Help me pick my side stones for HW tapered baguette ring

[jerichosmom]

Late last night I started to fret about my choice of side stones for my HW style baguette ring. Mark generously sent me pics of 2 other options. Please take a look and see which ones you would go for.
The center stone measures 9.89 x 10.24 and will be set N/S so that it will be a bit oval. Mark's pictures don't have the correct orientation I think. My ring size is 4.75 and my center stone is an OEC, K.

Would your choice of sides be the same if they all cost the same? What if there was a $1700 difference from cheapest to most expensive?

Option 1: 5.8 x 2.6mm (1/4 ratio of the center) I don't know the colour
Option 2: 5.7 x 3.3mm, H, VS1 (1/3 ratio of the center)
Option 3: 6 x 3.2mm K, VS1 (1/3 ratio of the center)

I've included the HW stock picture for an example.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Niel]

i like the first and third, depending on how thin you were going

 

[Puppy4248]

Hi jerichosmom - I love this style, it was one of my inspirations for a ring I just had made for myself too! I personally like the overall proportions of the 2nd picture, although they look a bit dark (not sure if that's due to the camera/lighting... will leave to other, more knowledgeable PSers to talk about that...). But I think #2 seems closest to the HW proportions... next I like picture #3 which also seems pretty close. #1 is also nice, but they seem a bit thin if you're going for HW proportions... just my personal opinion, but the HW tapered baguettes seem a bit shorter/chunkier if that makes sense? For reference, my ring (asscher center) was of similar length and each of the baguettes was between 0.25-0.3 ct if that helps).

Good luck with the project!

 

[jerichosmom]

Thanks Niel - Option 3 is $1700 more than Option 1. Does that sway you at all?

Puppy, thanks for the info. The 2 larger sets are .83 and .82 so larger than yours. I *think* the smaller set is under .50 which is why it's significantly less expensive. There's only one real HW set on PS I think and she doesn't give dimensions of her baguettes, but they're .35 total. Her center was over 2ct...I think her screen name was Hammy and she hasn't been here in years....

I'm stuck looking at rings on my computer screen, using my calipers to measure the stones and calculating the ratio for myself.

 

[LLJsmom]

Hi Jerichosmom, to be honest, the only difference I noticed was the color of the side stones. I loved the bottom one the most. Most appealing to the eye.

 

[Niel]

Thanks Niel - Option 3 is $1700 more than Option 1. Does that sway you at all?

Puppy, thanks for the info. The 2 larger sets are .83 and .82 so larger than yours. I *think* the smaller set is under .50 which is why it's significantly less expensive. There's only one real HW set on PS I think and she doesn't give dimensions of her baguettes, but they're .35 total. Her center was over 2ct...I think her screen name was Hammy and she hasn't been here in years....

I'm stuck looking at rings on my computer screen, using my calipers to measure the stones and calculating the ratio for myself.

I think it depends what you're going for. The bottom would make it look slightly more like a three stone, where the first would make it look more like a solitaire I think. O ha e a marquise with VERY thin baguettes, and it has a very solitaire feel.

 

[sparks1007]

I like the 1st option. I think it's a look more suited to an enhanced solitaire and I think option 1 achieves that look.

 

[Acinom]

I like the more 'fatty' proportions of the second option and the freshness (in terms of color) of the 3rd. Personally I find the first very small but it depends on the look you want to create. The HW has fatter sidestones.

I love that the 2nd have warmer colours, but they seem a bit too dark and I wonder if these are well cut? But I am in no way a diamond expert. If you go for the 2nd look, I would request more photo's/information.

 

[CharmyPoo]

Well for me it is 2 and then 3. Number 1 is far too thin and long.

 

[pandabee]

Well for me it is 2 and then 3. Number 1 is far too thin and long.

My exact thoughts too.

 

[Acinom]

PS member Puppy4248 has a HW inspired ring made by SK. If you like the dimensions, perhaps you could translate them to your own stone. Hers is a 4 ct square. I guess the look is quite similar to your no 2.

 

[jerichosmom]

Puppy, when you receive your ring would you be able to measure your side stones for me?

 

[tyty333]

#3 would be my choice. Is this a RHR or an engagement ring? If an ering, what kind of wedding band are you looking to go with it?

 

[UrsTx]

#3 appears more like the HW inspiration pic you posted.

 

[misskittycat]

I like #2 more but I think #3 is most like the inspiration picture.

 

[jerichosmom]

Tyty, the ring wasn't my ering but I tend to wear it on my left hand because it gets banged up less. My wedding band is usually on the opposite hand (many Europeans do it this way). I'm actually Chinese Canadian but I read LM's post on his site many years ago on how the tradition started and why it's not a good idea to wear both rings on the same finger. From what I recall, it was a Debeers/marketing gimmick in order to get people to continue buying jewelry by damaging what they already have. My jeweler is Armenian and told me that it is customary for them to NOT wear them on the same finger. Ditto for a Euro friend of mine. She wears her ering on her right hand.

 

[Puppy4248]

Thanks Acinom!

Jericosmom, sure I'll send the measurements once I receive it. Based on HW sales reps I met in the past, a roughly 4 ct center stone has been made with 0.25-0.3 ct per baguette, which was what I wanted my ring to have since I like the HW proportions. Similar for the Graff rings of that setting as well, which I also loved. Perhaps yours are more expensive than mine since they are longer, adding to greater carat weight? However mine seemed a bit long as well when SK laid them out, but that's because they were laying flat and weren't at the steeper angle, as HW has them. I basically ended up having him decide and take care of it all since I'm no expert haha. I just know that they are about 0.3 ct weight per baguette if that helps for now!

Will let you know of measurements when I get it, shouldn't be too long I hope!

 

[Puppy4248]

Just received - I have an awful camera so I haven't been able to get good pics yet, but I did measure the parts of the baguettes that were visible (not sure if some of the metal goes over the ends of the baguettes to keep them in place... doesn't look like it for my ring, but maybe different jewelers have different ways of setting). So for what's visible, measuring ALONG (not across) the longer sides of the baguettes, it is about 5 mm. On the shorter end, it is roughly a tad bit less than 2 mm (the shank is 2 mm btw) and on the other end (that connects to the shoulder), it is about 0.3 mm. Hope this helps. ALSO, just revisited my work order - each baguette is 0.23 cts, not 0.3 as i previously said. Of the ones i've seen and in similar style, the HW rings lean closer to 0.25 ct and the Graff rings lean closer to 0.3, for a center stone of similar size. Can't speak for all of them of course, but just of the ones I've seen in person.