Reading this with interest it baffles me why people use such
difficult & time consuming methods. An easier route to acheiving very
similar results though still precise work is…To drill the holes a
fraction smaller than the stones, drill away the metal not needed
creating small “prongs” which can then be undercut for the stones to
click into… then rounded off & tightened with a beading tool. Gives
as very similar result but alot easier.
Chris Mead
I want to make a couple of quick comments as regards Peter’s
description. If someone came to me and said he would use one and only
one word to describe Royal Pave and then he said “packing” I would
immediately know without any further conversation that he knew
exactly what he was talking about… for that is the descriptive for
the methodology of Royal Pave.
That said… I have another web site the URL being
http://www.ganoksin.com/gnkurl/8b If anyone wants to go there and
then click on Royal Pave Ring… you can see a job I did some years
ago. The image is not as clear as I would like it to be as I a
scanned a photograph given to me by a client after I had set up his
line.
Still… the imagery is adequate and translatable if one understands
what one is looking at.
Oh yes. And one more thing. I also charge a lot for that kind of
work. I think I’m worth it. [grin].
Reading this with interest it baffles me why people use such difficult & time consuming methods. An easier route to acheiving very similar results though still precise work is....To drill the holes a fraction smaller than the stones, drill away the metal not needed creating small "prongs" which can then be undercut for the stones to click into.. then rounded off & tightened with a beading tool. Gives as very similar result but alot easier.
Basically, this is what is done, only graver is more useful here
than a drill. The most difficult part of the technique is the layout.
Once location of the first diamond and the pattern is determined, the
process is relatively easy, just time consuming.
Leonid Surpin
Reading this with interest it baffles me why people use such difficult & time consuming methods. An easier route to acheiving very similar results though still precise work is....To drill the holes a fraction smaller than the stones, drill away the metal not needed creating small "prongs" which can then be undercut for the stones to click into.. then rounded off & tightened with a beading tool. Gives as very similar result but alot easier.
That may give a similar appearance, but it’s for one thing, prong
setting, or pinpoint setting, not pave. And there is a key difference
between the two in terms of the security of the stones. Done as you
describe, the stones are floating in their seats in the prongs. They
may be resting ON the underlying metal, but are not seated IN it.
With true pave setting (and bead setting in general) one of the key
aspects is that when the stones are properly seated, they are TIGHT
into the metal, even before beads are raised or shaped. Normally, one
uses a bud bur or ball bur to cut the seats, so the walls of the hole
are slightly tapered. The diamonds are pressed down into this tapered
hole, and the girdles literally press their own perfectly fitting
seat into the walls of that hole. When you do it right, especially
with softer metals like platinum or the softer golds, you can seat
all the stones before raising any beads or otherwise holding the
stones into the metal, but simply their press fit into their seats is
enough so you can turn the ring upside down and tap the bench with
it, and nothing will fall out. What this does is for one, it means
that less metal actually has to come over the girdle at the beads for
the stones to be secure, since the stones cannot shift. And it means
that the beads themselves attach to the base metal surface literally
at the top of the girdle. No height to the “prong”, so it won’t bend
or deflect with wear, and when done right, you can subject that ring
to years of wear and abuse, and the stones stay in. How many of the
old platinum or white gold pieces from the 20s have we all seen where
when one needs to cut out the old stones, it takes the removal of an
amazing amount of metal before those stones let go, even when they
seemed at first to be held delicately. The girdles are intimately
imbedded into the metal, and almost like a bezel in addition to the
beads, the stones are firmly set even when much of the metal has been
worn away by time. Your method of creating pinpoint prongs is
certainly another valid way to set stones, and may be preferred
sometimes, such as with some fragile stones instead of diamonds, but
your method does not create the sort of secure setting that can last
many decades of constant wear. Really good pave setting, (and it’s
not so easy to do this really well) will do exactly that. And that’s
why it’s worth the extra trouble. Plus, although the description
makes it sound like a whole lot of extra work, in truth, when you get
good at it, the time it takes is not all that much longer, if even at
all, to the time your method takes.
Peter Rowe
With true pave setting (and bead setting in general) one of the key aspects is that when the stones are properly seated, they are TIGHT into the metal, even before beads are raised or shaped.
Peter, your description of the proper method of pave is the best I
have ever heard. When you describe removing stones from the old
master’s work you are absolutely correct. It can take longer to
remove them than it took to set them.
Thank you for your eloquence concerning pave. As always, you not
only understand the process, you explain it extremely well.
The only thing I would add is that when done well, the tables of the
stones are all parallel to and even with the surface, so that when
the piece is moved, the reflections of the tables “roll” with the
piece. The basics of pave are relatively easy to master. The nuances
of really fine pave are not.
Dave Phelps