Duh - plonker!

[trialuser]

Hi, I've been having a go at this malarky for about 3 or 4 weeks now, ever since my wife did a short course.
I've made about 5 rings - all of which came out a size or so bigger than I was intending. (I use the [int dia + thickness] x pi to get the length.
I'd thought I'd share my latest and best fail with you all. I was going to make a ring for my daughters 18th, a small 2mm (£30!) diamond set in a blob of gold and a blue saphire either side in the silver ring (sept = saphire)
Well - I dropped the diamond 3 times and spent a good 90 mins searching for it, when I did finally mount it this is the result - spot the deliberate mistake!!!
I won't bother to finish it, it's in the tumbler to see if it shakes the diamond out, I suppose I could re drill it and mount a bigger cz or something.
All part of the fun.
Cheers
Martyn

3852

[mizgeorge]

I rather like it ;)

[Di Sandland]

Oh Martyn - that is classic! I would leave it as is, to be honest, so in a year's time you'll see how far you've come. Plus, I bet either daughter or missus would love it - it goes to prove you are stupid after all and I suspect they've been telling you that for years!

[Dennis]

I think it's a family heirloom in the making and would even double as a glass cutter. There might be rules against taking it on an aeroplane though.

Oh and if you really want to re-size it, 1.0 mm taken out will reduce it by approx one English size. You can do this with the diamond in unless you are very unlucky, but of course let it cool in air-don't quench it. Dennis.

[caroleallen]

It's certainly different.

[jille]

Reminds me of the glass pyramid at the Louvre

[Di Sandland]

See, Martyn? Such is art! Call it Louvre or Pyramid and sell it for an exorbitant price *-:)

[MeadMoon]

There's a section on upsidedown setting in Anastasia Young's book, so you ought to say that it was deliberate and that the ring is ultra-modern. I like it as well!

[trialuser]

Thanks everyone, it survived a good tumble and my daughter really likes it anyway, so I'll put it down to a lesson learned.
In my defence I think it happened because I set it using a microscope (52 year old eyes and fat fingers as well!) and the depth of field was really shallow and I was concentrating on rubbing over the metal and just didn't notice the stone was topsy until it was too late.
I'm hoping for her 21st I'll be half decent at simple rings!

[Dennis]

After much trial and error I always come back to these Lactona 4x headband magnifiers, which I have used for many years now. They are very light weight, can be worn with glasses and offer a good depth of field for working. http://www.prophyperfect.com/fnimall/LACTONA_VISOR_LOUPE/product.phtml

They are much cheaper if you can import two and your microscope will only come out for Pavé. Dennis.

[Kwant]

Lots of folks set in reverse if you had not told us it was a mistake snigger we would never have known :0)

[Julian]

(I use the [int dia + thickness] x pi to get the length.3852

Martyn

I have always used the formula (int dia x pi) + (2 x thickness) see if it works better for you?

As has been pointed out, many designers are doing that deliberately, in fact in the old days before faceting cubic stones were often cut in half an set that way with their natural facets.

3857

http://www.mnh.si.edu/earth/text/dynamicearth/6_0_0_GeoGallery/geogallery_specimen.cfm?SpecimenID=4043&categoryID=1&categoryName=Gems&browseType=name


J