like you said that's looks nothing like real pave it's just shared prongs ..as you can see most evident on the left side, the prongs are sticking way up past the shank and would be irratating against the finger...my suggestion is to get a book on diamond setting and read, but even better practice real pave setting then try and duplicate the look... once you understand the process and have practiced it you will know what real pave really looks like...it's pretty hard to duplicate the hand set pave look on the computer but it can be done ...read about how deep the stones should be set into the metal according to their size, how much bead should be over the stone, and the real difference is the 'brite' cuts on the edge and between the stones...that's the part that will give it the real look...
I do understand how real pave looks - and i do know that the above is not real pave its just shared prong - the reason the prongs are so long is that when i print i leave extra on prongs for the setter to deal with - better than not enough.
as for the brite cuts - i think thats what i am after - a way to replicate that on CAD (if possible) it's hard to convey pave and i have had customers point that out when drafting up their images for their custom jobs, it then becomes a case of - "oh dont worry about that, the software can't make it look handmade, here look at some of the pave stock we have to get an idea."
that's really annoying, i don't want to keep having to do that.
I have done two versions of the same ring to demonstrate to the client how the actual piece will turn out.
In your example above shared prongs are very appropriate. Drop the height of the prongs to the level a setter would trim them to (just below the diamond's table) to do your render for the client; the other rev. would be the one you use for manufacturing.
Tedious, I know.