What is your wise list for free ring/setting design software?

[RingHunt]

This is rather advanced for this group, but I am asking anyway. I am writing setting design software for free consumer use. I am writing a useful related set of plug-in''s(software) that create finished ring designs for visualization and manufacturing.

This is ground breaking on the consumer level. You would need to take the design you create to a casting company for the setting to be make. You can say this is a new way of asking for the ring that you want.

With a such a plug-in you can design the ring in a few seconds by entering in all the proper parameters. You can see an example of this at:
http://www.ringhunt.com/plugins/crossover/index.html

What free setting software would you like to see me write first?:

1.) Simple shanks/bands with many profile options?
2.) Lettered bands?, any demand for poems on rings?
3.) Simple Celtic designs with knots and braiding?
4.) Square shanks?
5.) Diamonds? - it''s a given, but where does it stand in your priority list?
6.) Simple Tiffany settings? (Great for visualization when you can do it in 2 seconds.)

This is continued in the next post....

 

[RingHunt]

This is continued from the last post....

7.) Eternity / Channel settings?
8.) Simple three stone rings?
9.) Settings with bezel heads for round and fancy shapes.
10.) Pave options?
11.) Automation tools? (example -- create 5-10 basic setting models for a diamond in your inventory, render them, then create the HTML code to display all these on your web page?)
12.) What else???

Obviously some of these are related, and dependent on others. I don't have much interest at this point in signet and class rings, but I will do some plug-ins for them if they are simple to
do, and demand is there.

Speak up, you have a change to steer the path of my development here.

Thanks Much,

Paul Krush
[email protected]
www.RingHunt.com

 

[katbadness]

----------------
On 6/21/2004 1:58:35 PM RingHunt wrote:
This is rather advanced for this group, but I am asking anyway. I am writing setting design software for free consumer use. I am writing a useful related set of plug-in's(software) that create finished ring designs for visualization and manufacturing.

This is ground breaking on the consumer level. You would need to take the design you create to a casting company for the setting to be make. You can say this is a new way of asking for the ring that you want.
----------------

Oh WOW!! I love your idea!!

I'll be looking forward to seeing this.

 

[dbgaap]

What free setting software would you like to see me write first?:

here's what i'd look & use:

-Simple shanks/bands with many profile options

-Simple Tiffany settings (Great for visualization when you can do it in 2 seconds.)

-diamond bands with a variety of setting options

GREAT IDEA & good luck!

 

[Mara]

What an excellent idea! I actually posted about this about a year ago or longer..asking if there was something like this out there! Of course there was nothing that was consumer friendly, and consumers don't expect to have to learn to use modeling software just to get a ring mockup. Consumer friendly and easy to use aka with fields for entering, pulldowns to choose, selection buttons, is the way to go in my opinion.




One thing while shopping around, is you have tons of ideas, and you don't always have an idea of what they will look like in the flesh. Having something where you can plug in variables and create what your ring would look like would be invaluable IMO. I'm surprised it has not been done before. While we were shopping...I wanted to see things like..what would 1/2 pave look like this with this basket head, or what would a 1.5c stone look like on a 1.5mm band vs a 3mm band. I wanted to play around with ideas and not have to go into 10 stores to find what I wanted in order to just compare. In the end we went custom but having a tool that showed what we wanted beforehand rather than just jotting down notes would have been much better for our jeweler!




In setting it up in terms of ease-of-use to build would be along the lines of the following steps/process:


-choose a setting type (aka solitaire, 3 stone, 5 stone)


-choose a band adornment type (aka filigree or channel set, pave or both or more than 2 etc)


(subset of this is would be dependent on what they selected, aka'where do you want pave/filigree, or pave on eternity style or 1/2 band, do you want prong set diamonds or channel)


-choose band thickness in mm (aka 1.5mm, 2mm, 3mm)


(subset of this is 'does band taper at head or stay straight' etc)


-choose a style of head (aka basket or v prong or tulip)


(subset of this is 'do you want your head to have pave or filigree etc)


-choose a number of prongs (aka 4 or 6 or split (


-choose thickness of prongs (aka thick/visible, or very small/not visible)


-choose stone (or stones) (aka diamond, sapphire, emerald)


-choose stone(s) cut (aka round, emerald, marquis)


-choose stone(s) specs (aka 6.51x6.53x4.02mm is round for 1c; 8.20x6.50x5mm may be a pear)


(using the SPECS for diameter and depth vs a carat weight will be easier to program for real-life viewing)


-choose ring size (aka size 4.5 or 6 will have different real-life viewing results)




-View Results (then show the ring from various angles, top down, side view, rotations etc)




Let them save their designs and/or send to friends, add in a printing option so that they can print it and take to their jeweler, one possible great thing to add would be a detailed analysis of what they used to create their ring (aka this is a 7mm round cut brilliant stone in a 2mm band with a basket shaped filigree pave head and 1/2 band pave on the side with tapering shoulders to the head, etc) so that the jeweler who is creating it will not only be able to rely on the PICTURE of the ring, but rather the detailed description of what they used to create it.




Another suggestion is to look at some of the rings out there that are EXTREMELY detailed, such as the Tacori line. They have filigree, pave, diamonds, you name it and they come with it. So take the most encrusted ring you can find, and make sure that your tool will be able to build that if someone has seen it in the store. That would be a foolproof way of ensuring that you are covering all the bases. There will be people who want to see a real Tiffany replica solitaire on a basic band and then there will be those who want the Tacori imitation with everything in the book. Make sure your program can deliver both options and everything in between.




