Pilot holes / azures behind pavé?

[rockysalamander]

I'd go with the 2.2 mm if it was me, but then again I wear a nearly 5 mm wide band with my ering. I long ago realized delicate was never a wise choice for me.

Part of what helps out @chappy to keep that ring cleaner is the deep side swoops of her pave band. You can see nearly to the culet. That helps get the area cleaner. It hard to see on the dark color, but it looks like your stones have a straight side "non-swoop". If you go with a solid bottom, but deep curved sides like @chappy that is another way to achieve structural stability and cleanability. The flip side is that those deep swoops expose more of the diamond's edges that can chip. Chipped stones happen, and little ones are not terribly expensive.

 

[chappy]

btw for your consideration, 2.9mm vs 3mm bands. It's only 3.4% wider, and yet somehow it really makes a difference at this size. For me anyway, the difference is big enough to have a visual preference one way or the other.

I hope the new wax mold will help make up your mind! It's such a tiny detail but I completely understand your obsessing.

 

[Lykame]

omg it's you!!! You were so helpful in my thread, of course you've seen it already. D'oh! I totally didn't recognize your username but I should've remembered your dog. Oops!!! And my ham makes me smile a lot too, I just brought her to work yesterday! She's over 2 years old and while she's still quite active I know with ham lifespans I won't have much longer with her now. Better love her while I can!


I see, then just go with whichever proportion you like the best, nevermind hole or no hole! I think since you already had the 2.8mm, you might want to go with 2mm for the most appreciable difference. Do you have pics of the 2.8mm on hand?

No worries, there are a lot of people in this place! Aww she really is such a special little girl. Artie lived three years so yeah... Hopefully you have a bit more time with her!

I guess it's not so much the difference between 2.8mm and the 2mm but more how I imagine the proportions to be between the central stone and the shank.

Erm do I have pictures of my previous ring on my phone, that is the question...





Yes, a couple! Not the best pictures but yes. The central stone was 1.65 carats... Erm maybe 7.6mm ish from memory?

I originally had a square central stone in it and it looked perfect to me but going round mucked up the proportions. But the shank itself was delicious. My new stone is 8.2mm so I am hoping 2.2mm will be fine.

 

[Lykame]

LOL true PS members here....2.2 means bigger melee. Love it.

Just a different way to look at things...

• 2.2mm is only 10% wider than the 2mm
• The 0.20mm difference is about 1/128th of an inch

Inches mean nothing to me!

I will definitely be able to visually see the difference. Yay for bigger diamonds?!

 

[Lykame]

I'd go with the 2.2 mm if it was me, but then again I wear a nearly 5 mm wide band with my ering. I long ago realized delicate was never a wise choice for me.

Part of what helps out @chappy to keep that ring cleaner is the deep side swoops of her pave band. You can see nearly to the culet. That helps get the area cleaner. It hard to see on the dark color, but it looks like your stones have a straight side "non-swoop". If you go with a solid bottom, but deep curved sides like @chappy that is another way to achieve structural stability and cleanability. The flip side is that those deep swoops expose more of the diamond's edges that can chip. Chipped stones happen, and little ones are not terribly expensive.

He he yeah I mean I did love the heft of my previous ring, it wasn't light. I'm inclined to go with the 2.2mm based on everything here, I had just been bothered by the CAD. I'm feeling optimistic about the wax though, I think it will be better in wax form compared to CAD form.

I noticed that about @chappy's ring, but that's a genius suggestion. See, my setting is actually going to be a bit zig zag in nature and I wonder whether that will actually mean more of the diamond is more easily accessible. That's a feature you can't really appreciate on the wax so I had kind of forgotten. If I can't stand the 2.2mm I'll check with the vendor about the zig zags - if they are sufficiently deep that's probably the solution to the cleaning problem!

 

[Lykame]

btw for your consideration, 2.9mm vs 3mm bands. It's only 3.4% wider, and yet somehow it really makes a difference at this size. For me anyway, the difference is big enough to have a visual preference one way or the other.

I hope the new wax mold will help make up your mind! It's such a tiny detail but I completely understand your obsessing.

See I totally agree, that looks like a huge difference to me and I would definitely have a preference of one over the other!!! Fascinating right! I'm sure that feeling would continue even if there wasn't the direct comparison. And this is exactly why I'm obsessing over 0.2mm...

