shape
carat
color
clarity

Opinions on milgrain: antique v. modern

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

kcoursolle

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
10,595
Don''t worry about whether the setting will look antique or not, focus on the beauty of the setting instead.

I think millgrain used in moderation can be very beautiful. I like fine milgrain used instead of thicker milgrain and I do not like rings covered in milgrain.
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
I''ve seen milgrain on a couple of Cartier Asscher-cut rings and on a few of Leon''s pieces that look really nice when paired with pave. But I wonder how much I am being influenced by what is popular or what has been historically acceptable.
 

Gypsy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
40,225
LOL. Fanboy... no offense but I think this is where you are losing site of the forest because you are too focused on the trees. Does it really matter WHY you are considering it? Whether it''s a matter of cartier... etc, etc. DO YOU LIKE THE LOOK? And does it, in your opinion add, detract, or do nothing for the overall design.

For me, which I like the deco feel blah blah blah... it ultimately boils down to the fact that I like the setting (as a whole) better with it than without it If I was setting a round, or princess in there I''d still want the milgrain. Why? Because I like the way it looks.

That''s the bottom line. Forrest, not the tree.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
lol Gypsy, well said.
 

neatfreak

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Messages
14,169
Date: 6/20/2007 1:40:07 PM
Author: Gypsy
LOL. Fanboy... no offense but I think this is where you are losing site of the forest because you are too focused on the trees. Does it really matter WHY you are considering it? Whether it''s a matter of cartier... etc, etc. DO YOU LIKE THE LOOK? And does it, in your opinion add, detract, or do nothing for the overall design.


For me, which I like the deco feel blah blah blah... it ultimately boils down to the fact that I like the setting (as a whole) better with it than without it If I was setting a round, or princess in there I''d still want the milgrain. Why? Because I like the way it looks.


That''s the bottom line. Forrest, not the tree.

I totally agree. All that matters is if YOU like it. You shouldn''t be trying to impress anyone with this ring but yourself and your fiance.

Milgrain can be a great look when used in moderation. But it''s certainly a different look.
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Aww come on, it's not so simple! I want the ring to be timeless (or as close to timeless as one can reasonbly expect). Of course, technology and times change, but even if they can cut ever smaller diamonds one day--and set them--it will be apparent that this ring was made with the best craftmanship available in its own day.

However, milgrain is not subject to the same timeliness. 20 years from now, when one looks at a ring with milgrain, will they think "oh, that's what technology allowed back then" or "oh, antique-style rings were fashionable at that time"? I think more than likely the latter. But again, my experience with design doesn't reach into the realm of jewelry, where I acknowledge that every element is necessarily ornamental in some way.

Anyone ever read The Fountainhead? How would Howard Roarke design a ring for Dominique?

EDIT: I'm not trying to impress anyone else. I'm trying to create a ring that supercedes what I, my girlfriend, or anyone else likes at the moment in order to create something beautiful over a long period of time.
 

decodelighted

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
11,534
Date: 6/20/2007 1:35:30 PM
Author: fanboy
I wonder how much I am being influenced by what is popular or what has been historically acceptable.
Yes. We've reached it. Analysis paralysis. You have begun to take yourself WAY too seriously. It's as if you'll be defending this e-ring like a disseratation or something. You won't have to explain to people why you chose what you did ... and what your INFLUENCES were (???!!!). Confident folks just say "I liked it". Self-concious people "explain". At IMO.



ETA: THANK GOODNESS you're not THE BRIDE!
3.gif
Picking out the dress is the hardest thing ever ... what will look good in pictures both on her & FOREVER. I can't IMAGINE the internal dialogue you'd have on that one. "Is lace passe? Does it serve a PURPOSE? Is a train declasse? I mean - no one NEED to clear a path anymore? What's the deal with "white" -- in "the future" will I look foolish to have bought into that lame-o "tradition"???"
3.gif
31.gif
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Date: 6/20/2007 2:08:50 PM
Author: decodelighted

Yes. We''ve reached it. Analysis paralysis. You have begun to take yourself WAY too seriously. It''s as if you''ll be defending this e-ring like a disseratation or something. You won''t have to explain to people why you chose what you did ... and what your INFLUENCES were (???!!!). Confident folks just say ''I liked it''. Self-concious people ''explain''. At IMO.
Well, I''ve picked away surgically at all the things I care about. I know others may think I''m taking things too seriously, but that''s how I roll; and keep in mind, that''s partially why my girlfriend loves me!

