CAD feedback help

[lovedogs]

Agree with @Rfisher... I would ask to see the ring in its current state and then ship it back with the specific requests if you don't love it

Totally agree with this strategy.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I’ll have to agree with Yssie that when a setting is perfect by the original designer, it’s not easy to get the same look elsewhere.

I definitely prefer platinum for the head. It’s more durable long term. And you can rhodium plate platinum just as well as wg. WG prong tips can wear away over the years. I know that from experience. The ring looks like your final cads, so honestly, I don’t think any changes are warranted. Just looked back and platinum was listed on the final cad which you must have approved?

 

[Rfisher]

The ring looks like your final cads, so honestly, I don’t think any changes are warranted. Just looked back and platinum was listed on the final cad which you must have approved?

I do believe 14 gold, 18 gold and platinum are always listed like this on every cad from DK. It’s not a designator of anything chosen. From the way I understand it. I think it’s a weight calculation in that metal to the design.
And I also am not sure prong size (as it relative here to OP’s stated concern ) can be deduced from the cad. As all the cads from DK do not show them finished or in their set position.
Just my opinion, from what I've experienced from them.

 

[yssie]

Also, someone plz tell me I’m not crazy...but do the prongs seem too far out from the diamond (almost look bulky). I’m not sure how to explain it. I market it in the picture and attached the picture of @D&t’s ring after which it was modeled.it seems that the prongs in her version are a bit longer and closer to the diamond (not sure what the correct terminology would be ).

You aren’t crazy. I understand exactly what you mean.

This is a product of the face-up diameter of the gallery as cast vs. the diameter of your stone. Crappy phone drawing attached. In the inspiration the gallery extends less far beyond the outline of the diamond - objectively or proportionally or both. The thickness of the metal “rim” that’s visible face-up on the outside of the stone… Which demands a certain prong depth (how “close to the diamond” it sits) and also specifies how long each prong needs to be to actually hold the edge of the stone (in this design that also impacts the curvature of those prong “swoops”).

There is absolutely no way for you, the end consumer, to reasonably specify precisely how much protrusion you will need to achieve a specific look. Also no way for other PSers to specify this, and no way for you or other PSers to judge whether the CAD will produce the real-world effect you want. You need to be working with a designer to whom you can say “I want the faceup to look like this” and know that your vendor will
A) Understand exactly what you’re going for,
B) Adjust for stereo vision, and
C) Convey the spirit of your ask into CAD and then mould.

This sort of concern (this and other things - shoulders, doughnut size and style, prong swoop, prong shape, etc.) is why we PSers should always recommend that people use the original designer whenever possible. Setting aside issues of intellectual property ownership, the original creator of a given aesthetic is the one person who is guaranteed to have the understanding, skill, and context required to effectively fulfill adjustments to that aesthetic. How a piece looks and feels is always more than the sum of each individual part, and ultimately it’s - always, only - the sum that we respond to.

 

[dhimer]

You aren’t crazy. I understand exactly what you mean.

This is a product of the face-up diameter of the gallery as cast vs. the diameter of your stone. Crappy phone drawing attached. In the inspiration the gallery extends less far beyond the outline of the diamond - objectively or proportionally or both. The thickness of the metal “rim” that’s visible face-up on the outside of the stone… Which demands a certain prong depth (how “close to the diamond” it sits) and also specifies how long each prong needs to be to actually hold the edge of the stone (in this design that also impacts the curvature of those prong “swoops”).

There is absolutely no way for you, the end consumer, to reasonably specify precisely how much protrusion you will need to achieve a specific look. Also no way for other PSers to specify this, and no way for you or other PSers to judge whether the CAD will produce the real-world effect you want. You need to be working with a designer to whom you can say “I want the faceup to look like this” and know that your vendor will
A) Understand exactly what you’re going for,
B) Adjust for stereo vision, and
C) Convey the spirit of your ask into CAD and then mould.

This sort of concern (this and other things - shoulders, doughnut size and style, prong swoop, prong shape, etc.) is why we PSers should always recommend that people use the original designer whenever possible. Setting aside issues of intellectual property ownership, the original creator of a given aesthetic is the one person who is guaranteed to have the understanding, skill, and context required to effectively fulfill adjustments to that aesthetic. How a piece looks and feels is always more than the sum of each individual part, and ultimately it’s - always, only - the sum that we respond to.

Wow, thank you for the great explanation and feedback. You gave me the understanding and the words needed to compile my email. The inspiration picture was made by DK in 2019 so I assumed I would not have this issue.
I will keep you all updated on his response. Thank you again!

 

[yssie]

Wow, thank you for the great explanation and feedback. You gave me the understanding and the words needed to compile my email. The inspiration picture was made by DK in 2019 so I assumed I would not have this issue.
I will keep you all updated on his response. Thank you again!

When vendors copy other designers' designs, sometimes design choices are carefully deliberated and sometimes they just happen! It's possible that the specific amount of visible gallery that you want was happy happenstance rather than the product of meticulous consideration, because the inspiration you point me to was itself merely a modification of Caysie's original custom design. Caysie, of course, discusses this as a first-class citizen because it is an integral component of her vision for her Dahlia.

If what you want is guaranteed and effortless perfection of this setting, the only way you're going to get that is by reaching out to Caysie.

 

[dhimer]

Just got the glamor shots from DK. He reworked the prongs and did it in WG (seems plated rather than unplated but no big deal). I can’t wait to get it on my finger

 

[WDWDiamond]

@dhimer what a difference! I’m glad you said something to them. Just beautiful!

 

[dhimer]

@dhimer what a difference! I’m glad you said something to them. Just beautiful!

Yes I’m much happier with how the prongs turned out. Here is a side by side comparison of before and after

 

[yssie]

Are you wholly happy with this remake?

 

[dhimer]

Are you wholly happy with this remake?

I won’t know for sure until I see it in person. But as far as pictures go, I think it has come pretty close to my inspiration picture (which DK had made in 2019 ). Below I attached a side by side comparison. Now I just hope the prongs don’t snag/catch on things, and that wg looks good with my stone (rather than platinum or YG)

 

[mwilliamanderson]

I think it's lovely. It's beautiful simplicity reminds me of a single rose in a bud vase. The setting really allows your diamond to shine.

 

[dhimer]

It arrived today and it’s beautiful (to me). DK did a great job, the detail and the craftsmanship is great. It’s so comfortable to wear and I can’t stop staring at it.
The only thing that I’m still not used to, is how different my OEC looks now that it’s set, vs on the stone holder. I feel like it doesn’t reflect as many colors now(could just be in my head). Anyway, here are some amateur pictures of the ring.
I want to give a very big thank you to all of you and the PS community. You have been so very helpful and supportive