Setting stones from underneath

Hi

I hope someone can help me.

I have 3 6x4 emerald cut amethysts and want to set them into a
silver band so that they are flush with the surface. I have
punch(gypsy) set round stones before but never emerald cut.

I am wondering if it is possible to set them by putting them in from
behind and using a spitch stick to lever out some metal and that will
hold them in position.

Can someone please point me in the right direction,

Mary Bourke
Ireland

Mary,

I did a ring for a gentleman who’s wife died and he wanted to wear
her opal. I created a gypsy setting, with an inside edge so the opal
was recessed below the top of the ring. I pushed the opal up from
underneath through the finger hole, and made a bezel that went up
after the opal, and I used a graver to make burrs that did not allow
the collar to move down. He came in a year later with his finacee and
bought a $5000 engagement ring.

Richard Hart

Mary:

Yes, something like what you’re talking about is possible.
Essentially you just do an upside down bead setting from the backside
of the piece. Given that you mentioned spit-sticks, I’m assuming you
must have some knowledge of engraved settings. I’ve done this in
niobium with round stones, so it’s at least possible, but emerald
cuts aren’t a whole lot of fun to engrave seats for at the best of
times. I’d suggest practice. Lots of it. The basic idea is to engrave
a setting as though you were going to set the stone upside down, with
the pavilion facing up. The only tricky bit is making sure the table
ends up level with the other side of the metal. (Which you can’t see
if you’re holding the mount with setter’s cement.) Once you get a
good solid seat, just run up some beads, and bead the stone in place.
Done. Of course it’s a whole lot easier to say than do. If you’ve
never done engraved bead settings, I’d suggest lots of practice and
research. (or perhaps a rethink of the design.)

Regards,
Brian.

PS–> Does anyone really know the “one true answer” to how to spell
spit-sticks and bull-sticks? I heard about a dozen different versions
when I was at the Cass, and I’ve read another half dozen since.
Everything from my versions to “splitsticker” and “bullsticker”. For
the record for those who have no clue what I’m talking about, they’re
the British names for ongilette and oval engraving tools,
respectively. Although in that usage, they’re sharpened in a very
particular–and to the uninitiated–particularly odd way. One uses
them to hand-engrave stone seats and settings. (Brian’s House of
Trivia is now closing for the evening…)

Hi Mary!

In casting pieces, sometimes I place prongs on the backside to hold
cabochon stones and this works well. It is a little more difficult
to set faceted stones in from the backside because you need to
protect the culet of the stone so it doesn’t get chipped. You could
probably solder in prongs on the backside to hold your stones, but
in a small space in the back of the ring it would be tricky. I
certainly would recommend that your prongs be round wire that you
bend to a ‘c’ shape and solder the ends to the backside of the ring
(2 ‘c’ shapes per stone) and do not cut these wires but bend them
over when setting the stone so that they almost cover the culet. If
done like that, there are no sharp edges to cut into someone’s
finger and the length of the long prongs should hold in your stones
and also protect the culet. Of course, your band will have to be
slightly deeper than your stones. The deeper it is–the less dirt
should accumulate behind it and around your stones.

I have a ring my husband purchased for me that has 4 emerald cut
(3mm x 9mm) color change cz’s that look like they are one stone
because they have been set with their girdles touching eachother on
top but there are channels to support the length of the 4 stones
underneath. (Yes the stones are set crosswise to the finger and not
lengthwise.) The design looks like approx. 1/3 of a circle on top
(when viewed from the side) and the designer put a narrow bezel on
the sides to hold the stones. When set, the tops of the stones lie
next to each other with no metal showing between them and I guess
this would qualify them as channel set. The design is clever and
there are step down designs on the sides next to the bezel. The
original ring was made in sterling and then gold plated so it looks
rich and the 4 stones look like one stone with lots of fire and
flash. I don’t know if 3 amethysts–instead of 4–would accomplish
the same effect. Maybe you could do a modified version. (Visualize a
tiny pie standing on edge on your ring finger with only 3 pieces
remaining–these are your amethysts viewed from the narrow end with
their girdles touching. Your job is to manufacture the ring to fit
this ‘pie’ section.)

Trying something new is always a challenge. Good luck!

Vi Jones, here in the stormy pacific northwest where I am
manufacturing wearable kaleidoscopes–fun!