At any rate, I have yet to be paralyzed by analyzing anything. I find that I just wind up happier with my choices. Obviously, if there was a bomb strapped to my chest with a clock ticking down, I''d have to decide faster with less thinking, but be it as it is, such is not the case.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
Date: 6/20/2007 2:12:39 PM
Author: fanboy

Well, I''ve picked away surgically at all the things I care about. I know others may think I''m taking things too seriously, but that''s how I roll; and keep in mind, that''s partially why my girlfriend loves me!

At any rate, I have yet to be paralyzed by analyzing anything. I find that I just wind up happier with my choices. Obviously, if there was a bomb strapped to my chest with a clock ticking down, I''d have to decide faster with less thinking, but be it as it is, such is not the case.
Then why are you asking us??
11.gif
2.gif
 

surfgirl

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
4,438
I agree with Gypsy. Just go with what you like. You say you want "timelessness", well then go with Leon Mege and let him decide on what is timeless as his designs are all timelessly elegant, whether or not they incorporate millegrain or not. If you want a clean lines look, more modern timeless, go without. If you want more old world timeless, go with millegrain. I would still suggest that you go shopping, if only by yourself, and look at more designs until one speaks to you. I know a lot of guys come here and say "my gf wants to be surprised. She wants me to pick out the ring..." Trust me, your gf might say that, but she KNOWS what she REALLY wants. And if she doesn''t she should figure that out before you drop 20k on a ring that might not make her heart sing! Just my two cents as I step off the soapbox now. Good luck.
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Date: 6/20/2007 2:21:23 PM
Author: Ellen
Then why are you asking us??
11.gif
2.gif
Well, for discourse! It''s easier to analyze when different ideas and points-of-view are available. I''m not expecting anyone to decide for me, but I want to make a well-informed decision.

I know, I know, there''s a chance she may not really want to be surprised, but that''s just a chance I''m going to have to take. Questioning the hypothetical isn''t helping me get anywhere. You might as well forget that it''s me deciding and not her.
 

decodelighted

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
11,534
Date: 6/20/2007 2:23:18 PM
Author: surfgirl
before you drop 20k on a ring that might not make her heart sing!
20K? Um, times two.
 

decodelighted

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
11,534
Date: 6/20/2007 2:12:39 PM
Author: fanboy
Date: 6/20/2007 2:08:50 PM
Author: decodelighted
Yes. We''ve reached it. Analysis paralysis.
I know others may think I''m taking things too seriously, but that''s how I roll; and keep in mind, that''s partially why my girlfriend loves me!
Ya *do* realize that "how you roll" is gonna change when it''s two making the decisions, in tandem.
2.gif
Devil''s advocate: the debates you''re having with "us" are foreshadowing of debates that are CERTAIN to occur post-nuptuals with the Mrs. -- and all this analysis that seems cute & loveable NOW might get tiresome if constant. And the rational of "that''s just how I am" may morph healthily into win-win compromises.
 

pyramid

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 10, 2002
Messages
4,607
Gut feeling.

Fanboy it sounds like your gut feeling is saying you don''t want milligrain.
 

Stephanie

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
1,164
Date: 6/20/2007 2:08:42 PM
Author: fanboy

Anyone ever read The Fountainhead? How would Howard Roarke design a ring for Dominique?
He would blow it up when it's almost complete.

(I'm kidding.. )

With all the time and energy that you seem to be putting into this ring, I think that she will be blown away (pardon the pun) with your choice. As you said before, she trusts you to make this decision for her.
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Oh God, let's not even joke about blowing up this ring . . .

Yeah, my 'gut' is more or less ambiguous on the matter. My 'brain' is conflicted. On the one hand, the bright-cut pave complements the octagonal stone with its rectangular edges, but the milgrain seems superfluous and no milgrain leaves a lot of metal showing. Micro-pave, without a rounded edge, provides a purer form and shows less metal, but makes the pave prongs more difficult to resolve, and provides less definition for the form of the ring.

See the conundrum? If I do bright-cut pave, the edges are an issue. If I do micro-pave, the prongs are an issue. Neither is perfect.

So, maybe I should take a step back: are there any other reasons to prefer either the bright-cut pave or the micro-pave? I'm not even sure what the structural differences are other than the edging: the pave stones are the same size (doesn't that make the bright-cut pave also micro-pave?).
 