 

[Lykame]

Right...



What do you all think?

 

[ringo865]

Top

 

[Lykame]

Top

So, totally agree... kind of!!!

I have finally figured out what to do and feel really happy with my decision.

So the FINAL rings would either be 2.0mm or 2.2mm. However - and this is what I have really struggled with, even though I have logically understood it - the WAXES are 2.2mm and 2.4mm respectively. They both have an additional 0.2mm on them for polishing away. I have known this throughout, but it's just been... quite difficult to get it all to match up with my idea of what I want. It doesn't help that my mind is not visual at all, so I am very reliant in what I have in front of me, rather than 'imagining' removing 0.2mm...

So, I really like the width of the top wax, as you say - but something about it is too thin, I have realised, based on getting the second wax. Just for that alone, the second wax was worth the money. I think the smaller stones make it look additionally thin, and obviously the final ring would actually be thinner. The second wax, the bottom one, is too wide - it's not right. Basically I'm Goldilocks. I feel like I need something visually in the middle. However, the bottom one, when polished away, will look somewhat in the middle of the two, or at least closer to the width of the top one, but with the larger stones of the bottom one - and THAT will be PERFECT. Additionally I would then feel very comfortable getting the pilot holes in it, which I really want.

So yes - going for the 2.2mm band, with the 2mm pavé, and the pilot holes - but it will look somewhere between the two waxes.

It's like - all my anxiety about my decision has just gone - so I know I've made the correct one for me. Phew.

 

[chappy]

Can't wait to see it! Sounds like it's absolutely mind-clean now, which is great since jewelry is so very much an emotional purchase. Goldilocks sounds about right!

 

[elliefire99]

So, totally agree... kind of!!!

Basically I'm Goldilocks. I feel like I need something visually in the middle. However, the bottom one, when polished away, will look somewhat in the middle of the two, or at least closer to the width of the top one, but with the larger stones of the bottom one - and THAT will be PERFECT. Additionally I would then feel very comfortable getting the pilot holes in it, which I really want.

So yes - going for the 2.2mm band, with the 2mm pavé, and the pilot holes - but it will look somewhere between the two waxes.

It's like - all my anxiety about my decision has just gone - so I know I've made the correct one for me. Phew.

So glad you found a decision you are comfortable with! Love PS, and I think that the extra time and analysis is totally worth it, but I think sometimes we can drive ourselves crazy going in circles on these little things!

BUT since you have two waxes, you will definitely have to take a photo of the final ring between the two waxes. To show how right you were. And, you know, for science and empiricism

 

[Lykame]

Can't wait to see it! Sounds like it's absolutely mind-clean now, which is great since jewelry is so very much an emotional purchase. Goldilocks sounds about right!

Absolutely! It's completely mind clean! I had agreed to production and everything and then had to be like... No! Stop!

I cannot wait but it's going to take ages because everywhere closes for Christmas. If I hadn't changed my mind I would have got it this coming week... Now it's more likely mid to late January. Damn. But it was always the right decision to make sure there's nothing I regret about this, and if that means waiting then so be it.

It's just difficult because I have been without a diamond ring since June... And as any Pricescoper would know, that's quite painful!

 

[Lykame]

So glad you found a decision you are comfortable with! Love PS, and I think that the extra time and analysis is totally worth it, but I think sometimes we can drive ourselves crazy going in circles on these little things!

BUT since you have two waxes, you will definitely have to take a photo of the final ring between the two waxes. To show how right you were. And, you know, for science and empiricism

Haha yes! Totally went in circles so many times, Durham Rose have been so so so so so patient with me. To be honest I think my circles would have been more extreme without Pricescope. Knowledge is power to me and understanding stuff means I can make a reasoned decision and that's so important to me.

Having said that, there are certain decisions I would never ever have made without Pricescope, like getting a J diamond as my starting point, and I certainly would never have found CBI diamonds or my jeweller. Even my mum said to me... "You found an amazing jeweller!" And that's high praise indeed from her. I actually think what she was really saying was that it was amazing that I had found a jeweller willing to put up with me and not tell me to take a walk! Hehe.

And yes! Well if I'm brave enough I will definitely put the real ring between the two waxes! What I'm totally expecting is that the dazzling sparkle from the ideal cut melee and the super ideal cut central diamond will make it impossible to judge!!!