Looking for feedback on these CADs

[sassy_pants]

Perhaps this is a PS faux pas, since I posted these yesterday in another thread?
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/beading-on-bezel-where-to-put-it-opinions-please.220348/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/beading-on-bezel-where-to-put-it-opinions-please.220348/[/URL]

Sorry if that's the case, just wanted to see if anyone had comments on these first CADs from DK. He pretty much nailed exactly what I asked for, a bezel with beaded halo and pave around the crown and open gallery. I'm still deciding on the beaded halo portion, if I want it how I originally described it to him (like in the CAD) or if I want to do milgrain on the inside edge of the bezel instead. The other option would be to keep the beaded halo but make the beads (and thus the diameter of top view) smaller. I think that is the way I'm leaning right now.

The only other thing I'm unsure about is the two triangle cutouts on the profile view. Again, this was in one of my inspiration photo, so exactly what I asked for, just wondering if those would look better filled in with metal? Or any other ideas for this area? The ring will be platinum.

Any other issues I might be missing? I'm very inexperienced at looking at CADs. I'd appreciate any comments!

 

[ringo865]

Not really sure how to interpret CADs, but it seems the culet is set 3mm above the finger. I, personally, would want that stone (the entire head) to sit down a bit lower.

 

[sassy_pants]

Not really sure how to interpret CADs, but it seems the culet is set 3mm above the finger. I, personally, would want that stone (the entire head) to sit down a bit lower.

Thanks, good point! I did ask for the height to be 7.5mm but am thinking of asking him if he can drop it to 6.5mm. Do you think that will still be too high? My current setting is 8.5mm high and I never thought of it as being abnormally high-set until I tried on some bezel settings that were very low set. That was one of the things about the stock settings that I didn't like, and hence wanted something custom. What's the concern with it being too high, that is will look weird, or just that I could knock it on things? I tried on a bezel setting with pave around the crown and you could barely see the pave because the setting was so close to the finger, it was really never exposed. So that's what I am trying to achieve, to be able to see the pave side halo more easily and also to have more of the open gallery look. But I do agree that there is a little too much open space under the stone at the 7.5mm height.

 

[LtypeI]

It's very pretty! In the past, I've just asked him to set the stone as low as possible, and he's done a great job. I mean if you want it a bit lower, maybe a donut?

I like the triangle cutouts, I think it might look odd to have them filled in.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

It's hard for me to make out details in those CADs, but no, I would definitely leave the triangle openings as they are.

Are the white dots on top diamonds, and the blue on the side of the halo, beading?

 

[sassy_pants]

Thanks for the comments! I was thinking filling in the triangles would be too clunky, but David sent a version with them filled in and I had an instant gut reaction that I definitely preferred it that way. It did take seeing the revised CAD for me to think that, though. Not sure if your votes would change after seeing the new drawings?

The top of the ring has beads (the white circles) and the blue circles around the crown are pave diamonds. The ring is somewhat based on a Brilliant Earth setting and James Allen setting (pics below), but I want the beaded halo to be more delicate that the Brilliant Earth pic. I know I am squarely in the minority on this, but For myself I did not want diamond in a diamond halo, the two different kinds of sparkle in the same view take away from the center stone, just my opinion! Plus, I have always loved beaded objects, like beaded pewter photo frames, my wedding china is a white bone with beading...so that's part of the inspiration as well.

One more note, we are going to drop the height just a bit, but overall I am going for a high-ish set so the side pave is more visible. Thanks again for the honest feedback, it really is helpful in making me think twice about decisions even if I end up going with my original plan! This community is awesome!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Okay, I see what you mean now. I greatly prefer the first shank version, but certainly this is to please YOU!!!

 

[Gypsy]

I like the shank and the triangle cut outs. The profile looks clean and lovely to me.

 

[sassy_pants]

Hmmm, interesting...

Well, I know the answer will be that I need to choose what I like the best, and of course I will do just that in the end. But I really have so much respect for your opinions, diamond seeker and gypsy!!! I've read your comments on these boards for a long time and you always have great insight. Gypsy, I especially love your respectful bluntness. You often say what people really need to hear, like "it looks like an octopus, start over". Your comments hit the nail on the head and never fail to crack me up!

So if there are other opinions on the triangles versus solid look, I'd love to hear them. Even though I had a definite preference immediately, sometimes people can make comments that make you see things in a different light you hadn't considered. I remember when my best friend was pregnant with her first baby, her mother hated the name she had chosen. This didn't dissuade her at all, she loved the name! But then a work acquaintance offhandly made the remark that the name "sounded like a druggie" and it made her reconsider and she ended up choosing a completely different name. I remember her saying how happy she was that someone had mentioned it before her son was born, because it would have probably come up later anyway and then she would have been stuck with the druggie name!

So, back to the triangle dilemma. I was able to try on the James Allen setting with a sapphire center and it has a very similar shank with the cutouts. So, I was able to see that version in person rather that in the bulky CAD view, and I remember thinking that part of the design didn't make sense to me, it just looked like it was structural, or to save some money on platinum, not really like it was a aesthetic choice.

Here's a pic of that ring. If love to hear any additional thoughts! I'm planning for this new setting to be my forever ring, so I want to make the most informed choice possible. Thanks!

 

[chrono]

Guess I'm the lone dissenter who prefers a smooth look without the triangular cutouts.

 

[Bonfire]

Beautiful ring Sassy! None of us can decide what you like best, it's a personal preference thing. It's helpful that you were able to try on a similar ring. My advice is go with your first reaction. That's your gut speaking In the end I hope you love your decision!

 

[Gypsy]

I think you've made your decision. No triangles looks very clean too. There is no bad decision here. You have to be happy with it. If you've seen the triangle cut outs and didn't like them... enough said. It's aesthetics and you are in the drivers seat there.

I am happy you've gotten some chuckles from my bluntness. It's a double edged sword. But... it's who I am.

 

[LtypeI]

Honestly, it sounds to me like you're set on the design without the cutouts, so go for it!