Friends don't let friends set their diamond off-center

[ringo865]

This is interesting. I wonder how one would mitigate this effect when setting a diamond in six prongs, as the facets are divisible by eight. So some wouldn't line up on flat surfaces.

 

[kenny]

Are tension settings safe??..

No setting is 100% safe, whatever safe even means.

That said, compare the delicacy of a tiny prong to the beefiness of the metal that touches a diamond in a tension setting.
Prongs can come loose, bend and let go of a diamond without your knowledge by simply slipping your hand into a pocket, or putting on a sweater.
To bend the beefy metal of a tension setting would require massive trauma that would likely send you to the ER.

In 13 years on PS I've read many sad threads from posters whose diamonds have mysteriously vanished from their prog setting - but only one where the OP claimed it fell out of a Niessing tension setting by merely applauding after a concert.
After reading that entire thread I did not believe that poster was telling the truth.

 

[kenny]

Kenny, my point was there is a difference between "Might" be an issue and "Is" an issue.
If it was a big issue we would have heard about it over 12-13 years.

Good point, Karl.
But are owners even aware/conscious/alert enough to catch and point out when a lost diamond was from a setting set one way or the other?
I doubt it.

It seems reasonable to me that there is a better chance of ensuring the most intimate contact between a prong and one flat facet than over two flat facets that meet at a ridge.

 

[Victor Canera]

Kenny, my point was there is a difference between "Might" be an issue and "Is" an issue.
If it was a big issue we would have heard about it over 12-13 years.

Karl,

I think this is an incremental change. Over 12-13 years ring designs have evolved and become more and more delicate. I remember 12+ years ago, ring designs had at least 10-15 grams of metal on them. These days, we’re producing rings that are 4-5g in platinum. Vendors are being asked to produce rings with minimal metal and that they don’t want to see the prongs. So the challenge is to provide that visual while still keeping the rings relatively durable. IMO all of these things combined could cause a diamond to become loose, yes.

 

[LLJsmom]

Victor thanks for caring enough to share.

 

[Ella]

Victor, while the content itself of your OP seems reasonable and mechanically sound, your post may violate one of the PS policies for Trade members ... Do not create fear-based doubts in consumers' minds in order to scare them into using your services.

A civilian posting the same thing would not run afoul of PS policy.

IMO while restrictive PS's trade member policies do keep this place from descending into a Turkish bazar where vendors shout and grab at every shopper who walks past their stall.

BTW, the OP had already been reported to admin so I'm not the only one who noticed this.

Kenny, he is not creating fear based doubt, but sharing a tip. His post was reported because he reported it to correct a tiny typo. Please do not jump to conclusions.

 

[kenny]

Thanks Ella.

 

[Alvain]

For us 6 prongs lovers, are there any tips?

 

[ShinYunStar]

I always thought that NSEW setting is not in fashion, as most of the rings I see on PS is set with arrows showing. Good to know that this is a secure way to set diamond.

My wife like NSEW and that's how we set our E-ring. This is how it looks in a halo.

 

[Tekate]

Probably has something to do with the price of metals and the look of a delicate ring. Also probably a bit of what's current.

Victor Canera" data-source="post: 4315572" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Karl,

I think this is an incremental change. Over 12-13 years ring designs have evolved and become more and more delicate. I remember 12+ years ago, ring designs had at least 10-15 grams of metal on them. These days, we’re producing rings that are 4-5g in platinum. Vendors are being asked to produce rings with minimal metal and that they don’t want to see the prongs. So the challenge is to provide that visual while still keeping the rings relatively durable. IMO all of these things combined could cause a diamond to become loose, yes.

 

[MarionC]

I'm of the "sturdy and secure" camp.
If I were going just for aesthetics, the latest setting I chose would not have been considered. It's a bit bulky but is great protection for the diamond so I can wear the ring without worry.
I love my diamond and sure it's insured but I would really hate to have to find an equivalent stone.
I appreciate the OP's information. Thank you.

 

[Tophat1]

Is this why my prongs are always picking up fibers from my clothing?

 

[Aimyr]

I believe I saw 2 configurations for 6 prong settings as well, one showing arrows more clearly (or symmetrically?) than the other. Is there a preference here as well?

 

[Karl_K]

Is this why my prongs are always picking up fibers from my clothing?

Have you checked to make sure you don't have a lifted prong?
Prongs picking up fibers all the time can be a sign of issues with a prong(s) no matter how the diamond is set.
Posting a close up picture taken at an angle of how the prongs meet the diamond can let us help you or have a professional look at it in person.

