Help me tweak these CADs

posted 3 years ago in Rings
Post # 32
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

View original reply
delphinia :  I think you have a lot of information to balance to figure out what you want in the design. I don’t this CAD looks like a stock setting at all. @msop04 makes a good point about the wraps that they were protected by the former shoulder. So, you can make your own decision about that. I think either option works for this design.

Like I said in my post before, they seller has the diamond, so I’d defer to them. Old cuts are tricky and as many look good in bezels as don’t. But your seller has a good eye. If you go with prongs, I’d prefer the single ones and the Zoe before showsn they can be quite delicate.  

 Perhaps a compromise between #1 and #2 based on the feedback here is something more like the shoulder detail on the CVB Zoe. It is longer than #1, shorter than #2, but it is more unique than #2. I like that this is not a perfect diamond…maybe called it kit shaped. This has 3 graduated diamonds.  This shows wraps with pave, but I think the ones in #1 could be retained if you want the outie wraps. 

 

Image result for cvb inspired zoe

 

 

Post # 33
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

One other idea. If you decide to keep #2, but feel the shank on #2 becomes too plain, you could have it engraved. This CVB (I’m on a roll with CVB) has a shorter shoulder detail (length closer to #1), but has the shape of #2. Indented wraps. Gorgeous engraving on the band. You’d want hand engraving not cast (like the milgrain). 

You can always add engraving, so you don’t have to be rushed to make that choice, but it would favor the more squared-off shank #2. Sorry for giant pictures, I’m on my phone. The emerald below is also CVB and has some really pretty engraving details added on the sides of the shank. It is also has a multi-wire profile on the outer-ring (like #1), but a squared off band like #2. Again, just offering choices and ideas. The one thing to keep in mind is that all of these diamonds are HUGE, so keep an eye on proportions of the shoulder detail relative to your stone.  

Image result for cvb engraved

 

 

Post # 35
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

I like that they pushed it up to allow a flush band. What has me puzzled is the part I circled in red (Picture at the bottom). It looks like there is a bump on the shank (maybe to level the band?) and the petal in the gallery does not come to a point here. With the new shank having no flare, I’m not sure what is going on here. You don’t seem to need a bump and the petal should be pointy. Also, the shank under the gallery (the part over the top of your finger), is too thick (i.e., too tall off your finger). If you look at the RG ring below and @msop04’s CAD, that metal is a lot thinner than the full height of the shank. By that being thinner, it helps with the next thing I’m going to mention. 

So, on this RG ring, notice that the shank over the finger is much thinner than shown on your CAD (same thinner metal on @msop04’s CAD).  By making that thinner, you gain some height in the gallery. The diamond here is a 1.3 carat OEC, so is about 4.1 mm tall. I’m guessing your lovely pear is not that tall. So, by setting your pear as low as possible, you have less height in the gallery. On this picture, the two lines are the same height as the band thickness (off the finger). So, the petals are 2xthickness of the band. If you do the same thing with your CAD, you get barely 1 ring thickness under the gallery. So, your petals will be less distant as petals than these. So, if you want the petals more petaly, you’ll need to raise the head of your ring a bit to give them room to lengthen the petals. That would also give you room to give the petals a bit of an outward shape (like #1) without losing the flush wedding band options. No criticism, just making the observation to give you something to ponder. 

As drawn in the CAD, I think  yor ring will look a bit more like this in profile with the petals out of sight. This rings shows yet another wrap option with both an indent at the bottom, a 3-d wrap above. Very pretty.  This is the Anne halo.

Image result for cvb lisette halo

 

 

Also, there is no under view from the maker. @msop04 rings shows a lovely big hole under each stones to allow for cleaning. You want that. You want a lovely big hole in the shank under the diamond to get the underside of the diamond clean.  

 

 

 

 

Post # 37
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

View original reply
delphinia :  Happy to help. If you pear and the inspo are similar height, I’m not sure why the head looks so much lower. The shanks of yours and the RG look simiar in thickness.  Maybe your pear’s girdle is thicker is shaped such that the bezel needs to be taller. Good questions to ask llya.

Post # 38
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

View original reply
delphinia :  HaHa. I figured out the height issue. I’m pretty sure that the diamond in that setting is floating 1-2 mm over the shank. I found a few others that show this (and some petal variation). This was bugging me all day…

 halorgfloat_opt

Post # 40
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

View original reply
delphinia :  You might check with them first about the CAD formats they can use. I know that we have issues accepting certain CAD files, especially if your Fiance is using a newer version of CAD than they are. I really don’t know if they do the CAD inhouse. A lot of jewelerly designed actually have a CAD design/service they work with. I think many use Rhino 3D as it has a lot of useful plugins and features that allow quick design. A lower-level program is ArtCam. 

Post # 42
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

View original reply
delphinia :  Just checking in. Any update?

Post # 44
Member
1704 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2009

View original reply
delphinia :  Glad to hear you found a design you loved. Can’t wait to see it!

Leave a comment


Find Amazing Vendors