Tennis Bracelets

[WinkHPD]

Date: 11/15/2005 12:01:35 AM
Author: Tacori E-ring

Date: 11/14/2005 4:11:29 PM
Author: Wink

Date: 11/14/2005 2:30:55 PM

Author: Tacori E-ring

Is this the look you are talking about?

The very concept of only two prongs for half carat stones terrifies me. While I can see that it might be okay in a bracelet, it defies my conservative and cautious nature. I will beg and plead against it and require a signature on a hold harmless legal document of many pages before letting one out of here...


Wink

Whoah, I was just trying to help Deb. I am not saying that the version I posted was perfect but if it could be done without any prongs it seemed from Deb''s posts it was what she had in mind. No legal action is needed. It was only supposed to be used as a visual.

Sorry, did not mean to offend you, it was not meant as an attack, just my overstated aversion to two prong settings. I was sort of kidding about the hold harmless agreement as I would never ever expect a client to have me make something I recommended that strongly against.

Sorry that the tone in my mind and in my heart were not the tone that you received. Please accept my apology.

Wink

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 11/15/2005 10:57:27 AM
Author: cflutist

Date: 11/15/2005 9:38:44 AM
Author: coda72
I tried to take pictures of my bracelet this weekend, but my digital camera''s battery went dead. I really think my bracelet just looks like a line of diamonds on my wrist; the prongs are barely noticeable. The picture on Whiteflash''s website shows the bracelet magnified greatly. In real life the prongs don''t look that big. My bracelet has small diamonds compared to what you want, but the 3 prong setting looks really nice. I think the bezel setting looks too thick and bulky, whereas the metal on the 3 prong doesn''t look that way.

I have to agree with coda72 here. When I look at my bracelet from top down all I primarily see are diamonds. The prongs are barely noticeable and they are 14K yellow gold. So with platinum, they would blend in even more.

Good luck with your search. You are in good hands with Wink. I just love the bracelet he made for me.

cflutist
yep....IMO.the less prong you see the better it looks. Wink did a beautiful job with your bracelet.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/15/2005 5:07:00 PM
Author: valeria101

Where is this from? (I also don''t know what the, "NC" meant!)

Deb

 

[crafftygrrl]

OMG!!!!!

I love martini settings. They make diamonds look sooo sparkly. I would love a martini necklace as well as a bracelet. But those will have to wait!!!!

A word of advice. Dont''t wear it to bed or for any hard work. You don''t want to have the links stretch.

 

[Kaleigh]

Deb,
Are you any closer to making a decision??? I said in another thread that CF's is the way to go. Less metal and lots of sparkle.

 

[cflutist]

Date: 11/15/2005 9:38:40 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/15/2005 5:07:00 PM
Author: valeria101

Where is this from? (I also don''t know what the, ''NC'' meant!)

Deb

I like the looks of this bracelet, however there is one more thing to consider. The stones in this bracelet appear to be connected by a single "connector" whereas Wink''s are double "connectors" hence the double prongs at the 9 o''clock position. A little more secure in my opinion. Hey, I like to err on the cautious side because my older 6.5 ct bracelet did break and I had to have it re-soldered.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/16/2005 12:43:43 AM
Author: cflutist
I like the looks of this bracelet, however there is one more thing to consider. The stones in this bracelet appear to be connected by a single ''connector'' whereas Wink''s are double ''connectors'' hence the double prongs at the 9 o''clock position. A little more secure in my opinion. Hey, I like to err on the cautious side because my older 6.5 ct bracelet did break and I had to have it re-soldered.

Thanks for the tip, cflutist. I do not want to spend any more money on a bracelet once I consider it completed! And, Kaleigh, no...I am not closer to making a decision, but I now know much more about how to watch out for what I do not want!

Deb

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/15/2005 9:38:40 PM
Author: AGBF



Where is this from? (I also don''t know what the, ''NC'' meant!)

Deb

''N.C.'' = no comment

The pictures are from Rau and are meant to show how tiny traditional prongs look on bracelets of size comparable to what you have in mind.

I am not sure I understand the relation between how the links are connected and the arrangement of prongs Cflutist hints at...

These settings look like very common four prong wire baskets finished nicely.


