Wax of My 3 Stone RHR In Here

[SuzyQZ]

OK, went to the jewelers today to see the wax of my new 3 stone RHR. I just love it! What do you think? Here are some pics. There will also be two little diamonds channel set into each side of the "M".

 

[SuzyQZ]

Here''s a top view. Please excuse the dirty diamonds.

 

[SuzyQZ]

And finally a hand view. I tried to put it on my finger, but I didn''t want to push it all the way up for fear of breaking the shank, so this is as far as I dared go. This gives an idea of how it will sit on my hand.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Oh, yeah, I like it! Looks like a very substantial ring and a beautiful compliment to your left hand ering. I can't wait to see the finished ring - hubby does good work!

What size are the three stones?

 

[SuzyQZ]

Going out to dinner now, I''ll come back later on to see what you all think.

 

[SuzyQZ]

Thank you for the compliment MissGotRocks, but my jeweler can take all the credit for this one. When we walked into his shop, my husband loved a similar design he had created and we asked him to make a variation of it for a three stone ring for us. It''s so original looking (I think). I''ve never seen anything like it. Hubby likes it and so do I!

 

[diamond_quester]

I like it! would you mind saying what shape/size diamonds are those? I love their shape and proportions for a 3-stone ring!

 

[SuzyQZ]

diamond_quester:

Thank you for asking

Center is 1.51 "H" Radiant
Depth 65%
Table 67%
Pavillion 53.3%
Polish VG
Sym G
Clarity VS2
6.8 x 6.62 X 4.3

Sides are 1.01 and 1.03

Depth 67% and 69.9%
Table 69% and 62%
Pavillion 47.7% and 55.3%
Polish VG and VG
Sym Good and Good
Clarity VS2 and VS2
Color J and J

I originally had three 1ct stones, but my husband exchanged the center one for a 1.51 and made the remaining 1 ct stones the sides.

 

[mrssalvo]

It looks great, can''t wait to see the finished ring..

 

[Mara]

i'm not really into the naked bar of metal thing in general as i think it detracts from the diamonds having seen settings like that in person, but it seems you like that style so i'm sure you will love it and it is definitely unique. i do like the M part and i love the side view, and think if it had little sweeping claw prongs instead of the bars, i would be a huge fan! so i like elements i guess! the diamonds sure do look purty!

 

[lizz]

Cool setting--I like how the diamonds are visible from the sides.

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 3/16/2006 10:20:49 PM
Author: lizz
Cool setting--I like how the diamonds are visible from the sides.

That''s what I was thinking too. I''d thin the bars out a bit, but that''s just me.

 

[SuzyQZ]

Thanks for your comments ladies. I appreciate all your constructive feedback. Here is a picture of the ring that was the inspiration for the three stone. Do you still think it''s too thick? I looks great on my hand and was very comfortable. I just assumed that the wax would look thick so I didn''t think about that too much. I assumed it would be like this finished product. What say you?

 

[Sundial]

Very cool!!! My three stone ring has the diamonds set in semi-bezels that are open from the sides like that and I really like the look. I look forward to seeing pictures of your ring when it is completed.

 

[SuzyQZ]

Thanks Sundial. We were trying to match the feel of my wedding ring. Which is a pretty hefty ring. It''s 18K gold with platinum tips and rhodium flash under the diamond. Here''s a picture. I''m wondering now if the gold "ribbon" part of the wax is too thick. I remember when I saw the wax on my wedding ring, I thought it looked thick too, but my jeweler said that waxes look heavier then they end up in real life. My wedding ring turned out pretty good I think. So, alot to consider. Decisions, decistions!

 

[SuzyQZ]

ok, we''ve emailed our jeweler and inquired about another wax making the ribbons thinner and my husband wanted to change the way the shank connects to the top part (the top will be white gold and the shank yellow gold). See the right hand side of this photo shopped picture you will see what he wants to change. I don''t really mind the shank either way. I''ve also asked if the wax looks thicker than it will after the ring is made, I''ve been told this and I wanted to ascetain if it was true. I have to remind myself that these pictures are enlarged like a gazzillion times so everything looks so much bigger than in real life. The jeweler has been absolutely wonderful to work with and I really like the design I think the ring is unique and distinctive. I love the "M" in it because my husband''s name starts with an "M"

 

[MissGotRocks]

I am sure that the wax does look much thicker and heavier than it will be in real life. I like the change to the shank - makes the top of the ring look more separate. I think it will be a very unique ring - much like your ering. Let us know what the jeweler says about the thickness of the ''m''.

