SUGGESTIONS? Cushion Halo Split Shank CADs are in!

[Yee Haw!]

Hey PS,

I just received the CADs for the HW-inspired cushion halo with split shank that I''m having custom made. I have a few concerns and I wanted to get y''all''s opinions:

1) Top: Is there a way to make it a bit more rectangular looking without creating space between the stone and the halo, which I don''t want? Also, is this as low as the stone can be set? I want to keep it as close to the finger as possible.

2) Band: Should smaller stones be used in the band to make it thinner and even more delicate looking? Will that compromise the structure or durability? Is the CAD just making it look thicker than it will be in real life? Also, is there a way to reduce the amount of metal showing where the band starts to split? Those last two diamonds before the split seem to have a lot of metal around them.

3) Basket: Should I add a slight basket (like MP''s)? I want a wedding band to be able to sit flush and I don''t want anything too flashy, but I''m worried about the stone getting banged around (or dirty) without anything underneath it

Thoughts?

 

[Yee Haw!]

Two more CADs

 

[Yee Haw!]

Last one

 

[Upgradable]

I think the overall design is beautiful. In my opinion, much of the bulkiness you are concerned about are part of the CAD print. Once finished it will be more delicate. The only portion I would reconsider is the "reflector base" with the window under the diamond. I''m not sure of it''s purpose, but I think you''re going to have a lot of metal showing there.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think you should ask all of the3se questions of the designer.

CADs add 15% bulk to the metals to allow for polishing, so the whole thing will e more delicate. I think that most of your requests are possible, with the exception of the halo being more square without adding more metal/increasing the airline. I think that is somewhat limited by the shape of the stone.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 1/16/2010 1:37:48 PM
Author: Upgradable
I think the overall design is beautiful. In my opinion, much of the bulkiness you are concerned about are part of the CAD print. Once finished it will be more delicate. The only portion I would reconsider is the ''reflector base'' with the window under the diamond. I''m not sure of it''s purpose, but I think you''re going to have a lot of metal showing there.

I agree, I would not want to look through the split shank and see a band of metal. It should either be thiner or split, IMHO.

 

[yssie]

Date: 1/16/2010 2:05:00 PM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 1/16/2010 1:37:48 PM
Author: Upgradable
I think the overall design is beautiful. In my opinion, much of the bulkiness you are concerned about are part of the CAD print. Once finished it will be more delicate. The only portion I would reconsider is the ''reflector base'' with the window under the diamond. I''m not sure of it''s purpose, but I think you''re going to have a lot of metal showing there.

I agree, I would not want to look through the split shank and see a band of metal. It should either be thiner or split, IMHO.

Ditto.


The profile is lovely

 

[gemgirl]

The undergallery can be modified however you''d like it. Just for an example.....

 

[icekid]

Date: 1/16/2010 1:37:48 PM
Author: Upgradable
I think the overall design is beautiful. In my opinion, much of the bulkiness you are concerned about are part of the CAD print. Once finished it will be more delicate. The only portion I would reconsider is the ''reflector base'' with the window under the diamond. I''m not sure of it''s purpose, but I think you''re going to have a lot of metal showing there.

Ditto this! Pretty ring. I really like the open gallery; it''s a lot like my e-ring

I actually think it is easier to keep clean this way.

 

[Yee Haw!]

What do y''all think, will adding struts with pave diamonds be an improvement? (like Isabelle''s and MP''s rings at the end of page 1 here)

Will adding those struts be a pretty addition to the profile that gets rid of the problem of too much metal visible from the reflector plate? Or will they make the whole thing too busy?

 

[LAG2010]

I have a pretty similar ering, except that my stone is an RB and the split on my ring doesn''t actually meet until the back of the shank. I''m not nearly as knowledgable as diamonds as the other PS''ers, but I did want to add my thoughts about your second bullet. I wanted a really delicate looks, so the paves on my band are very close together with shared prongs. This prevents any metal from showing through. I have not had any issues with durability, and I wear my ring almost 24/7. I''ve had it since April ''09.

Below is a link to my original SMTR thread. If you scroll down through the first page, you''ll see a side shot which really shows off the paves.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-dream-ering-now-need-dream-wedding-band.130751/

 

[Bella_mezzo]

I actually love your cad, I think IRL it will be very delicate and I like the profile you have...can''t wait to see the finished product.

 

[Upgradable]

WoW!!! I just checked out LAG''s thread and I second you take a look! The side view is gorgeous!!!!!!

 

[Upgradable]

Here it is.

 

[Yee Haw!]

LAG2010, can a wedding band fit flush with your E-ring? It is indeed gorgeous....

 

[Yee Haw!]

But I''m also still curious: what do y''all think about the idea of adding micropave struts?

 

[marcy]

I think the ring is going to be quite lovely.

 

[Gypsy]

Not one of the questions, but I think I''d split the shank more... join it further down on the shank than it does. That''s the one thing I would change. I like the shape of the halo. The point size on the melee... well, I''d talk to your jeweler to see if there is a way to make the point size in the shank a little smaller without it visually looking smaller than the point size on the halo.

I''m not sure what you mean by struts... can you explain better what you mean?

 

[Dreamer_D]

I like the open gallery myself, but like LAG`s ring I would split the bar that runs along the finger under the diamond and as Gypsy suggested, have the plit go further along the shank. Basically just like LAGs !

 

[gemgirl]

Date: 1/18/2010 1:58:22 AM
Author: Gypsy
Not one of the questions, but I think I''d split the shank more... join it further down on the shank than it does. That''s the one thing I would change. I like the shape of the halo. The point size on the melee... well, I''d talk to your jeweler to see if there is a way to make the point size in the shank a little smaller without it visually looking smaller than the point size on the halo.

I''m not sure what you mean by struts... can you explain better what you mean?

Gypsy, he means the little "support beams" that run north and south on an angle from the halo to the shank of the ring.

 

[Yee Haw!]

Thanks, gemgirl! You''re right. I''m thinking about adding "struts" (that''s what my jeweler called them) like Isabelle''s or MP''s at the end of page 1 of this thread.

What do y''all wise folks think? Would that be prettier than an open gallery?

 

[tyty333]

I like both (struts and no-struts). Since you already have the split shank I would probably go with the no-struts.
If you had a single shank I might go with the struts to add some more interest (not that they're needed).

 

[Upgradable]

I agree with ty. Struts and split shank would be too much and distracting. And I absolutely LOVE the unobstructed side view of the pavilion!

 

[LAG2010]

Upgradable: Thanks so much for posting that picture from my thread!! I tend to have trouble posting pics these days.

Yee Haw: I wanted a very low setting, and because of that, I don''t think that a wedding band will sit flush (although to be honest, I''ve never tried!) I''m actually considering making my ering a RHR, because I love the elegance of the split shank, and don''t want anything to take away from it.

 

[gemgirl]

More rings have struts than don''t have struts, but I don''t think that matters as much as how you envision your ring. Structurally they''re not necessary, so it''s really a matter of preference.

Here''s a Legacy repro from a 47th St. NY jeweler. Personally, I like the little support cross beams. All of that open space would bother me, but I know I sometimes have a different opinion than most people. Lots of folks love the Ritani Endless Love mounting, but it always bothered me that there is no top to the shank. Different strokes, ya'' know?