Setting ideas for Octavia

[lovedogs]

Now that I finally have my octavia, I want to find the "perfect" setting for it. While I decide I might have it set in a simple 4-prong setting I already own, so there's no rush. I will likely have to save up to set it, since I spent a bunch on the stone itself (sorry not sorry to my wallet).

I have a few ideas, and they are a bit all over the map so bear with me. There are 3 options right now.

1. Custom Sholdt setting (I've spoken to the designer at Sholdt about a custom setting based on ones they've made before). This is the mock up I made for Sholdt to show what I wanted. Basically I want the semi-bezel they're known for, but with the semi-bezel itself on the top and bottom of the stone instead of on the sides. Then the shank that is a "reverse taper". Basically it's 2 Sholdt rings combined haha with the semi-bezel in WG and the shank in YG.


Kalee (from Sholdt) described it as this ring, except without the split in the shank (and obviously w the 2-tone gold and octavia instead of a round)





2. Sholdt setting that isn't custom (except for the color gold). Their semi-bezel for an asscher that already has the reverse taper I like (but I would want the shank in yellow gold and bezel in white). I might ask for the bezel piece itself to be a bit thinner, but basically it would be this ring:







3. DK custom ring based on multiple design elements I like (both from him and from MC2). This mock up is kind of a cluster F--k, but I am bad with photoshop. Essentially I'd want a tri-wire shank in YG with "rosettes" on the shank evenly spaced (4-6 of them depending on what DK suggests). Then I would want the "top" of the shank (where it is closest to the stone itself) to have the style 3 "petal" style of MC2 (from one of my all time PS rings owned by @dreamscape made by Mcteigue & McClelland). The head/prongs would be NSEW (compass) in WG.





My thoughts:

On one hand, I want something "simple" and "sleek" to make sure the octavia is the "star". On the other hand, I've loved the elements from DK/MC2 for years, and like the idea of having something that is entirely "mine" based on my own aesthetic and preferences from rings I like.

I'd love PSers thoughts on this! Also open to other suggestions! Thank you to @Demon for suggesting a "top/bottom" semi bezel! I was initially not considering anything that might cover the corners of the stone, but the pics you sent made me look more closely at Sholdt so I owe you for that one

 

[Karl_K]

I have always thought of a simple but bold setting.
Greek columns on the flats to hold the stone up.
The flats facing front and back in the normal way.

Or roman arches with the stone set into the top with small prongs on the flats.
Soft of a none halo halo.
It has thing bar under the girdle the stone sets on then its secured by the prongs.
Then have decorative elements in the arches on the side but the arches on the front and back are open to show the pavilion of the stone.
Or use just the 2 side arches with just a small L shape to support the sides and give it strength and the ledge bar for the stone to set into at the top.

 

[Maggiemeans]

i feel like someone had a setting similar to what you want with an octavia... it was a while back... it was beautiful...

okay edited to add link.. I think this is very beautiful.. i haven't been on pricescope much.. strange that i came on today saw your post and remembered this.

New home for a familiar stone....2.30ct Octavia set by McTeigue & McClelland

Hello lovely Pricescopers! :wavey: I've been lurking here off and on for almost four years, back since I began doing research on what kind of engagement ring I wanted. I always thought I would make my first post when I finally received my e-ring and could share about the process, but there were...

www.pricescope.com

 

[lovedogs]

i feel like someone had a setting similar to what you want with an octavia... it was a while back... it was beautiful...

okay edited to add link.. I think this is very beautiful.. i haven't been on pricescope much.. strange that i came on today saw your post and remembered this.

New home for a familiar stone....2.30ct Octavia set by McTeigue & McClelland

Hello lovely Pricescopers! :wavey: I've been lurking here off and on for almost four years, back since I began doing research on what kind of engagement ring I wanted. I always thought I would make my first post when I finally received my e-ring and could share about the process, but there were...

www.pricescope.com

Yup, that's one of my inspiration rings

 

[lovedogs]

I have always thought of a simple but bold setting.
Greek columns on the flats to hold the stone up.
The flats facing front and back in the normal way.

Or roman arches with the stone set into the top with small prongs on the flats.
Soft of a none halo halo.
It has thing bar under the girdle the stone sets on then its secured by the prongs.
Then have decorative elements in the arches on the side but the arches on the front and back are open to show the pavilion of the stone.
Or use just the 2 side arches with just a small L shape to support the sides and give it strength and the ledge bar for the stone to set into at the top.

I wish I could visualize this, but I am such a disaster at imagining things. Do you have any pics of what you mean? Or can someone else help me with a crude sketch?

 

[Rfisher]

I’d be strongly leaning towards your 3, if me. Becayse yeah - that inspo - swoon-

Question.
Have you ever had some thing like option one or two before?
3?

