Please give me your thoughts...

[GemFever]

Is the stone damaged or is it not damaged. Sorry, but you were pretty sure it was until Dreamer gave you an out.

I would send the ring to an expert to try to determine that before trying to insure and then unset it. You guys are all over David, but none of you think this is fraud?

I don't think Cygnet was sure at all. She was just worried and stressed, and a damaged stone seemed like the scariest possible reason for why this whole situation happened in the first place. And I still think the stone is fine.

 

[Circe]

Is the stone damaged or is it not damaged. Sorry, but you were pretty sure it was until Dreamer gave you an out.

I would send the ring to an expert to try to determine that before trying to insure and then unset it. You guys are all over David, but none of you think this is fraud?

How on earth would it be fraud? A good bench or dealer would spot a damaged stone long before it got to this point. And there's nothing an appraiser can do while the stone is still set, if the suspicion is of setting damage to the corners - it'd be a waste of the fee.

 

[Gypsy]

Bye.

 

[PinkyPie]

Hopefully he is just trying to get you to take possession of the ring hoping you will just decide to keep it. That is manipulation that I don't approve of, but that may be his motive.

Please don't let this delay your engagement any longer! You deserve some happiness after all this mess!

THIS.

 

[TravelingGal]

I lied.
T-gal. You think Freke posted this and backed Cygnet into a wall? That's not what Cygnet said. She said she ASKED Freke to post.

SHE DID.

Which Freke did.

What conspiracy theories are you subscribing to and why? No one backed anyone into anything. Except the people who asked her to reveal the vendor. Which you will see, I didn't do. I said reveal the vendor when you have the package.

So why are you after me? you said DEBBY is the reason why you thought something was off. What did I do to earn your ire?

And what good does it do to complain about things off the boards? I've never gotten people who complain about vendors off the boards. What is the point of that? ON the boards is where it matters, because that's where we check the vendors and that's where we have the power to get them to what is right.

So...you lied. You knew WHO the vendor was. Then why didn't you say so? I'm CONFUSED.

You do NOT have my ire. I absolutely saw MissDebby's post and thought it was weird. Then I reread the thread. And thought the whole thing was WEIRD.

So are you telling me you then advised her to use pricescope to air her complaint to get a faster resolution from David? Look, I don't know the story. I certainly know that from reading posts on PS over the years that DBL can be infuriating to posters. I believe cygnet has tried to get a resolution and at this point feels like her options are few.

But she HASN'T seen the ring yet. She hasn't! EVEN if it's a monstrosity, she should wait to see the thing and then say "It's freaking ugly! How is this even CLOSE to what I wanted?"

I respect that each and every one of you is trying to help her. What I am BUMMED about is that I'd trust the people who are trying to us PS to "frame" this situation a little less to help ME in the future. Get my drift? I just don't see you guys as underhanded is all. And I don't know who knew what, but it seems like it was presented as Freke's FRIEND, who none of you KNEW, and you all were trying to get the story.

 

[cygnet]

Is the stone damaged or is it not damaged. Sorry, but you were pretty sure it was until Dreamer gave you an out.

I would send the ring to an expert to try to determine that before trying to insure and then unset it. You guys are all over David, but none of you think this is fraud?

I never said I thought it was for sure, I said it was a concern-- and a big risk for me to take to just trust that it isn't.

Are you trying to say I am committing fraud??

I am just trying to not get stuck with a potentially huge problem if my concern is correct. I think anyone else would want to know for sure that they'd be covered if the vendor damaged their stone and was trying to hide it.

 

[Circe]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, wow, those are some multi-stepped bezels. I'm counting four, when you wanted two. In and of itself, that's enough to void a contract. Talk about deviation from an agreement ....

 

[Gypsy]

So...you lied. You knew WHO the vendor was. Then why didn't you say so? I'm CONFUSED.

No. I was saying I lied about not responding to you. Not about knowing or not knowing who the vendor was. I went back and edited. You are too quick with that quote button.

That's all I was saying I lied about-- about when I was leaving the thread. Because I kept saying I was leaving, then DIDN'T. NOTHING ELSE.

I can't keep posting on a DBL thread. And I DID try to jump out the minute he was mentioned. And now I am doing so for real.

 

[cygnet]

i had Freke post for me because anyone could have looked through my post history and guessed instantly that the vendor was DBL. I was trying to avoid that happening because I wasn't sure I wanted to out the vendor. I just needed opinions from PS on the situation.

 

[Laila619]

Since Diamonds by Lauren has now been named, perhaps we will soon have an explanation from David.

Sadly, I don't think he's going to explain.

Cygnet, I'm so sorry for all the trouble you've been through.

 

[ruby59]

Is the stone damaged or is it not damaged. Sorry, but you were pretty sure it was until Dreamer gave you an out.

I would send the ring to an expert to try to determine that before trying to insure and then unset it. You guys are all over David, but none of you think this is fraud?

