My WF ER Reset -- Need your honest opinions!!!

[CBL]

Ok, so here is my saga...and the reason I didn''t post pics of my new ring immediately upon receiving it. Sorry in advance for this being so long. Pictures to follow.

As you might recall, I was DYING of excitement waiting for this ring, and the day before it was to arrive WF finally sent me the ''official'' pics. I knew right away when I looked at them that the ring did not look exactly as I had envisioned. My main problem was that the proportions seemed slightly different from the CAD and the bezel seemed waaaay too thick. As you might imagine, a part of me immediately died inside and I started to kind of freak out.

But, I figured I would wait til I got the real thing and evaluate in person. I won''t lie--when I opened it up and put it on my finger, I hated it. Like, really hated it! I think a BIG part of it is that with this custom process you have almost unattainable expectations--in my head it would most definitely be the most perfect thing EVER. IRL it just didn''t meet those expectations.

So I called WF and they were of course very very nice about it and they have to go through some process where some people (I have no idea who) discuss my ''case'' and see what they can do for me. I do not doubt they will come up with something (thin the bezel or something, etc). I should hear back from them on Monday or Tuesday.

In the meantime I have been wearing my ring and it has sort of been growing on me. At first I thought the bezel made my stone look waaaay smaller (and I was disappointed, having heard that halos make the stone look larger); now, I still think it makes it look a little smaller than before but it''s not quite so exaggerated in my mind. Last night I wore it out and it was behaving in a very sparkly manner

which of course pleased me, so in my head I was going back and forth about whether I was starting to love it or just so/so. I also know that my wedding band just does not compliment it at all, so maybe a new band (Danielle jazz bezel, eh?) would help in that department.

Regardless I really need your opinions. My husband thinks I''m nuts--in his mind, it''s shiny, it''s sparkly, what''s the problem? But he wants me to be happy. I just want to know: do you think it differs from the CAD? Do you think the metal in the bezel is too heavy? Do you think if they fixed that it would look better? I need ideas or reassurance or something...!!

Ok, here I go with the pics; again, it is a 1ct European Cut diamond, VS, L in color.

 

[CBL]

Not a great picture but you can see the width of the bezel...

 

[CBL]

again shows the metal bezel

 

[CBL]

workin on it''s sparkle...

 

[CBL]

oh yeah. and original cad.

 

[CBL]

one more cus I think this one really shoes how much metal there is around the stone...

 

[lyra]

I like your design a lot. The execution, I don't know. I can see the things you don't like about it. It does look the the bezel is slightly higher up on the side of the diamond on the real ring than in the CAD. Have you thought about going with 4 prongs instead? I've always preferred the prong look over the bezel look because I also find that my bezel set stones "seem" smaller somehow. (Although sometimes when you have them unbezelled, as with earrings, they come out looking smaller still!) In general, I love your design and I think the finished ring is very close to the CAD. I don't know what would be involved in changing the bezel at this point. It may mean starting over, I don't know. What I like about the design is how modern, simple and sleek it is.

ETA: sorry, didn't know you weren't finished posting pics. In the last one I see, the bezel seems too thick IMO. I wonder if slimming it down would be more suitable?

 

[CBL]

Lyra, I really wanted to bezel the stone because it has a very thin girdle and I wear it all the time. I like prongs too but for safety purposes, you know.

Thanks for your compliments on the design. I really loved it too...there was just something that didn''t translate. I am hoping they will say they can slim the bezel somehow.

 

[kjt]

I see what you mean also and if you ask for honesty...I dont like the way they did the bezel. There is too much metal and from the side profile, it doesnt look like a delicate halo. There is too much of the bezel showing and I would have preferred something more like the CADS.

From the original pictures they sent you, I think it looks better.

I would send it back until you were completely happy with what you wanted. Hope it works out for you!