Hmm that is all I can think of right now...this is an excellent idea!! I can't wait to see the finished product!

 

[RingHunt]

Wow Mara,

That's a lot. Thanks. It's pretty much where I would like to be, plus a 100 other little features. It will take a while. I am mostly trying to plan where to start first here. Plus testing the waters for the demand. I probably will roll out a web interface as well. I have been testing for months and months to know exactly what I can and can’t do.

This sort of software is very costly to design. It has just been too expensive in the past to be giving out to consumers. Even at this point most people in the industry think I'm nuts.

Saving the design for the jeweler will not be an issue.

Thanks,

Paul

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 6/21/2004 1:58:35 PM RingHunt wrote:



This is rather advanced for this group, but I am asking anyway.

----------------

... this may not be wrong, since there aren't that many professional software engineers here - just a few.

You will find allot of great hints in older posts asking about setting - and Mara did set up for you exactly what such a public opinion survey could yield.

The Q is interesting, so here's my 0.2, anyway.



#1: I a trying to understand what are you hoping to achieve... Should the software allow buyers to tweak options on largely pre-designed rings so that the output is a complete model ready to be sent to the manufacturer? (option 1) Or, should it give buyers some idea on what a certain stone size, band width and side stones look like without setting all details of the design? (option 2)

Obviously, both these routes have been already explored about 1000 time each. I think the version on adiamondisforever.com makes a good example for option 2 and the interface at BlueNile approximates option 1. The models at BN change for various diamond sizes and proportions and are presented "on hand" - something I have not seen elsewhere.

The "show me the ring" forum here makes good proof about how attractive this "ring on hand" viewing option can be. Also, just about every thread on "Show me the ring" asks about ring size - and no interface allows to select one, as far as I know. Also, no interface I know of allows to select band width for rings (another popular option is to make those thinner, but choice is great)... so you may want to make a first.


Actually, no exiting interface I know of allows to related the size of hand (ring size), band and center stone - something that seems to be often mentioned, regardless of design. Did you see the "fancy Shape Selector" at gemappraisers.com? As far as I know it is the only application that takes the size of a stone as input (ok, for a different reason) - not that the actual size is shown on the drawings, but allowing one to input the actual dimensions of a diamond he takes into consideration sounds very appealing. It would be nice to relate such measurements to ring size and band width, for example.

And there isn't much to play with when it comes to bands and three-, five- or seven-stone rings. Allowing for options about ring size and stone size would be great - at least looking at how many times questions about these surface here. And it doesn't have to be some complicated design - just look at the level of detail on adiamondisforever.com and how popular the site is... There always is some version 1.0 of any project: I'd vote for some wedding-band assembly line [you know: ( eternity, five stone) X (channel, shared prongs) X (square / round) and different sizes... what not)] for starters.

This, not to mention that not even the simplest simulation tool exists to pair up rings and bands - another generally appealing "issue", if I am not mistaking.


Hope this helps

 

[autumngems]

I am a beginning designer, (all work is on paper, ugh) and would love to know when you have this ready. I know computers but it needs to be an easy to use software for me. I would be interested in all but the class rings and such. I am in process of building a 3 stone square radiant and wish I had software to get a picture of what i want. Please let me know when you have this ready for public.

 

[RingHunt]

Thanks for the thoughts valeria101!

Something like this does many different things. For smaller diamonds, and simple settings it's good for visualization. It will help the consumer in asking for the ring that they want, whether it would be over the Internet or in person. For larger stones, especially fancies over 2 carats this is good for making the custom setting.

If you check out the example everything can be changed. It's not just tweaking.

The examples you stated are 2D. These web sites are making a picture. I am talking about a 3D model. A non-proprietary CAD model that you can directly cast to make your new custom ring. It’s way too much for the average consumer. I think there is a big enough group of people out there that would use this to make it worth my wild to write it.

By the way gemappraisers.com fancy diamond simulator is quite cool! I will be referring people to this for a long time!

Thanks,

Paul

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 6/22/2004 11:04:02 AM RingHunt wrote:



#1: If you check out the example everything can be changed. It's not just tweaking.

#2: I am talking about a 3D model. A non-proprietary CAD model that you can directly cast to make your new custom ring.

----------------

My fault here - but I am looking forward to playing with your ring-maker.

Actually, I wasn't concerned that the model would not allow enough choice - but that it would too much! Unlike professional design software, this piece would need to incorporate technical limitations that the user is unaware of (so that the output is close to feasible from the jeweler's point of view, something that not too many would be informed about or should need to). My impression could be very far from the truth, but it does seem that ring design (and jewelry at large) is copy-cat territory - meaning that for such occasional purchase, it is customary to go for a variation of a design you have seen or a combination of already seen elements rather than something completely new to human kind. Ever heard of "ring folders" - meaning collections of ring pictures assembled for reference and inspiration before purchase? Just fashion shopping, I suppose. Hence my use of the word "tweaking" for "combinatory creativity" or whatever is such behavior called.

In consequence, I would wander what "elements" would one want on the screen to start playing with: the pointer or a menu of adaptable parts more or less akin to what a catalog for semi finished jewelry would contain. BTW, those catalogs do sum up lots of experience on what makes a practical start for making jewelry - and you may find inspiration with them, if not done so already. Even though you seem to have been looking towards a CAD & casting process

And you know what, I love the idea. Way to go