Earring Design

[Cheyenne]

settings - GRRRR!

Hi again guys!

I just had to reply to this thread - albeit a bit late - as I complained about post placing on another thread. I agree with you, Mathilda, that stud earrings with top post settings (70% R&C stud earrings seem to be like this) tend to fall forwards revealing the piercing in all it's glory and can make the earring look like it's about to fall out! Pushing the butterflies right up to my earlobes makes them red and sometimes, if the stone is large, a bit sore - not a good look!

I've gone through my entire earring collection and most have posts placed on a bar - or similar - approx 2/3 of the way up the setting which protects and hides the piercing (a real bonus for those of us who have elongated or ugly piercings) and allows the stone to cover the earlobe as much as a top post.

Also why can't R&C be a bit more sophisticated in their setting style? Why are the majority of stones claw set (and some with alarmingly flimsy looking claws!) when channel and bezel setting for example can look so chic and elegant?

Lovely large stones can be ruined by ridiculously ornate settings, particularly pendants, with diamond chips scattered around like fairy dust, detracting rather than adding to the loveliness of the stone. What happened to less is more? what happened to creativity in design? If the stone is poor quality and needs to be hidden in all this clutter - well that's another story!

Just my opinion, of course - I couldn't hold it in any longer!

I sound like a real moaner, I know, next post WILL be positive, I promise .

Mathilda, I'd love to see some earrings from your collection - can you post some pics of your favourites? Ta!

 

[Cheyenne]

Sorry about that last sentence, I meant everybody, of course. I'd love to see pics of stuff from all your collections... however fancy

 

[Klosblue]

Sioux and Cheyenne are you related? Sorry but I couldn't help having a wee laugh to myself when I saw both of your names, it's like a Red Indian invasion :redindian: All we need now is Apache to come along :redindian2:

There's a joke about a bunch of cowboys in there somewhere isn't there? :Laughing1:

 

[RubyRose]

Couldn't agree with you more about design, Cheyenne. I feel a bit left out of the earring discussion as I don't have pierced ears, but I totally agree about nice stones being spoiled by over-fussy, flimsy settings. I prefer nice chunky, contemporary designs, especially channel or bezel sets. Really dislike what I call 'bristly' designs, with lots of small diamonds and lots of claws.

Sorry, going off at a bit of a tangent here, but I do not like to see the central stone surrounded by small claw-set diamonds either - I know it's 'classic' but to me it looks like a doily! Another hate, ring-wise, is a great big stone set on a thin, skinny band. I call this the 'dinner plate on a wire' look!

Simple, smooth and chunky good. Bristly bad!

 

[MissMagpie]

I agree about the earring posts, too.

You can, however, overcome the problem to a great extent if you replace the butterflies with those earring backs with a clear plastic disc on them, which you can get from Claire's Accessories (among other places). I have several pairs of lovely earrings which I wouldn't be able to wear at all if it weren't for this brilliant invention.

 

[Mathilda]

Good point, Miss Magpie, about those large earing backs. I also use them when I hace a heavy pair of earrings with an omega clasp that get a bit tight and tiring after a long day! I put the p wide plastic back on the post before the clip and it makes them a lot more comfortable. I like omega fastenings very much, but sometimes the spring of the clip is a bit fierce and needs "tempering" a little!


I will try to get some pics to post of earrings ....in the Bling Section of the Drop or in my album.... if I can remember how to do that.... seems ages since I did. Also, I am not a great photographer, may have some pix somewhere, though...... bear with me!!