my REVISED WF CAD images are here!! comments please!

[denverboy]

Alrighty, so I revised my original CAD with quite a few small changes. What do you guys think?
The original CAD is on the left, and the updated one is on the right.

Please be honest without being too mean

I think I like it overall but I might ask if they can make the prongs thinner. And maybe even make each section thinner.

Please be aware that I think the extra height in the prongs that extends above the table may overwhelm the picture a bit - so try to imagine the prongs cut off at the table and tapered into the stone.

 

[denverboy]

and I''m including the same image at a more lifelike size just b/c sometimes the same view can look wayyy different when brought down to size

 

[LostSapphire]

Nice. The new one is softer and more fluid.

LS

 

[geckodani]

Love the tightened profile on the new one. The whole thing looks more delicate.

I also like the new prong design a lot better.

The surprise stone kinda gets lost in everything else, IMO.

 

[denverboy]

Date: 9/29/2008 8:28:42 PM
Author: geckodani
Love the tightened profile on the new one. The whole thing looks more delicate.

I also like the new prong design a lot better.


The surprise stone kinda gets lost in everything else, IMO.

thanks yeah the surprise stone is more of an extra detail. I agree it doesn''t stand out too much but I''m ok w/ that. It''s hard to notice but I did get them to slightly increase the size of that stone, but I think in order to keep everything under proportion they could only increase it a really small amount.

 

[stone-cold11]

So no more birthstones?

 

[denverboy]

Date: 9/29/2008 8:42:59 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
So no more birthstones?

I think you're referring to the birthstones I was going to have set INSIDE the shank right? yeah.. unfortunately since Emeralds are too fragile to set inside the shank I decided to just do away with that idea. There were alternatives that others suggested as ways to include the birthstone idea (including your ideas stonecold!) but I just wasn't feelin any of them if you know what I mean but if you think of any other ideas fire away! doesn't hurt to brainstorm =P

But in a way I'm pretty comfortable about leaving the birthstones out b/c I didn't know that emeralds were fairly fragile when it comes to rings. So I'd rather avoid the risk of having the stone break. But darn it, it would have been cool to have them in there!

 

[stone-cold11]

ya, that''s what I mean.

If I have anymore bright ideas I will post... :p Looks good by the way. How much is the quoted price for such a design anyway?

 

[MMT]

Looks good. I love how much more delicate the second version is. Good Job

 

[denverboy]

Date: 9/29/2008 9:00:51 PM
Author: Stone-cold11
ya, that''s what I mean.


If I have anymore bright ideas I will post... :p Looks good by the way. How much is the quoted price for such a design anyway?

thanks stone-cold! I don''t have an exact figure for you b/c they combined the quote for this ring + the wedding band, but figuring that in I''d say roughly $2,300 for this ring in platinum.

 

[rocksolid]

hi denverboy!

i love the new version. the changes are perfect! it is beautiful, and i think she will love it! you are so cute to put so much work into designing this ring

 

[:)]

YES!

 

[bgray]

love it--what will be in the "hole" for the surprise stone?

 

[denverboy]

Date: 9/29/2008 10:15:10 PM
Author: bgray
love it--what will be in the 'hole' for the surprise stone?

thanks
just diamonds for the surprise stones- actually if you look closely it shows a diamond in there, but the CAD does make it look like more of a hole haha... i'll have to ask them if the CAD adds extra metal in that area too. I've thought about doing sapphires but I think that might be too much stuff going on.

 

[bgray]

no no-- i love all white metal/all diamonds.................tiffany has a deisgn with a little bezel set diamond in the same spot. its gorgeous--love it!

 

[dreaming of the day]

IMHO, I still think the prongs are a bit overwhelming and thick - but you said something about adjusting that. So if those change I think its perfect. I hope you don''t take that the wrong way - I am just giving constructive critisism

It is really love the changes you have made to make it more delicate.

 

[Kelli]

It seems like the thickest part of the prongs is right at the top, where it won''t be quite the same anyway. I think it looks GREAT!

 

[Kaleigh]

Love the new version. The prongs look more fluid and have a softer feel to them. Very feminine. The other prongs were too harsh IMHO....

 

[chipp]

I think the 2nd version looks great!! I like how the prongs go up and make the basket look rounded. It does look more fluid and softer than the first. It reminds me of the Ritani setting with the diamonds between the prongs. Like this one:

 

[arjunajane]

Much nicer Denverboy, the whole feel is alot prettier

 

[oobiecoo]

Much nicer than before! Is losing the surprise stone an option? It just seems redundant to have a surprise diamond set in the middle of so many others. Personally, I would do a colored surprise stone or none at all. It does look so much more delicate than the original though!

 

[denverboy]

Date: 9/30/2008 4:49:17 AM
Author: oobiecoo
Much nicer than before! Is losing the surprise stone an option? It just seems redundant to have a surprise diamond set in the middle of so many others. Personally, I would do a colored surprise stone or none at all. It does look so much more delicate than the original though!

thanks for the nice comments from those who like the new design

oobiecoo - I thought those options, but decided to increase the size of it slightly so that it doesn''t blend in as much as before. I think I''m going to leave it like this b/c although it is a little redundant and not easily noticeable, I like the extra detail it adds.