Stephanie

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
1,164
Date: 6/20/2007 3:09:50 PM
Author: fanboy
Oh God, let''s not even joke about blowing up this ring . . .
Sorry, I just couldn''t resist.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
I can''t speak for Howard Roarke (although BF did gift me a first printing of the book last year, my favorite gift ever!) BUT I agree that is seems like your instinct is saying "NO!" to the milgrain.

I think Gypsy and Deco had the best advice--do you like the look, or will you find yourself explaining it rather than enjoying it? This ring is a symbol of a promise between the two of you, what best represents that? (And leave postmodern design theory out of it!)
 

Stephanie

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
1,164
Date: 6/20/2007 3:18:28 PM
Author: Haven
I can''t speak for Howard Roarke (although BF did gift me a first printing of the book last year, my favorite gift ever!)
Wow! I am jealous.. I love Ayn Rand.

Back to the topic..
 

omieluv

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 28, 2007
Messages
2,146
Hey fanboy - 1st, I do think it is wonderful that you are taking the time to ask questions and explore several options before deciding on a setting for your fiance''s ring. She is very lucky to have a partner who is actively interested in the ring development process.

I am probably safe in my assumption that you have studied engagement ring styles from the Edwardian period through today and you have probably seen quite an assortment. In each period, styles were influenced by the events and tastes of that specific period, much like clothing style. You also know that "style" itself varies and you will see what was popular in past years emerge, though not exactly the same in modern times.

Your concerns of looking at the ring 20 years down the road and wondering if the style will look "dated" is something I think people take into considerration when deciding on a ring (well at least I have). However I think it is not likely to say that popular styles of today or even in the past will have little influence on your final selection.

You have already hinted that you want the setting to enhance the diamond, am I correct? If so, continue with that line of reasoning to design the ring. So, when designing the ring, ask yourself if each element adds or subtracts from the beauty of the diamond (which I think you have started to do) rather than looking to design a ring that mirrors a setting from a certain point in time. This way, you will end up with a product influenced by your ideals, rather than trying to replicate a piece from a specific time period.

Keep in mind though, that unless you really think way outside of the box and create something that is more artistic in nature (one that will defy modern + past ring design), you may end up with a ring that mirrors a style from any given time period anyway b/c designers tend to try to design a ring that will enhance the beauty of the diamond anyway (unless they are asked to make a replica or the client has other ideas). Will the design stand the test of time, not sure, but from what I have been seing through responses on this site is the more difficult it is to place the ring in a specific time period makes it "timeless" (just my opinion though).

Good Luck!
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Well, I just got off the phone with James at Taffin. The $10k price is solid; he won''t budge.

At any rate, according to him, he''d never do milgrain on any of his work. According to him, it has no place in a modern aesthetic, which is in line with my initial take. He''d do one-sided micro-pave on a 1.3mm band, not three-sided on a 1.8mm band.
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Date: 6/20/2007 3:39:16 PM
Author: omieluv
Hey fanboy - 1st, I do think it is wonderful that you are taking the time to ask questions and explore several options before deciding on a setting for your fiance''s ring. She is very lucky to have a partner who is actively interested in the ring development process.

I am probably safe in my assumption that you have studied engagement ring styles from the Edwardian period through today and you have probably seen quite an assortment. In each period, styles were influenced by the events and tastes of that specific period, much like clothing style. You also know that ''style'' itself varies and you will see what was popular in past years emerge, though not exactly the same in modern times.

Your concerns of looking at the ring 20 years down the road and wondering if the style will look ''dated'' is something I think people take into considerration when deciding on a ring (well at least I have). However I think it is not likely to say that popular styles of today or even in the past will have little influence on your final selection.

You have already hinted that you want the setting to enhance the diamond, am I correct? If so, continue with that line of reasoning to design the ring. So, when designing the ring, ask yourself if each element adds or subtracts from the beauty of the diamond (which I think you have started to do) rather than looking to design a ring that mirrors a setting from a certain point in time. This way, you will end up with a product influenced by your ideals, rather than trying to replicate a piece from a specific time period.

Keep in mind though, that unless you really think way outside of the box and create something that is more artistic in nature (one that will defy modern + past ring design), you may end up with a ring that mirrors a style from any given time period anyway b/c designers tend to try to design a ring that will enhance the beauty of the diamond anyway (unless they are asked to make a replica or the client has other ideas). Will the design stand the test of time, not sure, but from what I have been seing through responses on this site is the more difficult it is to place the ring in a specific time period makes it ''timeless'' (just my opinion though).