 

[Anna_Magdalena]

Hi, old lurker here! I had to offer my support and share my experience because I had the exact same thing happen with my halo reset (but not with Whiteflash). I had it made here in SF at Derco Jewelers (which is a terrific place). I had my .84 reset in a halo setting that probably was ideally meant for a 1-carat stone. I think that''s why the halo around it ended up so thick. I tried to like it, but it just didn''t do what I had hoped. So I took it back and had a couple different modifications done over several months. First, I had them file down the bezel as much as possible without sacrificing a secure hold on the diamond. Later I went back and had them add milgraining to the bezel as well. Both modifications made a huge difference! Now the bezel looks pretty delicate and I love my ring, and although it still isn''t exactly what I originally had in mind, it''s quite close and great in a different way.. It''s beautiful and I get tons of compliments from strangers all the time.

Good luck! I hope you end up with a ring that you love! I hope that my experience helps somewhat. Do consider discussing these minor adjustments with Whiteflash. They''re not hard to do and make a big difference visually.

Maybe I''ll try to post updated photos when I get a chance.

 

[SeaStar]

I absolutely love the CADs, but I don''t think your actual e-ring reflects the detail...the bezel looks hastily put together. The bezel seems thicker IRL than in the CADs and sits wayyyy too high. Even the band seems different IRL than the design. I can see why you don''t feel 100% satisfied.

 

[CBL]

Anna, thanks for understanding! I will definitely discuss those things with WF...I thought about milgrain but wasn''t sure if it would compromise the ''modern'' look of the halo (not that I don''t like milgrain--I do, I was just trying to stay simple, but maybe it will help). It''s good to hear that it''s possible to file down the bezel, too, I was wondering about that.

 

[Londongirl1]

Date: 5/30/2009 6:15:25 PM
Author:CBL

At first I thought the bezel made my stone look waaaay smaller (and I was disappointed, having heard that halos make the stone look larger); now, I still think it makes it look a little smaller than before but it's not quite so exaggerated in my mind.

Firstly, I'm sorry to hear that your not happy with your ring and I can see why

. To me, most of the halo settings I've seen don't make the stone look bigger unless the stone is at least 1.5ct - but that's just my personal opinion.

You asked for honesty so here goes.... I think that the halo 'swallows up' your diamond! It's a 1ct centre stone but doesn't look like it to me. Sometimes less is more. I recently reset by ering from a split shank to a solitaire setting so I went for less bling not more. My stone definitely looks bigger without the distraction of side stone.

Unless you can really get used to the ring as it is I would change it.

All the best

 

[CBL]

Seastar, yeah, I feel the same way. I do not in any way want to reflect poorly on WF, I''m sure they will make this work...I just wanted to make sure I wasn''t being totally crazy thinking this looked different. And it seems from your responses that I''m not, which is good for my sanity at least.

 

[CBL]

Londongirl, that is a very good analogy: "swallowing up the stone." I used something similar to that when describing what I didn''t like about it to my husband.

In reality it is a one carat stone and I never expected this to make it look huge...I just wanted to protect the girdle and thought that the sparkle in the halo would be a nice accent. I dunno, seeing it executed I have no idea anymore!!

 

[Londongirl1]

Date: 5/30/2009 6:43:55 PM
Author: CBL
Londongirl, that is a very good analogy: 'swallowing up the stone.' I used something similar to that when describing what I didn't like about it to my husband.

In reality it is a one carat stone and I never expected this to make it look huge...I just wanted to protect the girdle and thought that the sparkle in the halo would be a nice accent. I dunno, seeing it executed I have no idea anymore!!

The concept of a halo isn't a bad idea - the problem here is that the CAD doesn't match the finished result. The setting is far too overwhelming for the stone and sits too high. I'm sure WF can re-do the halo to make it look more subtle and less overpowering.

Don't worry - it'll be fine

 

[neatfreak]

I wonder if they had to bezel it that way to protect the girdle? Just a thought...as I am otherwise puzzled because WF usually executes bezels so well. I am sure they''ll help somehow!

 

[CBL]

Neatfreak, I didn''t really get an explanation or anything, so I''m not sure. Regardless, I''m a bit puzzled too so maybe I will learn more in the upcoming week.

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

I think the bezel is kind of thick too. And the band is also a little on the wider side, and those two factors are contributing to making the stone seem smaller. I wonder if it would help if you thinned the bezel a bit, or raised it onto prongs, and made the band a bit thinner too?

