Prong direction on antique cushion

[rubberducky]

Hi everyone,

Just got the finished ring from the jeweler (eee!) and it looks like the claw prongs are not all pointing towards the center of the stone.

The jeweler says that prongs can't be placed symmetrically because the stone (an antique cushion) isn't, and the shape of the diamond dictates where the prongs go.

Does this mean that the direction of the prongs also has to be affected, or just where the prongs are located? Is there a way around this or am I being too picky (in this picture, the top and bottom prongs seem a little askew to me, but maybe this is expected)?

Thanks!

 

[HappyNewLife]

that would bother me. I'd have to have symmetry

 

[rubberducky]

It bothers me too. Any idea if this is avoidable or if the diamond's shape might really force the prongs to be a bit crooked?

 

[valeria101]

Rounded rather than ckaw prongs ?

 

[valeria101]

Rounded rather than claw prongs ?

 

[tlfiore]

Your ring is very pretty and the stone is lovely. I am awaiting a fabulous custom design from CvB and I hoped for more delicate, claw-like prongs for my stone...a very old OEC that is likely rounder than your cushion cut. I can see now why the ever-fantastic Caysie designed the prongs as she did. These larger prongs seem to give more "hold" or greater "coverage" to a wonkier diamond's facets, thus avoiding the problem of prong asymmetry, as you've encountered. I'm no expert but it appears that a wider, or more gradually tapered, or rounder prong may give a different illusion, thus avoiding the off-center problem.

Good luck. Your ring is beautiful but I agree with others that from all angles, there should be more symmetry (a relatively easy prong fix, I would think).

 

[HappyNewLife]

you may have to ditch the claws

 

[Sagefemme]

The top two prongs are symmetrical with each other, and the bottom two prongs are too. The fact that none of them are at right angles to the girdle of the stone just reflects the square/rectangular shape of the stone. A picture that is not on a slant I think would look fine. Maybe post one like that and see what PC thinks.

 

[rubberducky]

The jeweler has the ring back to resize and look into the prongs, so I can't take anymore pictures until the weekend. She did explain more about why the prongs are wonky, and why they probably have to stay that way...

The prongs aren't quite symmetrical either way-- in the picture above, the left and right ones "point" at each other much more than the top and bottom, which means that none of them quite line up with either other.

I agree though that it doesn't look nearly as bad if I don't look at it on a tilt.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I doubt it will be as noticeable in real life as it is in a highly magnified photo. But antique cushions are often not perfectly shaped, so naturally, that does mean than the prongs may not be 100% symmetrical. I think your jeweler was probably right.

 

[arkieb1]

I personally would pick different types of prongs. I have a wonky old cut and it's in a 8 prong to hide that fact.

 

[foxinsox]

Your ring is very pretty and the stone is lovely. I am awaiting a fabulous custom design from CvB and I hoped for more delicate, claw-like prongs for my stone...a very old OEC that is likely rounder than your cushion cut.

sorry for the threadjack but OMG, tlfiore, I cannot wait for handshots when this beauty arrives!!

Rubberducky, I hope the jeweller can make the prongs look more symmetrical.. and that you will post a SMTB thread on this gorgeous cushion, including stats because it looks huge!

 

[rubberducky]

Thanks everyone for the input and advice! I think I'm going to 1) hope that the jeweler comes back with something better, 2) try to ignore it, and 3) look into shorter/stubby prongs in that order.

and that you will post a SMTB thread on this gorgeous cushion, including stats because it looks huge!

I was trying to take pictures for that when I discovered the prongs! So I guess it's really not that noticeable otherwise. Honestly this is by far the the photo, the rest are all hella blurry, so I'm not sure I can take good enough ones for SMTB. JBG has great pics and videos, but I didn't buy from her (local jeweler showed me the stone first), so I don't know if it's wrong to reference them.

 

[tlfiore]

@rubberducky please keep us posted because your ring is lovely. I honestly love and prefer prongs like those on your ring because they are so perfectly elegant but alas. They don't always blend with the old wonky stones, which we also obviously love, right?

Good luck. The ring is beautiful.

@foxinsox THANK YOU for the shout out! I may leave the modeling to sweet Caysie 'cause my hands are horrible...embarrassing

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I just wanted to add that I love the notched prongs and think they are a perfect antique style for the stone.

 

[Gussie]

Your ring is very pretty and the stone is lovely. I am awaiting a fabulous custom design from CvB and I hoped for more delicate, claw-like prongs for my stone...a very old OEC that is likely rounder than your cushion cut. I can see now why the ever-fantastic Caysie designed the prongs as she did. These larger prongs seem to give more "hold" or greater "coverage" to a wonkier diamond's facets, thus avoiding the problem of prong asymmetry, as you've encountered. I'm no expert but it appears that a wider, or more gradually tapered, or rounder prong may give a different illusion, thus avoiding the off-center problem.

Good luck. Your ring is beautiful but I agree with others that from all angles, there should be more symmetry (a relatively easy prong fix, I would think).

So sorry to thread jack but please start a thread with pics of this beauty on smtb! @tlfiore

 

[rubberducky]

Good news! Jeweler emailed today saying they were able to align the prongs. I'll have to wait until pick up to see for myself but I'm hopeful.

 

[tlfiore]

Good news! Jeweler emailed today saying they were able to align the prongs. I'll have to wait until pick up to see for myself but I'm hopeful.

That is super-great news!