Ring Design - Need Suggestions/Help

[will873]

So I am pretty new at this, but I am trying to finalize the engagement ring that I am buying. It is a suprise, so I have limited help from my girlfriend. I do know that she really liked this ring, but I think I would like to make two changes.

1) Round the corners. I know for a fact that this is a cushion cut diamond, so I dont believe that the ring has to be octoganol
2) Change the bezel. To me the bezel takes away from the diamond as it stands out. I would like the bezel to blend in as much as possible, which right now it does not. I have also thought about prong setting it, but I am pretty sure that would make the ring not be flush, of which I like. So I am thinking of a thin beaded bezel with rounded corners.

I would like to get thoughts on changing the design up just a little. Also, this is a Christopher Slowinski design, any reviews on this designer would also be helpful.

 

[LuckyTexan]

Is the setting made for a cushion? It looks like it''s for an Asscher!

 

[MonkeyPie]

I agree, I am pretty sure that''s an asscher, hence the sharper corners.

The bezel, to be, looks fairly thin already. Do you have an example maybe of a bezel you do like?

 

[FrekeChild]

Looks like an asscher here too. Also, I think the ring would be improved if it had prongs. I agree that the bezel is just too much metal. Prongs shouldn't affect if the ring is flush fit or not.

ETA: because the shank has 3 sided pave, it wouldn't be advisable to put a wedding band next to it because the diamonds will rub each other and the metal and could potentially ruin each of the rings. I just wanted to warn you of that.

 

[atroop711]

I love the idea of prong setting the main stone. I did this in my halo and have claw prongs (think that's what it's called). This way it allows for the entire stone to be the center of attention in my ring. As for the octagonal look. I'm a fan (as you can see in my avatar)

Also if you tell them to prong set it low it will be low. Mine is prong set low and it looks great. I've seen them high up but you can get them low..just need to speak to the jeweler about placement.

When you talk about rounding the edges do you mean just making the halo more of a square-ish than an octagonal?

BTW the setting is gorgeous and I think any tweaking you do on this setting will just be perfect!

 

[will873]

This is the picture that I have found of a ring that has a slimmer bezel and hence a little less noticeable. This also has more rounded edges. The ring that I first posted I have seen in person. I have never thought that the picture does it 100% justice. Something about the picture, maybe zoomed in, makes it look busy, but in person it flows together nicely, except the bezel.

Someone brought up a good point, This ring is made for a band to sit flush on either side, so there will be a band, potentially two in the future I am told. Does this mean that you dont want diamonds on the side? Will the scratch? It looks rough in the picture, buit seemed pretty smooth to the touch.

Thanks for all the help.

 

[will873]

Atroop - do you have a larger picture of your ring so that I can see the claw settings?

 

[Daisi2112]

I agree, it doesn''t look like a cushion.

I think the bezel for me personally is a bit too chunky and takes away from the center stone. I think a slimmer bezel would be nice and it would enhance the center stone greatly.

Yes, the first ring won''t be able to have a wedding band next to it because of all the diamonds on the shank. It is gorgeous, but if the diamonds rubbed on the wedding band, the rings will get damaged. Just something to be careful of

 

[atroop711]

Date: 3/11/2009 7:45:29 AM
Author: will873
Atroop - do you have a larger picture of your ring so that I can see the claw settings?

here''s the link to my pics from white flash. the pic on the lower left corner shows them up close. Also the pics makes it all look big but in person you can''t see them (the pic is with major zoom)


https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-ring-pics-from-wf.34178/

 

[atroop711]

Date: 3/11/2009 7:43:45 AM
Author: will873
This is the picture that I have found of a ring that has a slimmer bezel and hence a little less noticeable. This also has more rounded edges. The ring that I first posted I have seen in person. I have never thought that the picture does it 100% justice. Something about the picture, maybe zoomed in, makes it look busy, but in person it flows together nicely, except the bezel.


Someone brought up a good point, This ring is made for a band to sit flush on either side, so there will be a band, potentially two in the future I am told. Does this mean that you dont want diamonds on the side? Will the scratch? It looks rough in the picture, buit seemed pretty smooth to the touch.


Thanks for all the help.

I''m loving this ring!

 

[emeraldlover1]

I just wanted to show you a different option with a prong set cushion halo. Stone seekers amazing ring: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/stone-seekers-3-ct-halod-cushion.94117/

 

[tyty333]

wil873 - I love that second ring you posted! All that diamond encrusting on the first ring is too busy (for me) and
distracts from the center stone (IMO).

 

[LaurenThePartier]

Date: 3/11/2009 7:43:45 AM
Author: will873
This is the picture that I have found of a ring that has a slimmer bezel and hence a little less noticeable. This also has more rounded edges. The ring that I first posted I have seen in person. I have never thought that the picture does it 100% justice. Something about the picture, maybe zoomed in, makes it look busy, but in person it flows together nicely, except the bezel.

Someone brought up a good point, This ring is made for a band to sit flush on either side, so there will be a band, potentially two in the future I am told. Does this mean that you dont want diamonds on the side? Will the scratch? It looks rough in the picture, buit seemed pretty smooth to the touch.

Thanks for all the help.

This one is a much more elegant way to bezel a cushion, and to halo it, IMO.

