Oh no - I just realized . . .

[kenny]

An asscher has a square symmetrical look.
In fact we try hard to find one with a 1:1 ratio of length to width.
I found a very good square one.

But a stone must be set into the sides of a tension setting.
After set the left and right side of the square will be sunk into the metal.
The asscher will no longer look square.
I think it will look unsymmetrical with the left and right side of a carefully balanced design "missing".

I think if I get a setting made with prongs on the 4 corners it will look like a woman's ring.
Full bezel may be the only thing left, and I'm not too crazy about covering up that much of the face-up-area.
Argggg.

Anyone have any ideas / pics of options / ideas for me?

 

[diamondfan]

I wish I did...is there no option without the bezel that is less like a woman''s ring?

 

[kenny]

Does anyone have Photoshop?
Could you set an asscher into grey metal like this?


See how funny it looks when some of the symmetry is chopped off?

Here's the stone
Anyone know how much of the left and right side I will lose under the metal?

 

[widget]

Date: 12/12/2006 10:49:41 PM
Author:kenny
An asscher has a square symmetrical look.
In fact we try hard to find one with a 1:1 ratio of length to width.
I found a very good square one.

But a stone must be set into the sides of a tension setting.
After set the left and right side of the square will be sunk into the metal.
The asscher will no longer look square.
I think it will look really bad, rectangular and unsymmetrical with the left and right side ''missing''.

Are you so sure? I have an ''unsquare'' square asscher: 9.15x8.23mm...and it still looks pretty ''square'' to me. (But then I think I''m a whole lot less picky than you are, Kenny! LOL)

Just how much of the stone is sunk into the metal of a tension setting?

Here''s a pic:

 

[kenny]

Wow! Beautiful!!!!

But you can see ALL of your stone.
You don't have facets covered up on two sides so it looks complete and appropriate.
Yours looks how it is supposed to look.

I think you need to see all of an asscher.

Thanks, so maybe it is not the unsquarness that is bothering me, it is the covering up of two opposing sides, and how that seems to throw off the whole asscher look.

 

[pricescope]

If this is macho enough i can try to make a photoshop tomorrow.
ETA: Kenny, it's a really tiny line going to be missed in those groves in a tension setting.

 

[kenny]

Hmm
Wow - Smart
That is a very creative solution.

 

[starryeyed]

Widget, you have such a beautiful ring - thanks for sharing the photo!

Kenny, what about if you were to turn the stone 45 degrees and put the clipped corners against the tension mount? That might cover up less of the stone and give it a unique twist. Just a thought...

 

[kenny]

Thanks
I considered that.
I even held it in the clip-ring rotated 45 degrees like that for a while.
But I didn't like the look.
The stone felt more agitated than peaceful, if I can say that.

But then again, I should keep an open mind and take my time.
I'll be wearing this baby for 40 years, maybe longer if I can get buried with it.

 

[starryeyed]

How about something like this Kenny? I tried to photoshop your asscher in, but the resolution didn''t quite work out. You get the idea though...

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 12/12/2006 11:07:55 PM
Author: Pricescope
If this is macho enough i can try to make a photoshop tomorrow.
ETA: Kenny, it's a really tiny line going to be missed in those groves in a tension setting.

Another idea would be to set the diamond diagonally in general with a similar setting idea, not sure if you'd want to view your diamond like a "kite" rather than a square.

EDIT: oops, it looks like you didn't like the look of this, sorry.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/12/2006 10:49:41 PM
Author:kenny
An asscher has a square symmetrical look.
In fact we try hard to find one with a 1:1 ratio of length to width.
I found a very good square one.

But a stone must be set into the sides of a tension setting.
After set the left and right side of the square will be sunk into the metal.
The asscher will no longer look square.
I think it will look unsymmetrical with the left and right side of a carefully balanced design ''missing''.

I think if I get a setting made with prongs on the 4 corners it will look like a woman''s ring.
Full bezel may be the only thing left, and I''m not too crazy about covering up that much of the face-up-area.
Argggg.

Anyone have any ideas / pics of options / ideas for me?

check out how scott did his - it''s got 4 prongs but they''re very chunky - basically for your stone they''d cover the entire width of the windmills - but only the windmills, the other 4 sides would be nakey. I don''t think 4 prongs will get ya, I think 4 DAINTY prongs will though LOL!! You just have to go sturdy.

 

[Londonchris]

Date: 12/12/2006 11:44:48 PM
Author: starryeyed
How about something like this Kenny? I tried to photoshop your asscher in, but the resolution didn''t quite work out. You get the idea though...

Thats asking for trouble and not very practical.
You`ll only "lose" half a mm total,i really dont think it`s worth fussing about because it`ll look great.

 

[:)]

Poor Kenny, you are really having a bad day - PRW, no ASET, and now this... I think you should go to bed and start over tomorrow, hopefully that day will treat you better! (and maybe while you sleep you will come up with some ideas to solve this!)