I think knowing that, and whether you still have them would help in the decision, if it were me.

 

[Karl_K]

remove material from corners, ok needs support to hold it on, add a thin under bar under the girdle from a to b on both sides and a small prong at C.

 

[klrrrr]

So many beautiful options!

Re: 1/2, if you're looking for something like the Sholdts with a bit of a twist, check out Erie Basin Modern. He does a beautiful job with bezels and semi-bezels, and I'm particularly drawn to the finish/alloy of his pieces, plus the sleek galleries. I've also seen some beautiful pieces with bezels and compass prongs, which pulls from 3!

 

[Kim N]

Your ideas for #3 are so beautiful. That would be my pick if it were me.

 

[DejaWiz]

remove material from corners, ok needs support to hold it on, add a thin under bar under the girdle from a to b on both sides and a small prong at C.

I like that!

What about a double claw prong at each corner that accentuates the corner pattern of the Octavia?

 

[yssie]

Oh god dreamscape’s ring. I knew exactly what you were referring to as soon as I saw the username. Her ring is the stuff of legends


Sholdt’s semi-bezels really are all that plus a slice o’ cake and somehow the modern simplicity suits you. Everything I know about you from
PS! #1 or #2 let the stone shine uncontested and unencumbered. My two questions with #1 would be
A) Exactly how would you want the shoulders to “meet” the exposed girdle - would that wide shoulder tuck under the stone a bit? Or something else?
B) If the semi-bezel is N/S, and the shoulders are E/W, then you’ve now enclosed the pavilion of the stone on all sides. You don’t get that “open side” view that #2 gives you, are you okay with that?


#3: If you go this route I would suggest reaching out to Tim McClelland first:
https://wildflowercollection.com/
(Contact at bottom of page) https://mc2jewels.com/
We all know that the original designers are always best equipped to solve design challenges in ways that best reflect the intended aesthetic so working directly with him would be ideal! I don’t know whether he’s taking work/customer requests now though. How the tri-wire morphs into concave blooms, how the gallery supports N/S prongs, how the rosettes embed into the shank organically - I think success with DK on this sort of project necessities you having a very clear three-dimensional vision of exactly what you want.


Can I be totally honest? I LOVE MC2’s work. But for *you* I genuinely prefer the semi-bezels. I see you as a bold, fuss-free, and frou-free person, and my mental image of your jewellery matches my mental image of your personality

 

[Slickk]

I will weigh in more later (family over), but I really love the Scholdt. I may be biased since I someday need that setting too. I also agree with @yssie about what I think is your style from PS.

 

[dk168]

I would be inclined to keep it simple, probably bar prongs in the corners, or tension set, or plain bezel with a chunky shank.

Personal preferences and all that.

Looking forward to see the finished ring as it will be awesome!

DK

 

[MMtwo]

I love number 3 the best so far. It is so fun to see where you will go.

 

[Mooshi]

Big vote for #2, that semi bezel would accentuate the octavia shape, plus beef it up if you care about making it look bigger!

 

[winnietucker]

I’m throwing in a vote for #2. Although I do love option #3 as well.

 

[molecule]

I think part of the beauty of asscher cuts is the geometry of them, so personally, I would choose a solitaire, something geometric, or something that contrasts somewhat against the geometric nature. #3 is just too much and seems to have too many elements to draw away from the Octavia.

My vote is for:

Credit: Leyser inspired fluid shank.


Antique Geometric inspired ring (previously photoshopped for another PSer)


Antique Tiffany inspired (done by DK)

 

[Demon]

Now that I finally have my octavia, I want to find the "perfect" setting for it. While I decide I might have it set in a simple 4-prong setting I already own, so there's no rush. I will likely have to save up to set it, since I spent a bunch on the stone itself (sorry not sorry to my wallet).

I have a few ideas, and they are a bit all over the map so bear with me. There are 3 options right now.

1. Custom Sholdt setting (I've spoken to the designer at Sholdt about a custom setting based on ones they've made before). This is the mock up I made for Sholdt to show what I wanted. Basically I want the semi-bezel they're known for, but with the semi-bezel itself on the top and bottom of the stone instead of on the sides. Then the shank that is a "reverse taper". Basically it's 2 Sholdt rings combined haha with the semi-bezel in WG and the shank in YG.


Kalee (from Sholdt) described it as this ring, except without the split in the shank (and obviously w the 2-tone gold and octavia instead of a round)





2. Sholdt setting that isn't custom (except for the color gold). Their semi-bezel for an asscher that already has the reverse taper I like (but I would want the shank in yellow gold and bezel in white). I might ask for the bezel piece itself to be a bit thinner, but basically it would be this ring:







3. DK custom ring based on multiple design elements I like (both from him and from MC2). This mock up is kind of a cluster F--k, but I am bad with photoshop. Essentially I'd want a tri-wire shank in YG with "rosettes" on the shank evenly spaced (4-6 of them depending on what DK suggests). Then I would want the "top" of the shank (where it is closest to the stone itself) to have the style 3 "petal" style of MC2 (from one of my all time PS rings owned by @dreamscape made by Mcteigue & McClelland). The head/prongs would be NSEW (compass) in WG.





