Does my setting swallow my diamond?

[braga123]

I was drawn to this setting because I love the side stones. I have always favored a thinner shank, until I actually had one, and then realized that a plain solitaire thin shank was not doing much for me, so I opted for this setting. Now I am wondering if it is doing my stone justice. Please be honest. The stone is a 2.24 on a size 5.5 finger BUT the ring is sized at 6.5 and I am wondering if sizing it down would help in showcasing the stone better.

 

[Tekate]

Since I voted yes I will tell you what I would do, it's probably expensive.

I would reset the large stone in a ring without the little diamonds (melee?) the stone will pop and be complemented by the baguettes(?) not sure if they are baguettes or not.. then I would take the little diamonds and make a wedding band.. it would be lovely.. or I would take the stone and place it in a setting with baguettes on either side and take the whole setting and have it redone into a wedding band.. for me, I reset my 1.66 carat stone into a setting that I Ioved till it came back and while my stone isn't a 2+ carat it is nice.. the stone just melded into the setting, so I took the 8 baguettes and had a setting made where all the baguettes went east west around the band.. it's better but still not what I really want. but now my stone shows again... your setting is truly stunning the stone is magnificent and I would love to have it ..

 

[arkieb1]

You don't have a neutral button to vote yes & no...... YES your stone will "pop" more with a thinner band & plain head. It will also be plainer looking and less blingy as well. I actually really like your setting, I am not sure if your sides are French cuts or Carre cuts down the sides because I can't get a decent up close look at it but if they are, they are really amazing.

If you are having second thoughts you could keep the setting and put a coloured stone into it instead and wear it as a right hand ring. And either get a solitaire or if you are wanting to make your centre diamond look bigger halo it in a good quality halo. Depends on if you want clean sleek and simple or size and lots of bling, you have already admitted you didn't like the plain solitaire style so you were drawn to this over a more simple style for a reason. A halo might be another option for you.

There is a lot going on with your ring so it does draw your eye to the whole ring than just the centre diamond, but I really like it anyway!!!!

 

[braga123]

arkieb1: my side stones are awesome...they are old rose cut carre diamonds, which is why I am conflicted with the setting. I am still within my exchange period, but I don't want to be too rash and return it and then regret it.

Tekate: I am still within my return period.

 

[Laila619]

I voted yes, because to me it looks like the width of the setting is about the same as the prongs. Maybe a 6 prong head would be better since you'd get more width at the 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock positions. Does that make sense?

If you really want maximum coverage, a delicate halo or a 3 stone are the way to go IMO.

 

[braga123]

I voted yes, because to me it looks like the width of the setting is about the same as the prongs. Maybe a 6 prong head would be better since you'd get more width at the 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock positions. Does that make sense?

I wonder if that would do the trick....especially if it were set a little higher...will check with my jeweler but I get the sense that he doesn't want to customize it bc it is too loose now and he doesn't want to size it down--hence the exchange option

 

[Winks_Elf]

I was drawn to this setting because I love the side stones. I have always favored a thinner shank, until I actually had one, and then realized that a plain solitaire thin shank was not doing much for me, so I opted for this setting. Now I am wondering if it is doing my stone justice. Please be honest. The stone is a 2.24 on a size 5.5 finger BUT the ring is sized at 6.5 and I am wondering if sizing it down would help in showcasing the stone better.

Are you asking if the stone looks small in the setting, or are you asking if you should have the ring properly sized for your finger? These are two totally different questions.

My personal opinion on the setting is that I LOVE the look! The stone still has some overhang on either side of the shank, so it is definitely not getting swallowed up by the setting. I'm a big fan of side stones, especially mixed cuts, and after years of seeing mostly thin delicate settings, it's refreshing to see a bold blingy shank.

As for the actual fit of the shank itself, if your finger is size 5.5, the ring should be no more than a quarter size larger. This allows for swelling in the summertime, but won't let the ring feel uncomfortable in the cold winter months.

 

[braga123]

Winks_Elf: I am asking if the stone looks too small in the setting. Thanks for your opinion!

 

[msop04]

I love your setting. It's unique and very blingy and substantial. However, your diamond doesn't look as big as it would as if it were paired with a thinner or more tapered band. I think your setting would look best with a more elongated stone (colored stone, maybe?? ) like an oval or even an emerald cut. I'd hate to see you get rid of it, because it is really beautiful.

My setting isn't "dainty" like I thought I'd get, but it does taper and the shank appears to split three ways with polished metal in between. If it were "solid" all the way across, I don't think I'd be happy, as it would make my stone appear smaller.

 

[msop04]

P.S. I didn't vote either way, because I think it's just a personal preference.

 

[diamondringlover]

I love your ring I think the setting is pretty darn amazing and I dont think it makes the diamond seem small...but that is just my opinion.

 

[Mayk]

I think your setting is beautiful. I feel your pain because in just shy of four years my e-ring has been three different diamonds and four different settings until I found what I hope will be my forever ring. Never mind the detours into three RHR's until I settled on one and bands too... Just six...

This is a tough place to hang out and second guessing yourself becomes an obsession. I would say relax and live with it but it sounds like you have a return window. So my advice will not help. I hope you find exactly what you want! Your diamond is lovely, I don't think you can make a wrong decision.

 

[Tekate]

Braga, in response to you remark I want you to know your setting is awesome... it's really unique, and blingy... as the band is wider - your stone does become part of the HUGE, AWESOME blingy, gorgeousness.. I just put my little 1.66 in a thicker band and I just kept looking at it and was just not happy with it I lost the stone BUT my stone is quite a bit smaller AND there was no little diamonds.. your sides are much more beautiful (than my probably less stellar baguettes)... the whole ring is to die for and your finger size is perfect (mine is a 7) so whatever you chose, it's just darn awesome...

