Help me finalize my setting design!!!

[ladykemma]

Date: 7/13/2006 6:28:14 PM
Author: old-fashioned girl

Date: 7/13/2006 2:55:33 PM
Author: ladykemma
look at my avatar. from left to right
.20 .30 1.25 .30 .20

i think nice proportions
i like all your settings picked out and yes I think you won''t get tired of it.

Thanks! That is very helpful. Are there any close-ups of your ring on PS? It is beautiful, and it''s good to hear someone say I won''t get tired of this look. That''s what I want is something classic, that I will never tire of or regret!

oh, another question: since your center stone is a pear, what is the length?

9x6x4 mm measured with a ruler

i wouldn''t get the one with the stone on the side -- "trendy" you will tire of soon.

 

[ladykemma]

yeah I agree with the others-- i think the settings you picked out need bigger side stones. will help combat DSS.

 

[Kay]

I like the first Scott Kay of all the ones you posted. My favorite 5 stone design is the Vatche truffle (I''ll try to attach a pic). I would graduate the side stones, maybe .40 and .20 or .30 and .15. I think the surpise diamond makes it look too busy. A few PSers have gorgeous 3-stone truffle style rings custom designed by Whiteflash, so I bet they could make a great 5 stone ring for you.

 

[Odilia]

Date: 7/13/2006 6:43:43 PM
Author: Kay
My favorite 5 stone design is the Vatche truffle. I would graduate the side stones, maybe .40 and .20 or .30 and .15. I think the surpise diamond makes it look too busy.

Thanks, Kay! I have seen that ring before, but forgot about it when I posted my other pics. I haven''t seen it in person, but it does look nice.

Any more feedback, anybody? Including on the Vatche truffle?

 

[mrssalvo]

I like the vatche truffle but think the stones kinda all blend in and none really stand out. are you wanting your center to be the star with side accents or have more of an anniversary type ring look to it.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

They are all nice, but I''d choose the first Scott Kay. I''d buy that setting and not try to duplicate it. Does it come set with the side diamonds and you have your own center stone set?

 

[Ellen]

I like the very first pic you posted. But really, it should be what YOU like!

 

[dbgaap]

I must say I do love the photoshop pic with the rubies, especially the surprise ruby.

I will reverse my opinion about the trendiness of a SD if you put a colored stone in it. To me that would make it so unique that it wouldn''t bore me eventually.

I love rubies so I got an anniversary band with them. I am afraid I would get tired of rubies they were side stones on my e-ring.

But, the surprise diamond will be like your little secret.

So, if you are going with the SD, I tend to like the first setting the best.

Those Scott Kays REALLY look good IRL.
I''ve admired them when I was searching for my setting.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 7/13/2006 8:40:38 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
They are all nice, but I''d choose the first Scott Kay. I''d buy that setting and not try to duplicate it. Does it come set with the side diamonds and you have your own center stone set?

i agree and the SK''s do come with the side diamonds.

 

[qtiekiki]

I like the Vatche the best. I do think the surprise diamond is too busy with a 5 stone ring.

The size of the sidestones should depend on whether or not you want the center stone to be the focus. If you do, then I would do .20 sidestones. I have a three stones with 1.25 center stone and .25 sidestones, and the proportion allows the center stone to be the focus.

 

[bling*diva*]

~~I vote for the Scott Kay Crown (the first one)...I love it!!

 

[Odilia]

Date: 7/14/2006 1:37:54 AM
Author: bling*diva*
~~I vote for the Scott Kay Crown (the first one)...I love it!!

Thanks, bling*diva*! You are one of the only ones who has said they love it! It is good to hear some enthusiastic feedback on it!

 

[mrssalvo]

OFG, i have found in my own setting search that everyone''s opinions and tastes are very different. It all comes down to which one YOU like the best. I know how hard it is to make a decision b/c I''ve yet to come close to one myself but at the end of the day, your looking and wearing your ring not all the wonderful gals here. I think all of the settings are very pretty and any would really look nice with your stone. Plus, I for one am going on pictures alone and I know how different settings can and do look in person. you''ve seen them, which one do you love?

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Which do YOU like best?

ETA: mrssalvo and I were posting at the same time. I think it is great you want our thoughts but you seem to rely on them a lot. Only you will be wearing this ring so it should be your choice not ours.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 7/14/2006 11:05:08 AM
Author: mrssalvo
OFG, i have found in my own setting search that everyone''s opinions and tastes are very different. It all comes down to which one YOU like the best. I know how hard it is to make a decision b/c I''ve yet to come close to one myself but at the end of the day, your looking and wearing your ring not all the wonderful gals here. I think all of the settings are very pretty and any would really look nice with your stone. Plus, I for one am going on pictures alone and I know how different settings can and do look in person. you''ve seen them, which one do you love?

