.

 

[Matata]

2nd one.

 

[Nicrez]

Matata, do you think the Leon Mege one could fit a 6ct+ trilliant shaped topaz too? I LOOOOOOOVE that one! Simple, classic, and SPARKLY!

What type of chain would look best with that? A simple link?

 

[Matata]

I've only "spoken" via email with Leon Mege a few times regarding a design for my engagement/wedding ring and he appears to be a true visionary when it comes to design. I think he can probably do extraordinary things with your trilliant. I think a simple chain for the unadorned setting would be nice, but for the design with the sapphire, something keeping with the antique look might be better. This isn't a good day to ask my advice about anything simple and elegant because I'm in my froo-froo phase -- the blingier the better.

 

[Matata]

This is the Mege ring I'm thinking about having made for a faceted red spinel.

 

[Nicrez]

Is he very expensive? Does he only work in Platinum? Oooohhhh...I want more bling too, but I have to be careful, I can't go nuts in a few weeks from nothing to BLING....but Matata, I TOTALLY undestand your phase...

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Hey everyone, thanks for the great ideas. I really like the idea of setting it east-west, I also like the idea of pave around it - on average how expensive would something like this be? The leon mege setting is gorgeous! However I dont know if I could afford something like that.

As for my ring size, I am a 6, and my fingers are not very long - medium length I guess, so a look that would elongate them would be great! I am not used to wearing big rings, however it is not something I am against, though I am usually drawn to lower settings, but that may just be because that is what I am accustomed to.

I'm still torn between a ring and a pendant. I just can't decide! I could really use both, haha. What do you all think about mixing gemstones? I've been thinking about getting a ring made with a garnet or spinel. If I had a garnet ring and a blue topaz pendant, would that look strange? I'm not sure how I feel about it.

Thanks for the ideas. Keep them coming!

 

[Nicrez]

Color is something I believe only your tastes and personal stye can determine.




For instance that ring, set N/S in a long thin simple gold 4 prong setting could be very simple and long looking for your fingers. I have a friend who is a size 2-4, and is 5'6" who wears tons of jewelry (mostly costume considering the sizes) and wears mixed pieces really well with her funky clothes. She has even gotten so far as to successfully pull off gemstones in her updos with casual jeans and a cute flirty top! Absolutel props to her tastes, which on my would look absolutely silly!




That said, you have to find your style, and agree the Leon Mege is GORGEOUS! I think I will invest in a similar setting for my London Blue Trilliant, but other gemstones will be a bit cheaper set. I also say, measure how precious thier piece is to you, to determine how much you would spend on it. I had a person I know set a little seashell her husband gave her on her first date into a small diamond surounded necklace. Talk about sentimental value!

I say anything goes when it comes to your tastes, but if it clashes you won't wear it, so see what you are comfortable with and keep searching!!

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Hi again, thanks for the help! So I think I am going to make it into a pendant, east-west close to my neck, and I was thinking of having it as a centerpiece of the diamonds by the yard style, pictured below. Perhaps with a thin band of pave around the stone. What do you think? Would both the pave and diamonds by the yard look be too much? Would the pave make it look too fancy? This is something I would probably wear very often - something I would like to be able to dress up or down.

I was also thinking of this look instead of pave: http://www.myjewelrysource.com/Jewelry/gp3002.htm around the stone.

And I also need to decide if I want to use diamonds or CZs or smaller blue topaz's for the rest of the chain. Decisions decisions!

Thanks again for the help - I would really appreciate your opinions!

 

[valeria101]

Interesting thread...

I was wandering about one thing for some time: it is very uncommon to find inexpensive gems in stylish settings, even if the stones look very nice. For example, how often have you found, say, amber and set in diamond jewelry? (believe it or not such pieces used to be made and the combination is awesome !).

Matching the price of the stone with the price of the setting makes no more sense - to me - than pairing color and clarity grades in diamonds (and discarding D-SI stones as unworthy, for example). But some would argue the oposite (Fred Cuellar's book for example).

Am I seeing things, or the price of stones and settings tend to be matched ? The plans for this topaz go against the trend mentioned above, this is why I am asking my Q on this thread...

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Ana- you make a very good and interesting point. I rarely find the gemstones I like in a piece that looks expensive – mostly plain, often with hearts and such (I suppose they assume younger people will be wearing the less expensive jewelry), and just about always in yellow gold, which is not usually my personal preference.

As you said, I would love to see some amber and diamond jewelry – that would be a very unique and beautiful combination – as well as other gemstones in this style. I would just love to see what other gemstone jewelry *could be* if it weren’t often made in pieces the way they currently are, and used in some of the beautiful and creative designs that diamonds often are.

I would love to do something special and extravagant with this topaz, as I really love the cut of it, but I can only afford so much

. Still, I am hoping my plans for it will do it some justice.

Thanks for bringing up an interesting topic.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/11/2004 10:00:52 AM ClownFishFunk wrote:


I would just love to see what other gemstone jewelry *could be* [...] used in some of the beautiful and creative designs that diamonds often are.
----------------

I am not at all sure diamond rings get the most innovative, outrageous designs... It is rather expensive for designers to 'experiment' on diamonds. Here's what happened to some lucky blue topaz

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Thats an interesting piece - what exactly is it? A ring? The pic on my monitor is sort of dark and its hard to tell exactly.

