Thanks for the input!
Still lots of tweaking to be done.
Listen, I loves me some Gil Kane art, but, man, he was not the king of technical illustration or consistency. Trying to suss out what he and his inkers were going for has been a chore, considering the almost constant changes in the ring’s design.
Perhaps most often, we had the disc-atop-simple/parallel-band...
...and, most often in closeups of the ring itself (which are probably more indicative of the actual design than all those panels of the ring actually being worn, with the band mostly obscured), we had the curvy/signet band...
...and, on occasion, there was the very organic-shaped, dramatically-tapered-at-the-bottom band...
...and, late in Kane’s career (on those occasions where he’d revisit the character for one-shot stories in the 90s), we usually saw some traditional signet-style rings (with bezels of varying thickness), as well as the thin, flat disc atop a tapered band.
There’s also some major variance in terms of the shape, height, and detailing of the bezel/disc itself. Sometimes flat- sided (like a hockey puck), sometimes more of a dome with a circular depression in the center (where the symbol is). Some of the earliest versions even indicate a clear, domed gem in the center, with the symbol underneath it, similar to the yellow Sinestro/Gardner ring.
I’m trying to find some kind of definitive version of Kane’s design without going too far and making a hybrid version that doesn’t really match the overall vibe of ANY of the versions that he was usually going for.
The easy solution would be to go for the simple (parallel) ring band with the disc stuck on top, but I’m rather fond of the
signet-style band, and like yourself, find it to be a little more sophisticated and visually interesting. Also, it provides some contrast with the simpler look of the original SHOWCASE # 22 version, and other early iterations of the design.
Kane also tended to go for a rather thin band, but I think a slightly wider and chunkier band gives the design more heft and visual strength.
Personally, I do like the disc-atop-band look, and think the stronger undercuts in-between the band and the disc (in front view) are more visually pleasing than the very slight disc overhang in design # 1 (left side) in post # 302. It’s a tricky balance, to be sure.
And, you’ll notice that the three designs in post # 302 look virtually identical to each other in the 3/4 angled view, which is an excellent example of how the comic artwork also makes it difficult to determine whether Kane was going for the signet look or the overlapping-disc look. It’s only in the front view where you can see how the disc overhangs the band (if at all).
Certainly, in the Kane art depicting a simple, parallel band, the disc absolutely overhangs the band. I’ve always assumed that the signet-band version was drawn with that same intent, but perhaps I’ve mistakenly conflated two different design choices.
The Ross-style signet ring is very visually-pleasing, but, somehow, the utter lack of a disc overhanging the band (even slightly) doesn’t feel like Kane, to me. Remember, Kane usually drew the disc REALLY BIG. Now, I don’t necessarily have to take that literally, but, going with a big disc/bezel would also mean a virtually flat-sided upper half of the band, and I think having a bit of curve/doming to the upper band as it blends into the disc/bezel is more aesthetically- pleasing.