Good Luck!
Those are my sentiments exactly and why I was hesitant about the milgrain. I''m not trying to replicate a time period, but quite the opposite. When I say I want a modern ring, I mean one that comports with modernist ideals (form follows function, etc.), not a ''contemporary'' ring.

I think I''ve pretty much decided against the milgrain. Now the problem is that Taffin is much more comfortable doing no milgrain than Leon Mege, but Leon is much cheaper.
 

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
I''m having milgrain done on my ring and my ring isn''t very antique. It has elements of antique and elements of very modern and my opinion on it is if you want it use it. You don''t have to have an antique styled ring to use it IMO. It is a design element and can be used anywhere you want. Some might not think it is the most congruent piece in the world, but if you like it, who cares?
 

omieluv

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 28, 2007
Messages
2,146
Date: 6/20/2007 3:46:17 PM
Author: fanboy

Date: 6/20/2007 3:39:16 PM
Author: omieluv
Hey fanboy - 1st, I do think it is wonderful that you are taking the time to ask questions and explore several options before deciding on a setting for your fiance''s ring. She is very lucky to have a partner who is actively interested in the ring development process.

I am probably safe in my assumption that you have studied engagement ring styles from the Edwardian period through today and you have probably seen quite an assortment. In each period, styles were influenced by the events and tastes of that specific period, much like clothing style. You also know that ''style'' itself varies and you will see what was popular in past years emerge, though not exactly the same in modern times.

Your concerns of looking at the ring 20 years down the road and wondering if the style will look ''dated'' is something I think people take into considerration when deciding on a ring (well at least I have). However I think it is not likely to say that popular styles of today or even in the past will have little influence on your final selection.

You have already hinted that you want the setting to enhance the diamond, am I correct? If so, continue with that line of reasoning to design the ring. So, when designing the ring, ask yourself if each element adds or subtracts from the beauty of the diamond (which I think you have started to do) rather than looking to design a ring that mirrors a setting from a certain point in time. This way, you will end up with a product influenced by your ideals, rather than trying to replicate a piece from a specific time period.

Keep in mind though, that unless you really think way outside of the box and create something that is more artistic in nature (one that will defy modern + past ring design), you may end up with a ring that mirrors a style from any given time period anyway b/c designers tend to try to design a ring that will enhance the beauty of the diamond anyway (unless they are asked to make a replica or the client has other ideas). Will the design stand the test of time, not sure, but from what I have been seing through responses on this site is the more difficult it is to place the ring in a specific time period makes it ''timeless'' (just my opinion though).

Good Luck!
Those are my sentiments exactly and why I was hesitant about the milgrain. I''m not trying to replicate a time period, but quite the opposite. When I say I want a modern ring, I mean one that comports with modernist ideals (form follows function, etc.), not a ''contemporary'' ring.

I think I''ve pretty much decided against the milgrain. Now the problem is that Taffin is much more comfortable doing no milgrain than Leon Mege, but Leon is much cheaper.
I have not priced either option, but I would have to assume that you have reviewed "non-miligrained" settings by both designers? I have never dealt with Leon, but given so many positive responses regarding his work, I do not think going with him would be a bad route, unless he flat out turns down your business, but I doubt he would.
 

mrssalvo

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
19,132
fanboy, I feel your pain. I have thread upon thread trying to choose a setting for my upgrade and I''m and picky down to the tinest detail myself so I can see why this *little thing* is so big. I love lots of rings and ring styles from antiques to more modern classic. So my setting choice had to be something that I could be content with forever and i didn''t want a ring that would look dated either. In my own decision, I went with the less is more theory and to keep the design as simple as possible but including the few big things that were important to me..i.e I want a 3 stone ring. I think clean lines would be more classic and timeless because you aren''t trying to get an antique looking ring here. All that to say, I vote no milgrain
3.gif
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Date: 6/20/2007 3:53:16 PM
Author: omieluv

I have not priced either option, but I would have to assume that you have reviewed ''non-miligrained'' settings by both designers? I have never dealt with Leon, but given so many positive responses regarding his work, I do not think going with him would be a bad route, unless he flat out turns down your business, but I doubt he would.
The prices are as follows: ~$5k for Leon, $10k for Taffin.