How on earth would it be fraud? A good bench or dealer would spot a damaged stone long before it got to this point. And there's nothing an appraiser can do while the stone is still set, if the suspicion is of setting damage to the corners - it'd be a waste of the fee.

Insuring a diamond knowing that it might be already damaged. Then when the diamond is unset or even attempted, finding out that it is in fact damaged. You do not think that filing a claim at that point would NOT be fraud??????????

 

[TravelingGal]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, wow, those are some multi-stepped bezels. I'm counting four, when you wanted two. In and of itself, that's enough to void a contract. Talk about deviation from an agreement ....

Circe, no it's not. At least, I don't think so.

First of all, these "lines" on these photos don't mean much. There are two bezels. The picture is deceiving.

The bezel *appears* to be bulkier than the inspiration for sure. But that also has an inner bezel and outer.

Has anyone tried to put lines through the photos of the original as well? Because I doubt you'd get straight lines either. And sheesh...people are trying to put lines through a photo and the glare of the metal!

 

[TravelingGal]

So...you lied. You knew WHO the vendor was. Then why didn't you say so? I'm CONFUSED.

No. I was saying I lied about not responding to you. Not about knowing or not knowing who the vendor was. I went back and edited. You are too quick with that quote button.

That's all I was saying I lied about-- about when I was leaving the thread. Because I kept saying I was leaving, then DIDN'T. NOTHING ELSE.

I can't keep posting on a DBL thread. And I DID try to jump out the minute he was mentioned. And now I am doing so for real.

Got it. So you didn't know eh?

 

[GemFever]

Cygnet, I hadn't seen too many pics of your stone before, but after seeing it in this pic, I have to say ... it's so puuuurty Get it out of that bezel quick, set it in a temp solitaire, get engaged and enjoy your engagement and beautiful stone! Fingers crossed this can happen quickly and as painlessly as possible at this point!

 

[Circe]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, wow, those are some multi-stepped bezels. I'm counting four, when you wanted two. In and of itself, that's enough to void a contract. Talk about deviation from an agreement ....

Circe, no it's not. At least, I don't think so.

First of all, these "lines" on these photos don't mean much. There are two bezels. The picture is deceiving.

The bezel *appears* to be bulkier than the inspiration for sure. But that also has an inner bezel and outer.

Has anyone tried to put lines through the photos of the original as well? Because I doubt you'd get straight lines either. And sheesh...people are trying to put lines through a photo and the glare of the metal!

No, I wasn't looking at the red lines - I think that was somebody's attempt to show the asymmetry. I do think we've got two more steps to the bezel, though, since that's looking consistent across multiple photos. I am negative-talented at the PhotoShop, or I would try to illustrate.

ETA: Went back and stared hard at it, and now I'm not sure. It could just be astonishingly crappy photography, like, on the level of deliberate Magic-Eye-type optical illusion. Hm. If it is, though, that's some messy metal-work, but something that COULD be easily corrected. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Is the stone damaged or is it not damaged. Sorry, but you were pretty sure it was until Dreamer gave you an out.

I would send the ring to an expert to try to determine that before trying to insure and then unset it. You guys are all over David, but none of you think this is fraud?

How on earth would it be fraud? A good bench or dealer would spot a damaged stone long before it got to this point. And there's nothing an appraiser can do while the stone is still set, if the suspicion is of setting damage to the corners - it'd be a waste of the fee.

Insuring a diamond knowing that it might be already damaged. Then when the diamond is unset or even attempted, finding out that it is in fact damaged. You do not think that filing a claim at that point would NOT be fraud??????????

If she knew it was damaged, that would be fraud. if there is no evidence it is damaged, but she worries that removing it from the setting might cause damage, against which she wishes to insure it, for which pleasure she will pay a premium ... that's just insurance.

 

[cygnet]

Are you seriously telling me you think that setting is fine? The corners are clearly uneven. If you really need me to, I'll measure them.

And the bezel was NOT supposed to be as wide as the diamond. Would you want that to be your engagement ring?

 

[cygnet]

That is more than just a double bezel.

 

[Laila619]

Yikes, that asscher needs to be freed from that hunk of metal. Poor stone!

They really dropped the ball with that setting, didn't they?

 

[Mara]

I said it once and I'll say it again. That bezel looks like its eating that poor stone. Chomp chomp.

Total setting fail.

 

[TravelingGal]

That is more than just a double bezel.

Now that actually looks more symmetrical.

However, YES, it looks thick. I think you should have reserved judgment until you've seen it in person. My 3 stone ring would be a disaster if I tried to draw lines through a macro photo.

But it still looks like a double bezel to me. Just one that's too thick.

 

[cygnet]

I see three pretty distinct levels. I wouldn't call that double.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yikes, that asscher needs to be freed from that hunk of metal. Poor stone!

They really dropped the ball with that setting, didn't they?

Goodness! I agree!

Sorry, that is not acceptable. I do not blame you at all, cygnet! You beautiful octavia deserves a much better home than that!

 

[Niel]

Are you seriously telling me you think that setting is fine? The corners are clearly uneven. If you really need me to, I'll measure them.

