rub-over setting

[4quality]

Any comments? I have not seen a single thread on this topic.
the good and the bad for this type of setting?
Is this unpopular in US?
Is this popular anywhere?

 

[sumi]

I'm not sure what you are talking about, I haven't heard of this before. Do you have any pictures of the type of setting you're talking about? It would be really great if you could post some examples.

 

[4quality]

Iwas trying cut and paste, but it did notwork.
Here is the URLs:
http://www.hattongardenonline.com/build_setting.asp?setting_id=15

more examples here.
http://www.gemcat.co.uk/build/setting/listing.asp?d=4&t=ring

 

[winyan]

Ah, I looked at the second site, 4Quality, and I think we call that type of setting bezel set here. That's probably why you didn't find any posts on it.

I imagine the British name comes from the fact that one uses a tool to press the bezel down on the stone, in effect, 'rubbing over' the diamond (gemstone)?

win

 

[winyan]

"Rub over" = Bezel set, I believe. See pic.

win

 

[valeria101]

"Rub over" referes to the way metal is pushed over the edge of the stone in either a bezel setting or a flush or gipsy setting where the girdle of the stone sits flush with the band of the ring...

If a full bezel is what you refer too - well, it is considered an elegant style world over, but not exactly the most flashy fashion find.

 

[pyramid]

rub over setting is also sometimes called chenier setting.

 

[Griffin]

Bezel sets are always around, but they are really only popular in very high-end hand-made pieces. Bezel sets really only excel when the bezels are created for each stone individually, and when a craftsman can take the time do do them properly. This obviously severely limits thier use.

They can easily be mass produced, but the effect given is fairly mediocre at best. This has been discussed on several previous threads. There just isn't any way to do it in production without major compromises.

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 3/4/2004 10:43:04 AM Griffin wrote:

Bezel sets are always around, but they are really only popular in very high-end hand-made pieces.
----------------

Now I am puzzled... isn't the ring above a bezel ? square that is ? I tend to call "bezel" any setting like this which surrounds the stone with a continuous band of metal, even if the 'invisible' elements beneath the face of the ring are somewhat different. Is this wrong? Otherwise, it seems that what I call "bezel" can and is made in any shape

, fortunately - evn though jewelers are not very happy to be asked for non-round ones.

 

[Griffin]

>Bezel sets are always around, but they are really only popular in very high-end hand-made pieces.

"around", Ana, not "round"! As in about and available...

Bezels are indeed any shape at all, and surprisingly not really any harder to set in odd shapes than rounds.

 

[valeria101]

OUPS !

 

[valeria101]

At some point in history, someone decided to split that bezel and make it fit a range of stone sizes, so "off the rack" somewhat-bezel settings could me made. Below is a sample of the result: half bezels, quarters (?) and who-knows-what else they are called. Griffin is right, at least in the opinion of this bezel fan

 

[winyan]

I agree, Griffin, first ring I ever made had a bezel set green tiger eye oval cab in the bezel, with a braided shank.

win