 

[Karl_K]

Victor Canera" data-source="post: 4315572" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Karl,

I think this is an incremental change. Over 12-13 years ring designs have evolved and become more and more delicate. I remember 12+ years ago, ring designs had at least 10-15 grams of metal on them. These days, we’re producing rings that are 4-5g in platinum. Vendors are being asked to produce rings with minimal metal and that they don’t want to see the prongs. So the challenge is to provide that visual while still keeping the rings relatively durable. IMO all of these things combined could cause a diamond to become loose, yes.

Victor,
Yes, there will be cases where it might make a difference but a designer can take it into account when designing the ring and create a safe ring.
That is the difference between a skilled craftsman and one with lesser skills.
Including communication skills to discuss any potential issues with a client.

 

[Victor Canera]

Victor,
Yes, there will be cases where it might make a difference but a designer can take it into account when designing the ring and create a safe ring.
That is the difference between a skilled craftsman and one with lesser skills.
Including communication skills to discuss any potential issues with a client.

Well, I see it as a change that makes the diamond slightly less secure. I’d rather have the consumer be educated about it and have them weigh it in their decision making process with whomever they work with.

 

[Victor Canera]

I believe I saw 2 configurations for 6 prong settings as well, one showing arrows more clearly (or symmetrically?) than the other. Is there a preference here as well?

The situation is different with six prongs because the prongs are holding different parts of a diamond. Plus, the more prongs you add the more secure a stone is.

 

[CareBear]

This discussion is particularly interesting to me because I had run into a similar issue. I had WF set my stone (previous stone) in a 6-prong Tiffany style setting using 'tabbed' prongs, similar to that of the Tiffany solitaire. It was set using the "off-center" orientation most commonly used for H&A stones. When I received the ring, I louped it and noticed that there were tiny gaps between a few of the prongs and the stone. So I contacted WF and had a long discussion with their head of production. The issue was as Victor described here, the prongs went over facet junctions. Tabbed prongs are wider than claws so it was impossible for a 'tab' to lie completely flat on 2 different facets. I was given these options:
1. change to tiny claws, so that only the thinnest point crosses junctions
2. rotate the stone so that each of the 6 tabs lie on a single facet (aesthetically not optimal if you care about arrows)
3. live with the tiny gaps, as there were no security issues with 6 prongs (I chose this option)

Based on my experience and what Victor described here for the 4 prong configurations, I think it is a good idea to set NSEW for 4 prong settings.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Great information, Victor! Being informed is always best! Thanks!

 

[fenestrate]

Victor, for a cushion such as above, are only four prongs safe, and then, does it make a difference to safety as to whether the cushion is elongated or not.

Also, out of curiosity, do the pavillion facets ever have an effect on either prong placement or choice as to number of prongs

 

[fenestrate]

Also wondered as to the security of NSEW prongs on a cushion as for example below

 

[Victor Canera]

Victor, for a cushion such as above, are only four prongs safe, and then, does it make a difference to safety as to whether the cushion is elongated or not.

Also, out of curiosity, do the pavillion facets ever have an effect on either prong placement or choice as to number of prongs

Hi Fenstrate,

Using the cushion diagram you posted above, the prongs would still fall on the corner bezel facets. I can't see if this would change if the stone was square or rectangular because those facets would still be on the corners. Another thing that makes cushions a tiny bit safer in this specific situation is that a cushion has corners to it which keeps it in place in the basket so the diamond can’t really rotate inside of the basket. A vendor still has to choose prongs that are an appropriate thickness so that they can’t be easily peeled off by catching on fabric though.

Good luck

 

[Texas Leaguer]

I don’t have direct expertise as a setter so I found Victor’s post quite interesting and wanted to understand it better from a standpoint of Whiteflash practice and experience. I spent some time discussing this issue with our production manager since we normally set the prongs on top of the junction formed by the upper half facets (Red diagram). Leon Rocha has been at Whiteflash for 15 years. Others may have different experience but here is what I learned about ours:

1) Because we specialize in H&A diamonds, most of our customers prefer the look of being able to see the complete arrows. The table is also straight in this configuration which adds to the aesthetic of symmetry.
2) We have not experienced an elevated problem with stones becoming loose. Since we provide free service for the first year, this would be an expensive issue for us.
3) Leon believes that burnishing the prongs on top of the “ridge” and working the metal on both sides of it, actually makes the diamond LESS likely to rotate once properly set. He feels that a prong on a totally flat facet has more of a tendency to slide, making pressure at the girdle the primary force preventing the diamond from rotating.