My thoughts:

On one hand, I want something "simple" and "sleek" to make sure the octavia is the "star". On the other hand, I've loved the elements from DK/MC2 for years, and like the idea of having something that is entirely "mine" based on my own aesthetic and preferences from rings I like.

I'd love PSers thoughts on this! Also open to other suggestions! Thank you to @Demon for suggesting a "top/bottom" semi bezel! I was initially not considering anything that might cover the corners of the stone, but the pics you sent made me look more closely at Sholdt so I owe you for that one

I like the bottom photo in choice #3, but the four claw prongs scare me, as I know that I would knock that diamond into something the first day. Would flat tab like prongs be something you'd consider? But you're probably less of a klutz than I am, lol.

 

[lovedogs]

remove material from corners, ok needs support to hold it on, add a thin under bar under the girdle from a to b on both sides and a small prong at C.

Would I also need an equivalent bar on the opposite side of A---B (on the "top" of the stone)?

 

[Karl_K]

Would I also need an equivalent bar on the opposite side of A---B (on the "top" of the stone)?

just a small tab over the top with the bar under the girdle on both the front and back side of the ring.
Its basically a halo that is tight to the stone with only a small tab on the top that is all you see from the top on those sides..

 

[lovedogs]

just a small tab over the top with the bar under the girdle on both the front and back side of the ring.
Its basically a halo that is tight to the stone with only a small tab on the top that is all you see from the top on those sides..

That makes much more sense, thanks!!! I'm going to try to find an example or "draw " it later tonight

 

[Cerulean]

There’s the setting options you think you should get

And there’s the setting option your heart is telling you to get

My vote is no. 3

 

[Cerulean]

I think part of the beauty of asscher cuts is the geometry of them, so personally, I would choose a solitaire, something geometric, or something that contrasts somewhat against the geometric nature. #3 is just too much and seems to have too many elements to draw away from the Octavia.

My vote is for:

Credit: Leyser inspired fluid shank.


Antique Geometric inspired ring (previously photoshopped for another PSer)


Antique Tiffany inspired (done by DK)

Love this middle option! Marries some of the aspects of bold and ornate

I also really relate to being torn on more “frou frou” settings and ultra minimal

I’ve bought Sholdt, and I’ve done more ornate, vintage styles

Sometimes we have a lot of complexity to our “tastes” and it’s important to maybe identify what your sweet spot / comfort zone is

For me - I love the look of embellishments / ornate in theory, but more simple designs in practice

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I'd do full bezel Sholdt or a halo. I have a similar size asscher in a halo and it really frames it well. I am just not sure about a semi-bezel on that size stone.

 

[lovedogs]

@Karl_K is this kind of what you mean? Trying to imagine what it would look like. I used grey to indicate "silver" because in Paint when I used "silver" it was basically white haha.


I edited the Sholdt pic and also used a side view of a Sholdt semi bezel to try and visualize the side view with "bar" under the girdle.

Do you still think there would need to be a prong on the very bottom side (labeled "C")?

 

[Karl_K]

@Karl_K is this kind of what you mean? Trying to imagine what it would look like. I used grey to indicate "silver" because in Paint when I used "silver" it was basically white haha.


I edited the Sholdt pic and also used a side view of a Sholdt semi bezel to try and visualize the side view with "bar" under the girdle.

Do you still think there would need to be a prong on the very bottom side (labeled "C")?

hmmm the left/right side bezels are doing all the work anyway so the tab prongs might not be needed, just the bar under the girdle to hold the diamond from sliding in and out front/back.
That would be an option to explore with who you choose to make it if you go with this design.

 

[Mreader]

Yup, that's one of my inspiration rings

Whoa that is gorgeous!

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

A bold clean setting such as described above, yes. And open on the sides as much as practical so you can enjoy this lovely thing from the sides as well.

 

[DejaWiz]

A bold clean setting such as described above, yes. And open on the sides as much as practical so you can enjoy this lovely thing from the sides as well.

That's what I was envisioning with my quick photo edit that I posted above (I tried to erase the bezels on the sides)...nice chunky prongs up the sides of an open gallery with double claws for the heads at each corner.

 

[LilAlex]

Sholdt setting that isn't custom (except for the color gold). Their semi-bezel for an asscher...

This gets my vote. The simplicity of the ring lets the complexity (and beauty) of the facet pattern really shine. And there is just enough softness to the contour to keep it from looking masculine.