 

[SuzyQZ]

OK, hubby and I have been discussing (at length) the design of the first wax and feel maybe we should just pass on it altogether and go with something more streamlined and understated. Here is our Option 2 which very closely matches my wedding ring design.

 

[SuzyQZ]

Here''s the top view.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 3/17/2006 12:41:22 PM
Author: SuzyQZ
OK, hubby and I have been discussing (at length) the design of the first wax and feel maybe we should just pass on it altogether and go with something more streamlined and understated. Here is our Option 2 which very closely matches my wedding ring design.

If it were mine

... I'd keep the first - it is so unusual and what I liked the most was that the ring appeared to be a folded ribbon of metal holding the diamonds. The effect is lost on the second versions, but it is a nice ring nonetheless.


The rings remind me of a three stone tension ring. The first version still is my winner though, regardless of what it reminds me of or doesn't.

One think I wonder... is how heavy is this going to be? And how often worn... There's some relation between the two, unless you do not mind a heavy ring. IMO, the ribbon look would not get lost if the diamonds are not actually held in a complete fold of metal going uninterrupted under their culets. There could be a light split shank following roughly the same contour as the current ribbon. Oh well.. I am stopping here... before my Photoshop devil hits home

 

[SuzyQZ]

Valeria101:
Thank you for your comments. I love those tension set rings! Your points on weight and wear are very well taken. The RHR will be an everyday ring for me and the weight of the ring is something my husband and I also discussed, we felt that while the "M" design in the wedding ring form looked great, the interpretation into a 3 stone ring put alot more width and weight into the ring. My center stone is 1.5 with two 1 ct sides so that''s 3.5 ctw plus the weight of the gold. It would definitely be heavy. So rather than try to nip and tuck here and there and try to redesign what we probably wouldn''t be happy with when it came to everyday use we decided to emulate the design of the wedding ring, keep it simple and streamlined. Let the diamonds be the focus. We loved both designs and the "M" was a stretch for me and my lifestyle. I''m a channel set kinda girl. I was dazzled by the design and thought I could pull it off, but the reality is that the width and weight of the ring would probably be a detracting factor. Thank you for your feedback. I''ll post pictures of the finished ring in a new thread in two or three weeks when it''s done.

 

[FireGoddess]

Of the two, I really liked the uniqueness of the first M ring, and the inspiration ring for it was stunning. I too am not into the thick bar thing but it looks very nice on your ering and a nice similarity between the new design and your ering.

 

[Shay37]

I like ring #1 better too. It just has such a unique feel to it just as your ering does.

shay

 

[SuzyQZ]

Thank you FireGoddess and Shay37-- I agree that the "M" ring is definitely more unique. And I was swept away by the initial excitement of that. BUT, in real life, my personality and lifestyle are more in line with ring style #2. What was kind of bugging me about the "M" ring was that from the top view there was so much metal between the stones, they seemed to separate them out too much and spread them out too far across the top of my finger. Option 2 holds the three stones closer together and the top bar view is almost exactly like my wedding ring. I know it''s not as exciting or original as the "M" design but I''m feeling good with the cleaner lines. I think the diamonds are the focus of the channel/bar set ring and it will sit lower on my finger.

I thank you all for your feedback, every one of you has given me great input. This is a great forum and there is room for many different styles of rings here. We ALL agree on the most important thing.... that is that we all LOVE our diamonds!!

So I''ll post back with the final product in a couple of weeks, if you''d like to see it.

 

[Sundial]

While they are both beautiful designs, I personally prefer the elegant simplicity of the second one. I particularly like the way it looks from the top. Please please post pictures of the final result for us to see!

 

[SuzyQZ]

You got it Sundial! It will post pics in about two weeks.
My husband calles it the "understated elegance, less is more" design.

I was dazzled by "M" design but feel that the second one is more in tune with me and our lifestyle. I''m hoping the the diamonds will be the focal point and that will be the dazzling look.

Like I said, all opinions were of great value, I love being able to come to this forum and put it out there to see what everyone thinks. I will definitely post pictures of the final product!

Thank you all for taking the time to comment.