Anyway, for that ''brilliant line'' around the wrist, I''d be looking either at multiple rows of small rounds or for channel set square cuts like the last of the three pictures in the previous post. The large round stones do not blend into one another - there''s always a gap which can be filled in by the setting etc. but... who needs it.

 

[cflutist]

Date: 11/16/2005 9:53:51 AM
Author: valeria101

I am not sure I understand the relation between how the links are connected and the arrangement of prongs Cflutist hints at...

What I am trying to explain are the "double connectors" between the stones which can be seen here. They also align with the double prongs at the 9 o''clock position. Maybe Wink can do a better job of explaining.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 11/16/2005 10:46:36 AM
Author: cflutist

Date: 11/16/2005 9:53:51 AM
Author: valeria101

I am not sure I understand the relation between how the links are connected and the arrangement of prongs Cflutist hints at...

They also align with the double prongs at the 9 o''clock position.

I see... Thanks for the picture. On some settings these connecting elements are independent parts - some bars or links between the baskets without any relation with the prongs. I am used to see that kind, this is something else

 

[AGBF]

Another thread on tennis bracelets (in Jewelry Pieces) has made me aware that I have not kept you up to date. In part that is because tennis bracelets have not been on my mind! I had houseguests from overseas and when I got to the computer I went where I liked, not where duty drove me!

I should tell you that I received a small black and white photograph from Jeffrey Garrett in California. He wrote that what was pictured was called, "a line bracelet" and that he could create it in platinum for $3,000. If I chose to have him set my diamonds the cost would be $700.00.

The writing beneath it was cryptic and not explained in the body of the letter. It was part of the photograph, not something Jeff had written. It said:

TB 100-K 36 dia.x.334=12.02 ct (4.5mm) 18.0Gr. A=$35284, B=$30524, C=$22946.

I am assuming that 36 diamonds of .334 carat, totalling 12.02 carats, set in platinum would be those three prices depending on whether one chose diamonds of A, B, or C quality...but I may be mistaken. (If anyone else knows what this means, please tell me!)

I believe Mara that the bracelet she saw was spectacular, but a black and white photo (probably from a manufacturer''s book) doesn''t do it justice.

I do owe Jeff a phone call, though. He was very kind and Fedexed this picture to me. I would have been glad to buy stones from Wink and have him set them if the bracelet he made had knocked me off my feet, but I just cannot see what he makes from this photo! If you live in California and are looking for a tennis bracelet, though, it might be worthwhile to stop in at his store! Apparently he has one at #7 Seascape Village in Aptos, California.

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/16/2005 12:43:43 AM
Author: cflutist
I like the looks of this bracelet, however there is one more thing to consider. The stones in this bracelet appear to be connected by a single ''connector'' whereas Wink''s are double ''connectors'' hence the double prongs at the 9 o''clock position. A little more secure in my opinion. Hey, I like to err on the cautious side because my older 6.5 ct bracelet did break and I had to have it re-soldered.

That (the bracelet pictured) is the look I want. Maybe I need a single connector bracelet. Is it impossible to make that single connector very thick and strong?

My solitaire looks as if it is on a thread because the knife edge on either side is so thin...but the ring has depth! It is really very sturdy; it just gives an ethereal appearance! (Kind of like Scarlett O''Hara!)

Could that bracelet be made with narrow, but thick connectors that do not show when the diamonds are facing up?

Deb

 

[Ann]

http://www.hmerrill.com/shoponline.asp?point=moreinfo&catid=11&id=891

I saw this and thought about this thread. Different setting for a tennis bracelet. The pics are terrible though!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 12/14/2005 11:38:04 AM
Author: Ann

Photo

I saw this and thought about this thread. Different setting for a tennis bracelet. The pics are terrible though!

Thank you, Ann. Once again, that is the look I want (from a distance). It is hard to tell what it would look like up close, however! The setting is described in these words: "The new crescent setting features a ½ split bezel and a prong."

Does anyone have a close-up of what such a setting would look like?

Deborah

 

[DiamondExpert]

I love the tennis bracelet concept - you guys have shown some beauties!

Here''s another take on the idea...

 

[DiamondExpert]

Dang...wrong pic...this is a better one.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 12/15/2005 8:14:10 PM
Author: DiamondExpert
Dang...wrong pic...this is a better one.