The size of the diamond, and the size, number, and style of the prongs, do present some different variables, so I don’t think it is a simple black and white question.

We also agree that trends toward thin band widths and smaller prongs do lead to durability concerns and we have established certain minimums that we will not go below. We get many requests for super dainty and we do lose some business since other vendors are willing to accommodate these customers. But we know that strength is particularly important for engagement rings that will be worn every day and subjected to all kinds of conditions.

 

[Victor Canera]

Hi Texasleaguer,

First off I wanted to say that I’m sure your team does a great job setting. Burnishing the prongs is a great touch.

My comment is more geared towards super delicate prongs done on rings these days especially in halos. It would be a bit tough to burnish very thin wire eagle claw prongs but I guess it can be done.

The facet junctions cause the prongs to sit a little higher as opposed to having them on top of the main bezel facet which is where my concern comes from. Having the prongs sit lower would prevent the diamond from rotating and causing the prongs to go into a higher position.

All the best

 

[Texas Leaguer]

Victor Canera" data-source="post: 4318419" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Hi Texasleaguer,

First off I wanted to say that I’m sure your team does a great job setting. Burnishing the prongs is a great touch.

My comment is more geared towards super delicate prongs done on rings these days especially in halos. It would be a bit tough to burnish very thin wire eagle claw prongs but I guess it can be done.

The facet junctions cause the prongs to sit a little higher as opposed to having them on top of the main bezel facet which is where my concern comes from. Having the prongs sit lower would prevent the diamond from rotating and causing the prongs to go into a higher position.

All the best

Hi Victor,
I agree. It's not a binary issue. A variety of factors dictate the best approach. And as styles change, setting techniques have to adapt and evolve.

It's a worthy topic for discussion. Thank you for bringing it forward.

 

[sugarcloud]

Victor Canera" data-source="post: 4315459" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to share a suggestion to the community based on past experience and because I’ve had this debate with clients in the past.

Setting a round diamond off center in a four prong arrangement causes the prongs to sit right on top of two facet junctions, namely between two upper girdle facets. This means that the prongs are not on top of a flat surface which is not as secure as having them on top of a flat surface. This might or not become an issue with the prongs over time. Some unknowns such as the thickness of the prongs (even the type of metal) can effect whether this becomes a problem. Please refer to the image below:


My suggestion is to set a round diamond with the arrows facing the NSEW arrangement. Doing this causes the prongs to sit right on top of a single Bezel facet which is nice and flat and more secure.


All the best,

I know this is an old post but I am currently dealing with issues from a setting from Whiteflash which I will most likely need to send back and this post has got me thinking.

My ring has six prong and ther 12 and 6 prong were an issues from the start with mulitple attepmts to even them out. Now looking at this diagram I am realizing that the orientation I chose meant that these prongs were lying right on those vertical lines at the top and bottom in option 1.

Would I be better off going with the seond option where the 12 and 6 prongs are centred instead? I was trying to avoid covering the arrows but one of them has ended up covered anyway which is frustrating, and I feel like maybe this orientation which seems to have become more poplar lately is maybe a bit harder to execute?

Right now mine is set like the 6 prong in the second row in the image below, but I am thinking it might be better to get them to set it like the 6 prong in the top row instead.





I am also hoping that maybe this might offest the obstruction/ head body refelctions I am currently seeing in the bottom portion of my diamond when I wear dark colours which seem to cluster around the bottom two arrows right now. Maybe having the arrow right in the centre will help a bit? Sorry if that makes no sense, its very hard to explain!

 

[1955FL]

@sugarcloud Did you get this sorted out?

 

[sugarcloud]

@sugarcloud Did you get this sorted out?

In the process of getting a refund for the setting from WF and then will see if I will end up getting it set locally instead. If so I may change up the orientation of the arrows and see what I prefer. But I suspect the difference will not be very noticable as I have been looking at a lot of photos and videos and I think it is only something that you can see if look extremely closely .

 

[1955FL]

What if the claw/prong had a relief cut or channel that sits between the facet junction? Does anyone do this?
Seems like a simple enough solution.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

Fun topic Victor and all!
From a light return PoV - the upper girdle facets tend to return a bit less light to a face up observer than do the kite shape main facets.
So its not even a Texus Leaguer "binary" issue - and with 6 prongs and fancy shapes - its maybe more like quintuplets maybe?