New LOGR - on fence about it

[T L]

Well, I wanted this one for a long time, and it finally came up in the BIN for a much lower price than he originally quoted me on it, and I upgraded the diamonds. I am not impressed with the diamonds on the top, they're too heavily covered by metal (can my jeweler fix that???), but the side diamonds are nicer, especially along the shank. However, it's not as nice as my two other settings I recently obtained from him, the 8x8 legacy and the LTP OEC double shank. 45 points of diamonds.

Here's a pic from the top with my blue diamond in it. I'm not planning on using it for the diamond, just put a gemstone in there for an example.

 

[T L]

side view.

The diamonds really tiny here and on the side of the shank, but they are much bigger on the top of the shank (when the stone is face up.)

 

[platinumrock]

TL, I really like the daintiness of the shank and gallery. This is my favorite of your settings so far. But if the metal bothers you, then you wont'' be happy with it. I think it''s possible for your jeweler to reduce the metal, but the head seems to be built as one unit. Maybe you can have the metal corners shaved down? Or you can widen the prongs so it can accomodate a larger stone. That way, you won''t see the metal corners from face-up. It can be overshadowed by a larger stone.

I think it''s nice the way it is. The details on the gallery make it stand out.

That blue diamond sure looks purdy with the setting!!

 

[LD]

TL I can''t see in your first pic clearly enough. Is it that the diamonds are pave and therefore small or is it that there''s lots of metal showing around the diamonds? Or is it the V shaped metal bits in each corner? These shanks tend to be cast all together (diamonds, metal etc) so changing anything can be risky.

I actually like the setting as it''s not "run of the mill". If you''re not happy, you won''t be in the future and it''s the top that you''ll see most so I''d be tempted to say to return it and get something else. What a pity cos it''s very pretty.

 

[T L]

Here's another picture, and you can see the diamonds a bit more clearly on the top. A demantoid is sitting in it. The demantoid is not meant for this setting though. I really love the style of it, my only contention is the top of it, the diamonds are covered by a bit too much metal, or don't seem to sparkle as much as my other diamonds. I did loupe them and they're full cut and clean, but the metal is covering too much of the stones, and they're smaller than in my other settings. I'm hoping for a very vibtrant stone to put in here, since it will be the center of attention anyways, and not the diamonds.

 

[T L]

Here''s a better top view with my salmon diamond in it.

 

[T L]

Here's a side view of the side shank diamonds. Maybe I'm just too picky because of how awesome my last two settings turned out. This has a bit more going on though, and he said it took longer to make.

 

[T L]

Here it is with my medium blue vallejo916 aqua. I really want a light to medium blue ceylon sapphire for this setting.

 

[mochi]

That blue aqua from vellejo looks yummy. I purchased a aqua from him and he described it as medium but it was kindda light. Really like your new setting.

 

[T L]

Date: 1/18/2009 12:50:09 PM
Author: mochi
That blue aqua from vellejo looks yummy. I purchased a aqua from him and he described it as medium but it was kindda light. Really like your new setting.

Hi Mochi,
Same here, I also purchased a cushion aqua from him that I thought was medium, but it was actually too light. This aqua is actually a medium blue though. You should post a pic of your aqua though. I like his cutting, so it would be nice to see it.

Thanks for the kind words on my setting.

 

[CharmyPoo]

I think the setting is nice and all your stones are beauties. I love that green one.

 

[Diamond*Dana]

I think that it is a very pretty setting...I love the look of all your stones with it!

 

[cellentani]

Very interesting setting, TL; I don''t think I''ve seen this LOGR one yet. How wide is the inside dimension? It doesn''t look like it''s going to be very forgiving width-wise, considering the diamonds on the prongs. Also, does this setting sit higher than the legacy setting (you got any digital calipers?)? I do like it, but I can understand not being 100% thrilled with it if the diamonds on the top aren''t up to snuff. And, that''s where they''ll get noticed the most too (especially by you). Have you decided what you''re going to do - return/keep?

 

[T L]

You know, it has a big donut around the hole as indicated by the first pic with the blue diamond in it, so I think a 6mm will fit and the side diamonds will still show up. It's made for a 5 to 5.5mm stone though. I still haven't made up my mind.

I have to post some pics of it next to my LTP OEC split shank ring.

 

[AmberGretchen]

Hmmm...it just strikes me as clunky, I hope you don''t take that as an offense - I really just don''t know why, but I''m not loving it nearly as much as some of the others you''ve posted.

 

[T L]

Date: 1/19/2009 7:58:58 PM
Author: AmberGretchen
Hmmm...it just strikes me as clunky, I hope you don''t take that as an offense - I really just don''t know why, but I''m not loving it nearly as much as some of the others you''ve posted.

No offense taken at all. I am looking for honest opinions. Thank you

 

[cellentani]

Date: 1/19/2009 7:02:34 PM
Author: tourmaline_lover
You know, it has a big donut around the hole as indicated by the first pic with the blue diamond in it, so I think a 6mm will fit and the side diamonds will still show up. It''s made for a 5 to 5.5mm stone though. I still haven''t made up my mind.

I have to post some pics of it next to my LTP OEC split shank ring.

Okay, I think I know what you mean...took me awhile. You''re talking about the polished metal ring around the opening - like you might have on a bezel setting? If you could see this polished rim after the stone was set, that would bug me; it doesn''t fit in with the rest of the design. Hopefully, if you decide to keep it, you could find a stone that covers it.

By the way, with the prongs having diamonds on the outside, are you limited in how low you can set a stone? I''m thinking that the prongs will have to maintain a certain length (or height, if you will) to keep the diamond design.

 

[T L]

Date: 1/19/2009 8:53:09 PM
Author: cellentani

Okay, I think I know what you mean...took me awhile. You're talking about the polished metal ring around the opening - like you might have on a bezel setting? If you could see this polished rim after the stone was set, that would bug me; it doesn't fit in with the rest of the design. Hopefully, if you decide to keep it, you could find a stone that covers it.

By the way, with the prongs having diamonds on the outside, are you limited in how low you can set a stone? I'm thinking that the prongs will have to maintain a certain length (or height, if you will) to keep the diamond design.

I think it would be easy to find a stone to fit it since it is a typical round size. I really like this style because it reminds me of a modern deco style, especially with the dimensionality in the prongs which are squarish and raised, in comparison to the round head. That probably sounds a bit ridiculous doesn't it? I feel that if Clarice Cliff designed a ring, this would be it.

I love the style of it, and I know it's not for everyone. I'm just torn because of the diamonds on the top.

 

[marcy]

I think it''s very pretty.

 

[T L]

Okay, I tried to return it, and I emailed him, but he''s giving me an ebay "request to cancel transaction" - what is that?

 

[Steel]

Date: 1/19/2009 7:58:58 PM
Author: AmberGretchen
Hmmm...it just strikes me as clunky, I hope you don''t take that as an offense - I really just don''t know why, but I''m not loving it nearly as much as some of the others you''ve posted.

Sorry - I also think it is a bit chunky. I hope the return works out ok -I don''t know what the vendor is talking about as I do not e-bay. Good luck

.