 

[whitby_2773]

hi will

i agree - i like the second ring much better. if you put a wedding ring next to that first ring, not only will it scratch the wedding ring, but it will also damage the engagement ring, knocking out the tiny side diamonds over time. the wedding band can always be re-polished, but the knocked out pave stones are a pain.

i think the second ring, tho, is gorgeous - enough detail to make it lovely, without being too glitzy (and i think ring 1 is a tad too glitzy), and i''m not fond of that bezel at all.

are you committed to a particular jeweler? because this site could give you lots of ideas as to who to go to if you wanted to have that second ring made up.

just a thought...

also, what are the dimensions on your center stone? this makes a difference.

good luck!

 

[will873]

This is the side picture of the first diamond that I posted. I like this side more than the second pic because it allows for a flush fit of the wedding band. Next post shows that side of pic two in which I like the top better.

With the side pic, I do notice more defined lines via the thin beaded edges that seem to be more noticeable on the second ring. I really think that first pic is not a good picture. Overall, I think they are very similar rings based on the side pics. So I will attempt to do the following -

1) Change the bezel and ensure more rounded corners (this will happen with the cushion cut). Basically like the second picture.
2) Remove side diaming encrusting. Would you all recommend to do this? I kind of like it on both diamonds, but there will be a wedding band.

Thanks again for all the helpful suggestions.

 

[will873]

Here is another top pic of the first ring - Christopher Designs ring. This is from the jeweler, and I actually think this is a better picture.

 

[will873]

And here is the side pic of the second ring that I have posted.

 

[will873]

I have found a 2.02 ct diamond (H/VS1) that will be the center stone. I do have a family jeweler, so that is why I am trying to work with the first pic. Which I really do like, minus the bezel, and the designer seems willing to change that. Also, the prongs holding in the smaller diamonds seem to be a little larger in the first Christopher Designs picture than the prongs holding in the diamonds of the second picture. Do you actually think that is the case, and I could ask them to be a tad smaller, or do you think it is just because one pic looks to be computer altered to be perfect vs the one taken in the shop.

 

[tyty333]

Ok, I could be wrong (and it probably doesnt matter) but these new pictures of that 1st ring do not look like the same
ring as the first picture you posted. Mostly I see it around the shape of the halo. In the very first picture it is somewhat
square with cut corners. In these last 2 pictures it has more rounded off corners.

Have you seen some of the jewerlers pave work? According to PS folks only some people can do it well and I imagine
how big or small the prongs are holding the little pave work in is dependent on how good the craftsman is at doing
pave work.

 

[atroop711]

Date: 3/11/2009 1:21:00 PM
Author: tyty333
Ok, I could be wrong (and it probably doesnt matter) but these new pictures of that 1st ring do not look like the same

ring as the first picture you posted. Mostly I see it around the shape of the halo. In the very first picture it is somewhat

square with cut corners. In these last 2 pictures it has more rounded off corners.


Have you seen some of the jewerlers pave work? According to PS folks only some people can do it well and I imagine

how big or small the prongs are holding the little pave work in is dependent on how good the craftsman is at doing

pave work.

good eye tyty! I looked and it doesn''t look like the first ring. I think #2 ring is FABULOUS

 

[will873]

You all my be right. May not be the same ring, I just pulled it from the designers site, but may be a little different. Hopefully you all like the pic taken from the store better.

Atroop - which #2 ring do you think is fabulous, the #2 christopher designs ring (picture taken from the store) or the #2 ring which was the second pic I posted at the top of this thread.

 

[whitby_2773]

will -

i like the second ring you posted, and the reason is because of the pave setting. looking from above, you''ll notice that on your first ring/photo the width of the pave is much wider, due to not only the internal bezel edge, but also due to what i consider to be a fairly thick milgrain edging on the outside. the effect from above (and let''s face it - that''s what you''re going to see) is a lot of metal from above. to you it may look delicate, but to a woman who has been looking at it for 3 months, 6 months, 12 months...it can start to look like something you want to change!

the second ring, on the other hand, has a lot less metal and a lot more diamond proportionately.

keep in mind also, unless she has big hands, a 2 ct stone is a good, big stone! add a wide halo, and you''re starting to get a whoooooooole lotta ring. it sounds as tho you''ve chosen a fabulous center stone. my suggestion is that, if a halo is what you want, make it a delicate one with nice crisp edges, like in ring 2. ring one has a more rounded look which i, personally, think will date. ring 2''s style is more classic.

so i''d go with ring 2, remove the side pave finish so you have no wedding band/e-ring abrasion issues, and give her the ring of her life!

 

[atroop711]

Date: 3/11/2009 1:45:07 PM
Author: will873
You all my be right. May not be the same ring, I just pulled it from the designers site, but may be a little different. Hopefully you all like the pic taken from the store better.


Atroop - which #2 ring do you think is fabulous, the #2 christopher designs ring (picture taken from the store) or the #2 ring which was the second pic I posted at the top of this thread.

the 2nd pic you posted at the top of the thread. That entire ring is DEVINE!

 

[icekid]

Date: 3/11/2009 2:58:12 PM
Author: atroop711

Date: 3/11/2009 1:45:07 PM
Author: will873
You all my be right. May not be the same ring, I just pulled it from the designers site, but may be a little different. Hopefully you all like the pic taken from the store better.


Atroop - which #2 ring do you think is fabulous, the #2 christopher designs ring (picture taken from the store) or the #2 ring which was the second pic I posted at the top of this thread.

the 2nd pic you posted at the top of the thread. That entire ring is DEVINE!

I agree- this one is lovely! And definitely the way to do the bezel setting, if you prefer that route to prong set. I would be cautious about the three-sided pave though, if your gf wants to wear a wedding band. The stones will end up eating each other and the metal!