Not too shabby! I wouldn''t mind having that bracelet made with 1-carat stones! How many would I need for a 6.5" bracelet? (This could NOT be a substitute for the "regular" tennis bracelet...just something to buy a little later .

Deb

 

[strmrdr]

i love it now make every other one a bright red ruby and id love it even more.
yummy!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 12/15/2005 8:23:56 PM
Author: strmrdr

i love it now make every other one a bright red ruby and id love it even more.

yummy!

I think I agree with you, Storm. Ana can change it for us .

Deb

 

[Kaleigh]

I agree that would be sooo yummy!!! Irina is getting really good at her photoshop skills, right irina??

 

[widget]

Here''s one for you, Stormy!

Sorry about the quality of the pic, but you get the idea: "Line bracelet comprised of 36 asscher cut diamonds: TCW: 26.23

I''ll take two!

widget

 

[Kaleigh]

Sorry Storm, that bracelet has my name written all over it!!!

 

[DiamondExpert]

ABGF - about a dozen stones would work, but you have to begin to worry about the pavilions peeking out the back side and scratching your skin!

Maybe a set of ovals would work better into this design...doing them lengthwise.

Of course, most any stone would look pretty good - ruby...yum, yum - sapphire (any color) - spinel (RED)...gee I''m day dreaming again...

 

[valeria101]

Looks very 'by the yard' ... and agreed about using large stones. In the DBY settings, 40pts diamonds already 'pinch' with the culet well outside the bezel. On necklaces this is OK, but I can't imagine those culets being tossed around the hand and getting into harsh contact with table tops all the time - either one would get hurt at some point, IMO.


Instead of turning the current drawing red, does THIS work for you guys ?

 

[AGBF]

Date: 12/16/2005 8:04:48 AM
Author: valeria101
Instead of turning the current drawing red, does THIS work for you guys ?

Not for me, Ana. In fact, I am having doubts about the other bracelet as well. If we are going to discuss ruby bracelets, I think we need another thread! I am always ready to discuss rubies!

Deb

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/16/2005 9:53:51 AM
Author: valeria101

The pictures are from Rau and are meant to show how tiny traditional prongs look on bracelets of size comparable to what you have in mind.

I am not sure I understand the relation between how the links are connected and the arrangement of prongs Cflutist hints at...

These settings look like very common four prong wire baskets finished nicely.

The relation between prongs and connectors is how much metal shows . If prongs are big or if there is a lot of metal connecting the stones, one sees metal, not diamonds. I want to see large diamonds, seemingly separated only by air, around my wrist. Can I indeed get that look with a "regular" bracelet?


Deb

 

[AGBF]

Is there a chart anywhere that shows how many stones of each carat weight would be needed to make up a tennis bracelet of standard length? Some enterprising jeweler should put such a chart on his site if there is not one out there! I want to figure out how many stones I would need to make a bracelet with different carat weights, but without a chart, that is hard to do!


Deb

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/15/2005 5:07:00 PM
Author: valeria101

I love the top bracelet, but not the bottom one. The top one is exactly what I have been looking for. The stones seem SEPARATE. To me that makes the "setting" look less visible.

The bottom bracelet looks packed together, not graceful.

What is the difference? How do I make sure I get the look of the top bracelet when I have one made? What do I ask for?

Deb

 

[AGBF]

I e-mailed Wink to ask him if he could make the bracelet I want in the style of the bracelet in the upper photo of the two. I was surprised to hear from him while he was still in Chile-in between rolls in his kayak, no doubt!

He asked (from Chile, no less!) the person who makes up tennis bracelets for him if he could make my bracelet in this design and that man e-mailed Wink to ask what was to stop this bracelet from twisting.

Does anyone here know why the upper bracelet would be more prone to twisting than would any other bracelet?

I really do not want to make mistakes with this bracelet. It is way too big a purchase for me to take lightly! Sheesh! My real engagement ring probably cost under $500.00!!!


Deb

 

[AGBF]

Date: 2/3/2006 11:37:26 AM
Author: AGBF
Does anyone here know why the upper bracelet would be more prone to twisting than would any other bracelet?

Wink is back from Chile and e-mailed me that with one point of connection the bracelet would be more prone to twisting than with two. Now I need to see if I can get the look of well-spaced diamonds, a graceful look, even with two points of connection.

Deb