 

[ILikeBond]

check out how this beautiful asscher was set - more of a bezel, but maybe something here could work for you. Seems that by wrapping it around, it keeps the eye focusing on it being square, if that makes sense.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-beautiful-asscher-engagement-ring.41271/

 

[indecisive]

I just wanted to say don''t do a full bezel! I love seeing all the flashes from the side all the way to the bottom of my asscher. I hope you can get as much of the stone to show as you can... it''s worth it!

 

[kenny]

YES! Thanks "I like Bond".
Now we’re talking my language.
Tad and I have very similar taste!

I love the sleek, clean architectural sense this design has.
I think it would look more masculine if the head rose straight up from the ring instead of rising up and out at an angle, and there was no slot cut into the ring itself.

But I love how the modified half bezel is beveled on the top (reminds me of that beveled leaded glass you see in the front doors of some old Craftsmen houses - which are also a design of that era of the asscher cut) and hugs the chamfered corners of the stone.
This echoes and compliments the asscher design.

I really like how it lets the asscher breath on two sides allowing air and light to get in and out.
Like a tension setting this lets you see more of what you paid for.
Still it seems to cuddle the stone more than those straight sides of a tension setting where it grips the stone.

Yes, this design has many elements that feel right for me.

 

[Ellen]

kenny, I agree, that setting style has great potential!

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 12/13/2006 7:59:12 AM
Author: kenny
YES! Thanks ''I like Bond''.
Now we’re talking my language.
Tad and I have very similar taste!

I love the sleek, clean architectural sense this design has.
I think it would look more masculine if the head rose straight up from the ring instead of rising up and out at an angle, and there was no slot cut into the ring itself.
Yes - or even rose out at an angle from the shank - not a full slope from shank to girdle (though that could be nice also, maybe) but just not tapered in or perfectly straight...

But I love how the modified half bezel is beveled on the top (reminds me of that beveled leaded glass you see in the front doors of some old Craftsmen houses - which are also a design of that era of the asscher cut) and hugs the chamfered corners of the stone.
This echoes and compliments the asscher design.

I really like how it lets the asscher breath on two sides allowing air and light to get in and out.
Like a tension setting this lets you see more of what you paid for.
Still it seems to cuddle the stone more than those straight sides of a tension setting where it grips the stone.

Yes, this design has many elements that feel right for me.

 

[pricescope]

I like this setting too, but Kenny, it "off-squares" more then tension.

 

[pricescope]

Uggh took me a while, sorry, kenny this one will keep a square look and has a Decos mirror.
ETA: just realized i did not re-make the corners, i will if you like it.

 

[kenny]

Thank you so much for taking the time to do this for me.

It really helps to see it instead of trying to visualize.

I MUST learn Photoshop.
We have it at work and I can mess with it during my off time.
Thanks so much.

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 12/13/2006 9:18:31 PM
Author: Pricescope
Uggh took me a while, sorry, kenny this one will keep a square look and has a Decos mirror.
ETA: just realized i did not re-make the corners, i will if you like it.

I really like the prongs and the way this diamond is set. You could make it look more masculine by getting rid of the metal below the stone, setting the stone lower, and having the shank go higher so that it doesn''t look like the stone is sitting up so high. Does this make sense?

 

[pricescope]

Kenny do you see where i screwed up? Each prong will have not 2 outer sides of the same size, but one in the middle (covering a clipped part) bigger then 2 beside it (covering corners). Sorry, a headache...

 

[kenny]

I''m having trouble seeing what you are describing.
Also am I talking to Leonid or Irina?
I can never tell, you both sign as Pricescope.

I also like that idea of lowering the stone as much as possible by drilling a hole under it.
Maybe not a round hole but an up side down pyramid that opens at the bottom.
This will lower the profile of the stone and make the head more stealth.

Also think solid left and right sides would look best and less prong-like.

I like the straight down view to look exactly like Tad''s ring (without the slot in the ring).
This is fun.

 

[pricescope]

Irina-photoshopper here

I lowered the head as kc said without cutting a hole yet, i think deco is at something with mirror instead of skin under an asscher, especially low set.
Look at the prong close to you kenny - i tried to show 3-sided prong compare to previous picture with wrong 2-sided.

 

[kenny]

That does look much better indeed.
cool.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/13/2006 9:53:31 PM
Author: Pricescope
Irina-photoshopper here

I lowered the head as kc said without cutting a hole yet, i think deco is at something with mirror instead of skin under an asscher, especially low set.
Look at the prong close to you kenny - i tried to show 3-sided prong compare to previous picture with wrong 2-sided.

I love it :}

I may steal and modify (band gold/plat prongs) that design for my own ring if I ever go for an asscher .. after wifey2b gets one of course.

 

[simplysplendid]

I think this looks cool Kenny, simple design for a stunning rock. But I agree with Kcoursolle, the setting needs to sink in a little more so it looks lower, more masculine that way..

 

[:)]

Fantastic job Irina!

I also would like to see it set a tad lower for a more masculine feel (that that it feels effeminate now, but would be more masculine lower). Still love the mirror under the asscher!