I have personally consulted with both in person. Taffin''s design sense is much closer to my own than Leon''s, but Leon could still do something as directed by me. Taffin hates milgrain, Leon thinks my ring calls for it.
 

Cehrabehra

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 29, 2006
Messages
11,071
Date: 6/20/2007 11:37:15 AM
Author: fanboy

Date: 6/20/2007 11:35:09 AM
Author: Pyramid
I think what fanboy is referring to maybe is what Oldminer wrote about once. He said that millgrain was originally used to disguise a wavy edge, meaning less precise and less expensive pieces which were cast were made with millgrain as compared to handwrought pieces where the skill of the craftsman meant the edges were clean and straight.
Right; in other words: since milgrain was originally applied to hide flaws, and it is no longer necessary, isn''t it a bit like adding a corinthian column to a modern steel-frame building because people like the way columns look?
its funny that you brought this up because I was going to use columns in architecture in my last post and decided against it LOL

You could be a purist but I tend to be more of a merger or bridger. I don''t think just sticking one element against a vastly different element alone is necessarily going to look best, BUT there are elements you can add that bridge other elements together. Like in color... two blues might not look at all good together, but if you have a third blue that ties them together, you can make it work. Some of my favorite architecture blends different styles... the right architect could combine my love of gothic windows, corinthian columns, victorian wrap around porches and turrets, and cantilevered balconies and make it all fit together. Not everyone could do it, but I''ve seen similar things done and it is amazing and unique and beautiful and even yes, congruent in its own way. You can wildly mix materials if you follow the same style... you can wildly mix styles if you join them with details and materials.
 

fanboy

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
219
Date: 6/20/2007 3:58:56 PM
Author: mrssalvo
fanboy, I feel your pain. I have thread upon thread trying to choose a setting for my upgrade and I''m and picky down to the tinest detail myself so I can see why this *little thing* is so big. I love lots of rings and ring styles from antiques to more modern classic. So my setting choice had to be something that I could be content with forever and i didn''t want a ring that would look dated either. In my own decision, I went with the less is more theory and to keep the design as simple as possible but including the few big things that were important to me..i.e I want a 3 stone ring. I think clean lines would be more classic and timeless because you aren''t trying to get an antique looking ring here. All that to say, I vote no milgrain
3.gif
Thank you for the commiseration, mrssalvo. It''s a big deal! I''ve never spent so much money on one thing before. ''Less is more'' is similar to my thinking, with the caveat that jewelry is inherently ''more''.

What do you think about spending the extra $5k on Taffin?
 

decodelighted

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
11,534
Date: 6/20/2007 3:46:17 PM
Author: fanboy
I think I've pretty much decided against the milgrain. Now the problem is that Taffin is much more comfortable doing no milgrain than Leon Mege, but Leon is much cheaper.

Sounds like Taffin is the choice then ... here's my reasoning: no matter how "perfect" the non-milgrained, cheaper Leon is you'll ALWAYS wonder if the Taffin would have been "better". You'll wonder if the extra 5K would have been "worth it". Especially since you share the aesthetic philosophy of Taffin. Leon is known for his antique styles & his milgrain. Even if he is "cheaper" -- his specialty isn't in the style you prefer. This will haunt a perfectionist like yourself forever. Consider the extra 5K a sanity tax.
 

neatfreak

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Messages
14,169
Date: 6/20/2007 4:00:15 PM
Author: fanboy
Date: 6/20/2007 3:53:16 PM

Author: omieluv


I have not priced either option, but I would have to assume that you have reviewed ''non-miligrained'' settings by both designers? I have never dealt with Leon, but given so many positive responses regarding his work, I do not think going with him would be a bad route, unless he flat out turns down your business, but I doubt he would.

The prices are as follows: ~$5k for Leon, $10k for Taffin.


I have personally consulted with both in person. Taffin''s design sense is much closer to my own than Leon''s, but Leon could still do something as directed by me. Taffin hates milgrain, Leon thinks my ring calls for it.

Well, I think you need to do what YOU want. Sounds like you''re thinking no milgrain, which I think is a great choice. I have a pave ring without milgrain and it just looks so modern and refined, while still being a HINT antiquey. Love it.

Leon has done many gorgeous rings without Milgrain, so I am sure if you let him know you would prefer it without, he can oblige.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top