And the bezel was NOT supposed to be as wide as the diamond. Would you want that to be your engagement ring?

I agree the execution is is very poor. I do only see two levels of bezel but it looks very lumpy and and think, not crisp at all.

On a lighter note, what setting will you put it in, i can think of a really lovely one that I think would really bring out the shape, which is what i assumed you were trying to do with this setting. Im so sorry it didnt pan out. Its amazing how such a little thing can be so daunting

 

[TravelingGal]

I see three pretty distinct levels. I wouldn't call that double.

OK, this is what I see...one thick raised bezel surrounding the stone. Then a "dip", then an outer bezel. I see the same thing on the inspiration ring. Maybe I'm missing something?

Proportionately (meaning thickness of the bezels and the dip) don't resemble the original to me at all though.

 

[cygnet]

The macro photos aren't the only problem, though. The hand shots are what really sealed it for me. They are hideous. I guess we can agree to disagree if need be, but it doesn't look anything like the original.

And yes, I showed some PS friends the photos because I was blindsided by how awful it looked and I wanted to make sure I wasn't completely insane before I got upset about it. Everyone who has seen it has agreed with my assessment.

 

[loriken214]

So, what's the status?

Lori

 

[TravelingGal]

Are you seriously telling me you think that setting is fine? The corners are clearly uneven. If you really need me to, I'll measure them.

And the bezel was NOT supposed to be as wide as the diamond. Would you want that to be your engagement ring?

I agree the execution is is very poor. I do only see two levels of bezel but it looks very lumpy and and think, not crisp at all.

On a lighter note, what setting will you put it in, i can think of a really lovely one that I think would really bring out the shape, which is what i assumed you were trying to do with this setting. Im so sorry it didnt pan out. Its amazing how such a little thing can be so daunting

That's the thing though...the original looks kind of the same. I wouldn't expect crisp if I were using the original as inspiration. However, I wouldn't expect such a saucer, either.

 

[cygnet]

On a lighter note, what setting will you put it in, i can think of a really lovely one that I think would really bring out the shape, which is what i assumed you were trying to do with this setting. Im so sorry it didnt pan out. Its amazing how such a little thing can be so daunting

I don't even know anymore. I think at this point I need to just take it one ring at a time. I'll let you know when I figure it out though! I am feeling the need to take a break from thinking about the ring after this mess is all taken care of. I know you guys do custom jewelry all the time with few issues, but I have been really burned by this experience.

 

[ruby59]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, wow, those are some multi-stepped bezels. I'm counting four, when you wanted two. In and of itself, that's enough to void a contract. Talk about deviation from an agreement ....

Circe, no it's not. At least, I don't think so.

First of all, these "lines" on these photos don't mean much. There are two bezels. The picture is deceiving.

The bezel *appears* to be bulkier than the inspiration for sure. But that also has an inner bezel and outer.

Has anyone tried to put lines through the photos of the original as well? Because I doubt you'd get straight lines either. And sheesh...people are trying to put lines through a photo and the glare of the metal!

No, I wasn't looking at the red lines - I think that was somebody's attempt to show the asymmetry. I do think we've got two more steps to the bezel, though, since that's looking consistent across multiple photos. I am negative-talented at the PhotoShop, or I would try to illustrate.

ETA: Went back and stared hard at it, and now I'm not sure. It could just be astonishingly crappy photography, like, on the level of deliberate Magic-Eye-type optical illusion. Hm. If it is, though, that's some messy metal-work, but something that COULD be easily corrected. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Is the stone damaged or is it not damaged. Sorry, but you were pretty sure it was until Dreamer gave you an out.

I would send the ring to an expert to try to determine that before trying to insure and then unset it. You guys are all over David, but none of you think this is fraud?

How on earth would it be fraud? A good bench or dealer would spot a damaged stone long before it got to this point. And there's nothing an appraiser can do while the stone is still set, if the suspicion is of setting damage to the corners - it'd be a waste of the fee.

Insuring a diamond knowing that it might be already damaged. Then when the diamond is unset or even attempted, finding out that it is in fact damaged. You do not think that filing a claim at that point would NOT be fraud??????????

If she knew it was damaged, that would be fraud. if there is no evidence it is damaged, but she worries that removing it from the setting might cause damage, against which she wishes to insure it, for which pleasure she will pay a premium ... that's just insurance.

Might have misunderstood, but I thought the consensus was that the reaspn David refused to unset the diamond, was because he had damaged it. At least that was how it was being presented until Dreamer suggested insuring it.

 

[GemFever]

I think the inner bezel is a hair too thick, but the real problem is in the gap. The gap looks awful, the metal looks dented and unpolished... dunno what happened there. I think that's where all the confusing reflections are happening too. The symmetry isn't bothering me, I don't think I'd notice problems with symmetry on a daily basis. But it is just too much metal.

I missed this in the previous posts... but will you get a refund even if the bezel is destroyed during unsetting? Or does it the stone have to be removed with the bezel intact?