Weddingbee Blog

JK. Here are my tips, free of charge. They come from a total amateur, though.

[Tip #1] As others have said, natural light is best.

[Tip #2] Sometimes darker environments with flash showcase the sparkle better. This one’s blurry, but you get the idea.

[Tip #3] The camera totally makes a difference. I used our work one for most of these. It’s a pseudo-SLR with more bells and whistles than your typical point-and-shoot. It also has a semi-manual mode that lets you adjust certain things manually.

[Bonus Tip] Don’t wear a red shirt while photographing. The stone will reflect the color. Ugh.

My inspiration. It’s his fault for taking me shopping at South Coast Plaza.

[image from Tiffany & Co.]

My process:

This is something I have only shared with one other person besides. Lime as I was super embarrassed about this, but no shame for the sake of contributing to all your engagement/wedding plans, right? My jeweler gave me the sizes in millimeters of the stones and band thickness, as my main concern was that the ring wouldn’t be delicate enough for my freakishly small hands. We custom designed it, but this particular jeweler does not do CAD models, waxes, etc. To allay my fears, I made a flat, 2D model. Yeah, I’m that OCD.

DIY instructions: A CAD program, knowledge of how to use said CAD program, knowledge of how to plot things to scale, about 2 minutes of time, and some scissors. It’s not really that great a modeling method, though, as the flatness is very deceptive.

The graduated trapezoidal step cut & square step cut stones from the original (each one is slightly smaller than the one before it) were just too crazy for my jeweler to source. She was able to find same-sized square step cuts (not asschers, mind you) small enough for the sidestones, though. After wearing it for a few months now, I LOVE it and like how it doesn’t taper, after all. As always, the ring sparkles more and looks much more delicate in real life. These close-up photos really do screw up your sense of scale and perception.