 

[denverboy]

I spoke with Joe about the prongs and he said they are probably as thin as he''d like to make them - he said they''ll go down in size a little b/c of casting and finishing. I''m still a little nervous about that simply b/c I can''t visualize the final thing grr!! Does anyone have any examples of CADS vs real ring images that showcase the difference (if any) in prong thickness or bulkiness??

By the way, the height of this setting is 6mm? I wouldn''t have minded 6.5mm but i don''t think it would have made much of a difference right?

 

[Upgradable]

I think the revise height is beautiful. It gives it a much more balanced feel. I, too, think the prongs will be thinner when finished. It may be all the bead work that gives the heavier look in the CAD. It won''t look bulky at all IRL.

 

[LostSapphire]

Date: 9/30/2008 4:28:04 PM
Author: denverboy
I spoke with Joe about the prongs and he said they are probably as thin as he'd like to make them - he said they'll go down in size a little b/c of casting and finishing. I'm still a little nervous about that simply b/c I can't visualize the final thing grr!! Does anyone have any examples of CADS vs real ring images that showcase the difference (if any) in prong thickness or bulkiness??

Here you go. Joe did my CADs too.

The prongs end up a bit thinner and shorter.

Hope this helps.
By the way: the CAD pics are GINORMOUS compared to when it's on your finger. I'll attach a 'real life' photo for your reference too, ok?

(apologies in advance if the pics are too big: I always mess this up!)

LS

CAD on the left: Actual Ring on the right:

 

[LostSapphire]

Date: 9/30/2008 7:28:53 PM
Author: LostSapphire

Date: 9/30/2008 4:28:04 PM
Author: denverboy
I spoke with Joe about the prongs and he said they are probably as thin as he'd like to make them - he said they'll go down in size a little b/c of casting and finishing. I'm still a little nervous about that simply b/c I can't visualize the final thing grr!! Does anyone have any examples of CADS vs real ring images that showcase the difference (if any) in prong thickness or bulkiness??

And here's the ring on my finger.
LS

ETA: YOU CAN TRUST JOE!

 

[denverboy]

thanks for the pic lostsapphire - I did notice they are just slightly thinner.

AHHHHHH I'm the most undecided person EVER I think - now I'm debating whether or not to go to 4 prongs or not.

I know it was suggested earlier on by others but I thought I'd see if fixing the other things I adjusted helped the 6 prongs look OK. But I just can't decide if the 6 prongs is still overhwhelming the stone or not.

I originally wanted to stay w/ 6 to make it rounder and I thought it was more of an antique feel. But if I did go for 4 prongs I'd try to have it in a NE/SE/SW/NW location with the shoulders of the ring still attaching on the East and West to the basket and maybe that would help w/ a rounder look and open it up more. And at this point I know any major CAD changes would result in an additional CAD fee. Opinions on this?

 

[LostSapphire]

Date: 9/30/2008 7:43:41 PM
Author: denverboy

I know it was suggested earlier on by others but I thought I''d see if fixing the other things I adjusted helped the 6 prongs look OK. But I just can''t decide if the 6 prongs is still overhwhelming the stone or not.

I originally wanted to stay w/ 6 to make it rounder and I thought it was more of an antique feel. But if I did go for 4 prongs I''d try to have it in a NE/SE/SW/NW location with the shoulders of the ring still attaching on the East and West to the basket and maybe that would help w/ a rounder look and open it up more. And at this point I know any major CAD changes would result in an additional CAD fee. Opinions on this?

That would be my preference. But I''m not a "six-prong" kinda girl. I like the idea of the location of the 4 prongs.

If you''re having a hard time deciding, it might be worth your while to rework the cad. That would be fairly minor to just change the prongs....I *believe* a major CAD revision is $250 so you may not be out too much $$.

Like I say in engineering/design: it''s WAY cheaper to revise it on a drawing than it is once it''s built! Same in jewelelry.

You''ve made GREAT progress. I''m sure she will appreciate all of the work you''ve put into this!

LS

 

[denverboy]

Date: 9/30/2008 7:55:29 PM
Author: LostSapphire

If you''re having a hard time deciding, it might be worth your while to rework the cad. That would be fairly minor to just change the prongs....I *believe* a major CAD revision is $250 so you may not be out too much $$.


LS

The reason I''m fairly sure they''ll charge me for any further revisions is b/c my first set of revisions was pretty major (or really a bunch of small revisions that ended up resulting in a fairly major revision overall). And Joe had said that his manager almost wanted to charge the fee for that revision, but that if we could make this the last revision we could avoid that.

Has anyone ever heard of them doing medium size revisions for like $100 or $150?

 

[LBug75]

I vote for #2 !!