The end result looks excellent.
Anna, your ring absolutely glorious. The seal appears to have been cut in an amethyst.
I know it’s rude to ask, but was it horrendously expensive?
No, Richard, not rude at all. The price (Euro 1800) I think comparable with some figures given above ...
Joseph McMillan;86599 wrote:
Suppose the arms concerned are those of the Fitzgerald Dukes of Leinster, Argent a saltire Gules, with the crest being a monkey wearing a collar and chain. Isn’t the crest alone going to be far more identifiable than a tiny rendering of a shield with a saltire—the tinctures of which will be invisible in wax—and some kind of animal thingy on top of the helm?
Just to note that for many years I lived next door to one of the Fitzgerald of Leinster cousins and the monkey crest alone (reversed) was precisely what she bore on her signet stone. I think it was the first armorial signet I examined in detail.
In some cases, the arms will be more distinctive; in others, the crest. Given that the prime function of heraldry is identification, distinctiveness would seem to be the prime criteria.
Space allowing (i.e. if the ring is big enough & the arms and crest are both simple enough to show well in that space) showing both would IMO be better.
Mine (purchased years ago from a now defunct source) has shield, crest & helm—but the elements are quite simple & the ring is a bit big & clunky. (Also not terribly well carved—e.g. the deer is a bit wimpy and the saltires are not evenly spaced around the border—but then I didn’t pay a lot for it!!)
I hope that a link submitted below can be viewed by all ...
It’s quite interesting and not traditional signet ring where a stone acts as a magnifying glass ...version maybe more suitable for ladies than gents but this reflects an attitude of some European designers who are ready to explore new techniques and are able to meet all clients’ expectations.
http://60photos.com/welcome?_vt=197294981&p=23234894&u=1537885&f=9190466
Stunningly beautiful Anna. I think I’ve seen examples of this technique before - but only in museums. The arms are painstakingly carved in reverse on a cabochon cut stone that is hollowed to lighten the colour and then polished but unfaceted.
Once I had the initial design of my Arms completed I started looking into signet rings. Everything I read pointed to different traditions depending on the region. I was impressed by the continental European designs of the shield, or shield and helmet with mantling, engraved in smeiprecious gemstones. However my Lordship of the Manor was English and I wanted to be somewhat traditional. The various references were consistent that this meant a gold ring including only the crest and worn on the left little finger.
After comparing the work of several engravers I decided on Dexter Rings in the UK which seemed to me to have the most detailed engraving.
http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/264702_2045459269637_1639059259_32058879_868189_n.jpg
Very nicely done signet ring. Aside from price, honestly Dexter is hard to beat as far as quality.
Agreed, Dexter isn’t cheap.
Although I ended up getting one of their pre-made designs, a Jerusalem Cross engraved in black jade, the following company does custom work as well. The quality is quite good, and the cost is very reasonable compared to Dexters since they use local artisans in Thailand.