Sorry to hijack, but I LOVE the avatar of your pendant, mrssalvo! That is the perfect way to identify yourself especially since you designed it!!!

 

[dbgaap]

Date: 7/14/2006 11:05:08 AM
Author: mrssalvo
OFG, i have found in my own setting search that everyone''s opinions and tastes are very different. It all comes down to which one YOU like the best. I know how hard it is to make a decision b/c I''ve yet to come close to one myself but at the end of the day, your looking and wearing your ring not all the wonderful gals here. I think all of the settings are very pretty and any would really look nice with your stone. Plus, I for one am going on pictures alone and I know how different settings can and do look in person. you''ve seen them, which one do you love?

Ditto.

Come on OFG, dig down, dig waaaaaaay down and ask yourself, which one do I LIKE BEST?

I truly think they are all very pretty and each, in its own way, is the perfect choice for you.

This design will give you bling spannage, it will still show off your center stone and it will stand alone nicely, too, esp if you go with a unique little surprise diamond.

which one DO you like best?

 

[Odilia]

Date: 7/14/2006 11:17:43 AM
Author: dbgaap

Date: 7/14/2006 11:05:08 AM
Author: mrssalvo
It all comes down to which one YOU like the best.

Come on OFG, dig down, dig waaaaaaay down and ask yourself, which one do I LIKE BEST?

I truly think they are all very pretty and each, in its own way, is the perfect choice for you.

which one DO you like best?

Ok, my first answer to the $64,000 question "which do YOU like best" would have been, "I DON''T KNOW!!"

A more detailed answer would be that in person I''ve only seen the Scott Kay and one A. Jaffe at Charleston Alexander (CA), which I don''t have any good pictures of, so I''m in the same boat as you all for many of them. The only picture I had of the A Jaffe I saw was the one with the title (if you look under the picture) CA MES122. It was a top-down view without the center diamond, and doesn''t look that good in the picture. A further answer would have been, there are elements of each that I like. I liked the top down view of - probably the one I called "basic 5 stone" because the diamonds were smaller so the center stone still got most of the attention. Side view - I wasn''t sure, because I couldn''t recall enough of the CA A. Jaffe. But that''s why I leaned toward custom - so I could incorporate the best of each.

SSSSOOOO, I went to CA today (the first & last time I saw the ring was over a month ago - no time for jewelry lately) and looked again. I think I probably like the side view of it best. But it is different than the pictures I posted, which are all more like the Scott Kay. Also, it has some very charming little details, which I like, because I''ve always been torn between "classic" and "unique" - where ''classic'' can so often seem boring, but unique has the risk of getting tired of it etc... Well, one thing I like about both the Scott kay and A Jaffe are that from the top down, it''s a classic ''two rounds next to a center round'', but the profile is where the uniqueness comes in. Well, the A Jaffe has the profile where you can see the whole side of the diamonds - but done differently, but also has cute little double prongs, part of which forms the U that holds the diamond, and part of which comes from the shank of the ring, and when they meet they sort of twist around each other - it probably sounds awful but IRL it is very subtle, and so cute when you notice it!! Also, the way the shank transitions to the first side stone is interesting, and kind of ties in (style-wise) with the twisted prongs.

The lady from CA is supposed to email me a side view - hopefully that will help! In any case, I love the little details in the A Jaffe ring at CA, but the diamonds are bigger than I was intending. Takes away a bit of attention from the center stone, but if I can get myself used to the idea of more bling, and make it more like an anniversary ring, rather than worrying about the ''center stone pop'' thing - then, if I were to do an ''off-the-shelf'' ring rather than custom, I''d probably go with this one. If not, I''d probably like to get something close to this A. Jaffe, but with smaller side stones, and make the surprise diamond a pale blue diamond. But, the details that make this ring charming would be hard to reproduce if I go custom.

Incidentally, it does have the surprise diamond, but as I said earlier, it is very dainty, not nearly as big as the one on the Scott Kay. The A Jaffe has 0.83ctw diamonds, and they are graduated, so I guess that means the stone next to the center is slightly over 20 points, and the next one is under - roughly?

Anyway, that''s the latest....