 

[cellentani]

I'm so sorry your ring isn't what you'd envisioned and hoped for - I know that's very disappointing. After looking at your CADs and photos, I can definitely see the differences: in the CAD, the bezel is just one ring separating the halo from the stone, and also sits nearly flush with the halo. IRL, there is a ring of metal forming the inside of the halo, and the bezel holding your center diamond is a separate piece alltogether - it's not one integrated piece at all (this is especially noticeable in your last pic). In addition, even though the bezel itself is not particularly thick, it is much higher than the halo, and lifts your center stone up quite a bit. I think the two-part bezel does make your stone look smaller than a single bezel would. Anyone looking at the photos you posted can clearly see that it's different from the CADs, and I hope WF is able to rectify this. Even if they completely re-do the ring, it'd be a bummer to have to send everything back, especially after anticipating this for so long. Keep us posted!

 

[CBL]

Cellentani, that is the most depressing thing--after missing my ring for a month, it''s going to be gone again! Lame!!!

 

[CBL]

oh, also--I had asked particularly for the shank to be 2.5 mm. I have been known to bend and break shanks and I wear my ring all the time, so that was important to me...I don''t necessarily want the shank smaller but the halo is (obviously) the part that really bugs me.

 

[D&T]

CBL- your ring looks beautiful, however, your bezeling is quite thicker IRL than the CAD and usually its the other way around. I''m a big fan of bezels I mean everything I have is semi bezel or bezelled. but when it comes to halo and bezel, i''m indifferent although there are plenty of gorgeous rings, Now you are wanting to keep a halo correct? maybe prongs (6) would be the way to go even with your thin girdle? as I see halo prongs appear to make the center larger jmho unless they can dramatically thinned out your bezelled center without losting its integrity.

 

[Snooper]

Honestly? The first picture I thought to myself, "What is she thinking? It''s fantastic" but the picture after the WF cads? I knew immediately what the issue was.

I love the cads, and like others have said, often the cads are bulkier, but for you, it''s the opposite. If it''s bugging you, definitely fix it. I like the design though!!

 

[chiquitapet]

Date: 5/30/2009 7:10:37 PM
Author: Brown.Eyed.Girl
I think the bezel is kind of thick too. And the band is also a little on the wider side, and those two factors are contributing to making the stone seem smaller. I wonder if it would help if you thinned the bezel a bit, or raised it onto prongs, and made the band a bit thinner too?

Exactly my thoughts. I really like your design, but if possible I`d get both the bezel and the band thinned a little.

 

[CBL]

Those are good ideas....will bring them up with WF for sure.

Snooper, it is hard to photograph but IRL the width of the bezel is very obvious. Then again i'm obviously its harshest critic!

 

[decodelighted]

I see what you were going for and I think its a very cool design. This is a WEIRD case because its the first time I''ve ever seen a ring turn out BULKIER than the CADs -- usually the other way around by a mile! FREAKY!

Part of what''s throwing me off is the "doughnut" quality of the bezel. It looks really tubular and plump where in the CADS it looks more angular & pipe like. Some taper would be nice & gentle -- a bit more than the CAD but not like its swallowing your stone, which is, I agree, the case here.

Hope its a quick & easy fix & that you get that stone back on your finger asap.

 

[Tuckins1]

I echo everybody else... It''s a beautiful design, but if you aren''t 100% happy with it you should have them fix it.

 

[Stone Hunter]

I too see why you are unhappy. The bezel is very fat and also seems very tall. Maybe your stone being an OEC has alot of diamond above the girdle? That may be what they wanted to protect.

But I hope they figure out what types of things they can do to make this ring more delicate. I do really like the idea you were going for. And I am surprised that it doesn''t make your center stone look larger, maybe with a more delicate metal halo it will.

 

[4ever]

I love the CAD design but the final product, as others have said, just isn''t the same. It''s that pesky high bezel. If I were you I would be unhappy with it too.

Hopefully it wont be to dificult to fix.