 

[valeria101]

Sorry about the pic... it is one ring with a dark blue topaz, bicolor gold and sapphires. I think the designer is Loris Abate.

These blue topaz stones are so often used in spectacular designs !

 

[katbadness]

----------------
On 3/11/2004 6:57:49 AM valeria101 wrote:

Interesting thread...

I was wandering about one thing for some time: it is very uncommon to find inexpensive gems in stylish settings, even if the stones look very nice. For example, how often have you found, say, amber and set in diamond jewelry? (believe it or not such pieces used to be made and the combination is awesome !).

Matching the price of the stone with the price of the setting makes no more sense - to me - than pairing color and clarity grades in diamonds (and discarding D-SI stones as unworthy, for example). But some would argue the oposite (Fred Cuellar's book for example).

Am I seeing things, or the price of stones and settings tend to be matched ? The plans for this topaz go against the trend mentioned above, this is why I am asking my Q on this thread...


----------------

I agree, this is a cool thread.

I have to say that it seems like my family considers gemstones to be expensive. I don't know if it's a general outlook for people in Asia.

I don't know if the designs are innovative, per se, but I have seen amethyst, citrines, smoky quarts set with diamonds.

Out of curiosity... do you consider aquamarines, blue zircons to be inexpensive? How about morganites or pink tourmaline?

 

[katbadness]

----------------
On 3/10/2004 10:57:52 AM ClownFishFunk wrote:


I love antique styles, as well as sleek flowing styles. I'd really appreciate any help! Feel free to post pictures of any ideas/settings too! Thanks!

----------------

I found this picture of a pretty neat Art Deco ring one day. Maybe you can design your blue topaz similarly?

Just a thought.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/11/2004 1:27:02 PM katbadness wrote:

Out of curiosity... do you consider aquamarines, blue zircons to be inexpensive? How about morganites or pink tourmaline?
----------------

It's not so much about what I consider as what the prices are. In all these gem varieties prices go from dollars per carat to thousands per carat... so, what can I say? Top quality versus top quality these wold surely be less expensive than the 'big four'.

But this is how the market goes and has precious little to do with anything else. It is hard to say 'inexpensive' without implying 'cheap'. Not my opinion at all.

 

[katbadness]

----------------
On 3/11/2004 2:01:57 PM valeria101 wrote:



It's not so much about what I consider as what the prices are. In all these gem varieties prices go from dollars per carat to thousands per carat... so, what can I say? Top quality versus top quality these wold surely be less expensive than the 'big four'.

But this is how the market goes and has precious little to do with anything else. It is hard to say 'inexpensive' without implying 'cheap'. Not my opinion at all.
----------------

Very true, indeed.

I wonder what the cost of a top quality Paraiba tourmaline would be if people still maintain that it's inexpensive (regardless of rarity)?

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Oooh Katbadness, thats a lovely setting - it may be hard to resist! Thanks for posting it!

 

[ClownFishFunk]

On 3/11/2004 1:27:02 PM katbadness wrote:

Out of curiosity... do you consider aquamarines, blue zircons to be inexpensive?
----------------[/quote]


Just as a comment towards this question, the blue topaz that I bought only cost $3.00 - inexpensive, but to me certainly not cheap.

 

[winyan]

When I went to the Javits show a number of years ago, I saw sheets of the most prevalent semi precious stones (citrine, blue topaz, amythyst) in sheets of bubble packed calibrated stones. I think you could buy a sheet for $15 or so. *THAT* blew my mind.

win

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Hey everyone. Just a little update on my project.

I finally got to take the stone to the jewelers today (hadn't been able to previously because I was up at school), and I am very excited about the outcome!! I am getting it set east-west in a white gold antique/filigree basket setting with a very beautiful antique inspired chain that really pulls the whole look together, and is very much what I was hoping for. It should be all set by the end of this week (as in around friday)...yay! Unfortunately I couldn't afford to add any diamonds

but without the diamonds the whole thing is even cheaper than what I was planning to pay, so no complaints there! OK, thats all for now...just needed to share my excitement.... thanks for listening! I'll post pics when I get it!

 

[winyan]

CFF, darn it, if I had thought of it, you could have had the topaz set with good Cz's in a melee pattern. Small Cz's like the russian brilliants or interlaps are very much indistinguishable (without a diamond tester) from real diamonds! In a pendant especially, they would get little wear, as they do in a ring, and wouldn't 'whiten' too soon!

win

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Yes, I had thought of using some sort of CZ as well, but I decided it wasn't worth it to adjust the setting when I really liked the original one I saw at the store anyway. Thanks for the idea though - maybe for my next pendant.

 

[ClownFishFunk]

Hello everyone! So I went to pick up my necklace yesterday and it just looks amazing! I am quite happy with it. The stone actually looks larger in the setting which is good because I was worried it would be too small for a necklace. I will post pictures of it once I go back up to school (I forgot my camera there) in a few days. Thanks again to everyone who helped me with all the ideas!

 

[Nicrez]

Ahhh....dying for some pictures! Please! So glad it came out well!!!