But I do want to say, I am fully aware that in the end I am the one who will look at it and have to like it, but there are so many things that I would overlook - I don''t see certain things at first that I might dislike later etc... (case in point is my first setting - ugh!) So, all of your input is valuable to me! Even those that I don''t necessarily follow -e.g. suprise diamond or not - obviously I can''t please everybody on something like that!

But in the end it just helps to know what people think, or have other eyes look at them -even if they''re just pictures - especially if I do go custom, because some of your input has already helped immensely - things that I might have thought of too late - but will pay attention to now. So anyway, I really do appreciate all of the feedback on here, even though I know I will have to just bite the bullet and decide in the end. It really does help me.

 

[Sundial]

Well I think that all of the designs you are considering are quite lovely. As much as I liked the first Scott Kay, I have to say that Vatche truffle five stone is just to die for! Custom is the way to go if you decide you want something very specific that you can''t find elsewhere, but there is something to be said for seeing exactly what you are getting with an in-store setting. Personally I like the look of a row of sparkly diamonds where it is not so much all about the center stone. Ultimately of course it is up to you and the more rings you can try on the better.

 

[Kay]

Now I really want to see pics of the CA A. Jaffe. I will reverse my earlier vote against the surprise diamond if it is very delicate (i.e., tiny stone and no huge bezel) and blue. I love the look of a tiny blue diamond as a surprise stone. It may still be a little busy with a 5-stone ring, but it will add some of the unique factor you are craving. If you like the look, go for it.

Did you ask CA if A. Jaffe will make the ring with smaller side stones?

 

[Odilia]

Date: 7/14/2006 12:15:17 AM
Author: qtiekiki
I like the Vatche the best. I do think the surprise diamond is too busy with a 5 stone ring.

The size of the sidestones should depend on whether or not you want the center stone to be the focus. If you do, then I would do .20 sidestones. I have a three stones with 1.25 center stone and .25 sidestones, and the proportion allows the center stone to be the focus.

Thanks, qtiekiki! I like your ring, and saved the picture of it once because your center stone does stand out nicely! I appreciate your putting the sizes down, and also, I don''t know if I thanked ladykemma above for putting the measurements of hers!

 

[Odilia]

Date: 7/14/2006 4:49:30 PM
Author: Kay
Now I really want to see pics of the CA A. Jaffe.

Me too! I sure hope she sends that side view shot soon.

I will reverse my earlier vote against the surprise diamond if it is very delicate (i.e., tiny stone and no huge bezel) and blue. I love the look of a tiny blue diamond as a surprise stone. It may still be a little busy with a 5-stone ring, but it will add some of the unique factor you are craving. If you like the look, go for it.

Yes, the first time I saw this ring, I noticed right away that the SD was so much more dainty than the Scott Kay's, and I liked the daintier one a lot better.

Did you ask CA if A. Jaffe will make the ring with smaller side stones?

You see, this is why I need input! I totally forgot to ask that with this ring! (I sometimes ask about things like that, but for some reason didn't think of it here!) Definitely worth asking, because I knew some designers will do that. IF they will, then this ring, w/ smaller sidestones, off the shelf, would probably be the way to go. Thanks for the great idea!

 

[Odilia]

Well, once again life has interrupted my setting quest. But since I promised to post the side view of the A.Jaffe setting at Charleston Alexander, here it is:

 

[Odilia]

Wow, didn''t know the file was that big. I will post it again, and also maybe repost the Scott Kay profile so you can see them in close proximity.

 

[Odilia]

Here''s the A Jaffe again. Hopefully small enough.

 

[Dee*Jay]

They're both beautiful, but there's just something about the A Jaffe that appeals to me more.

 

[Sundial]

I prefer the Scott Kay, but certainly both are stunning.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Well, I got to finally try on some Scott Kay settings yesterday, and I''ll have to say, they were stunning! All the ones I tried on were 3 stone..and boy they were expensive, too! But really gorgeous and very perfect looking. I was mainly focused on the ones with engraving and milgrain. The one I liked the best had a retail price of $7000.

They are having a yearly sale this weekend and it will be 20% off. I can''t figure out if Pearlman''s has the same one pictured or not, so I can''t really compare the prices. I had not been interested in Scott Kay before yesterday, so it surprised me that those would stand out among the many I looked at yesterday. I do personally prefer the 3 stone Scott Kay''s, though.

 

[mrssalvo]

I vote for the Scott kay too...

 

[Gypsy]

SK here too.

 

[Diamond*Dana]

I like the first A Jaffe the best, I love the flowing smoothness of it. My next favorite would be the first Scott Kay.