 

[insured]

I think it's lovely and proportional - I'm not a fan of 'bobblehead' rings with huge stones on thin shanks. My personal taste doesn't favour large stones for that reason but that setting carries the large stone well, IMO.

 

[Tekate]

that is an interesting take.. I never thought of it this way but I can see why someone would see that!

I'm not a fan of 'bobblehead' rings with huge stones on thin shanks. My personal taste doesn't favour large stones for that reason but that setting carries the large stone well, IMO.

 

[SB621]

arkieb1: my side stones are awesome...they are old rose cut carre diamonds, which is why I am conflicted with the setting. I am still within my exchange period, but I don't want to be too rash and return it and then regret it.

Tekate: I am still within my return period.

I have never heard of those. Can you give us better close up pictures. I'm curious

 

[braga123]

 

[Gypsy]

I do not think it swallows your center stone. And I think that your current setting is arresting and lovely. I wouldn't change it.

 

[msop04]

braga, after seeing this photo, I most definitely would NOT change your setting!!! It is gorgeous!! I love love LOVE the profile and the old carre cuts!!!! It is very different and eye-catching! KEEEEEPPPP ITTTTT!!!

 

[motownmama]

GOSH - I LOVE it!! You seem to have some conflict over it though. I guess you just have to listen to your own voice. To me it looks: classy, blingy, big, substantial & unique

 

[nottospec]

I think your setting is fabulous in it's entirety.

There is nothing like it on PS which is an added bonus

 

[Niel]

I'm somewhat of a persnickety patty, but I wish it didn't have the pave part. I love the side carre diamonds, and them alone sans the pave parts would make the size of the center pop. But don't get me wrong your ring is lovely. I'm just one to want one look per ring. I'd separate the pave bands and add them as a separate stacker ring if you missed them later.

 

[Acinom]

Braga, your setting is beautiful and unique and really showcases your diamond. The sidestones are stunning; even on PS it's unique.
I did not vote though as you are clearly having doubts and I feel you should be happy when you look at your ring. You already tried the solitaire look and you were not happy. Perhaps a setting with your sidestones set in a smooth or milgrained channel would help as it is less blingy (like in the french cut sides rings from Leon Mege, Steven Kirsch and Victor Canera)? With a 2ct stone such a setting will not swallow your diamond and your unique stones could be used.

A delicate halo could also be an option, but I think I rembember that you said in another thread you are not a halo girl..

If you are still in your return period I would explore all options, like you are doing with this thread. Your new setting is clearly bugging you. I hope you find a good solution. Perhaps put your ring away for a day and see how you love it when you start wearing it again.

 

[distracts]

I'm somewhat of a persnickety patty, but I wish it didn't have the pave part. I love the side carre diamonds, and them alone sans the pave parts would make the size of the center pop. But don't get me wrong your ring is lovely. I'm just one to want one look per ring. I'd separate the pave bands and add them as a separate stacker ring if you missed them later.

This is my opinion. I like the ring the way it is, but if you are concerned and want the center stone to pop more, well, it's definitely the pave that is the over-the-top part.

 

[junebug17]

I don't think it is swallowing your diamond, looking at your ring you can tell the stone is a good size - I do really love that the setting is unique - it is a gorgeous setting that creates a very substantial look! You're obviously torn on this, I hope you can settle on something that you really love!

 

[onyx8]

Why is the ring sized one size larger than your finger? Seems it would be uncomfortable.

 

[braga123]

Thanks everyone for your compliments! Coming from PSers like you, these mean a lot. I really love my setting, but it is unlike any other that I have owned, so I think that is why I am having doubts about how it showcases my stone. I am really leaning towards keeping it and enjoying it for its overall look, instead of obsessing over how big the stone looks.

onyx8: The setting is stock, so when I bought it, my jeweler warned me that he could not size it down and told me to try it out, bc I insisted that I like to wear my rings loose. I am considering adding sizing beads.

 

[backwardsandinheels]

Well, shoot, now I can see it! It's very pretty. Maybe a few more good pics, but I wouldn't halo it, that doesn't seem to be you. It looks great now that I can see it better. I'd keep it.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think it is a beautiful and unique setting! Those side stone possibly look like French cuts to me. I will tell you that I have a 2.3 ct diamond in a solitaire setting right now, and I do not think it makes the stone look larger and it definitely makes me feel like the diamond needs a setting with more detail (and wider shank, too). (Part of my feeling this way is that the stone is antique style and I think it needs an antique style setting.) The only hesitation I have about your ring is the size. I wear the exact same size you do, and I cannot imagine trying to wear it a full size larger it is sized 1/4 size larger and it is about to fall off in the winter.

You could get the same look with a slightly thinner shank made by Victor or Steven, but I imagine you'd be looking at around $5k+. If you paid anything even close to that, I would return that setting and get one custom made for your diamond and ring size.

Like this but with a round:

http://www.victorcanera.com/jewelry/engagement-rings/the-sophia-french-cut-solitaire-with-emerald-cut

I will also show you a pic I just took of my new watch, because it gives you an idea how a diamond the size of yours looks in a solitaire on a 5.5 finger.

 

[heididdl]

No the stone is in perfect proportion to the stone It looks lovely. I it is not my taste but it is beautfiul and the stone is nicely highlighted in it.