Low cost stones in high cost settings (POLL)
- Thread starter Acinom
- Start date
CSpan
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2016
- Messages
- 1,387
Cerulean
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2019
- Messages
- 5,118
The inverse is true for me.
I am about to set an expensive sapphire in a temp 14k YG/silver Gypsy setting to figure out if it’s what I really want. I love the style of setting but am not sure if it’s going to flatter the stone. The stone is more than 10x the cost of the setting. I imagine I will keep it for a while!
I am about to set an expensive sapphire in a temp 14k YG/silver Gypsy setting to figure out if it’s what I really want. I love the style of setting but am not sure if it’s going to flatter the stone. The stone is more than 10x the cost of the setting. I imagine I will keep it for a while!
Ionysis
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2015
- Messages
- 1,976
Because I love coloured stones I focus my money on the stone itself with the setting a necessary evil which I reluctantly have to fork out for to display my babies. I hate paying too much for settings.
However I’ve got a 13ct cabochon ruby which is clarity enhanced and I had it set in an expensive and dramatic halo of huge pear shaped diamonds - inspired by an award winning setting by a very famous designer. When I look at it I have this bizarre feeling that I want to strip it if it’s finery as if it doesn’t “deserve” all the diamonds I’ve lavished on it! I am toying with giving it a more appropriate setting and using those pear diamonds in a tennis bracelet.
On the other hand I have a project in hand right now where the setting is going to cost about three times the cost of the stones because it’s something of a work or art and will take a lot of detailed custom craftsmanship. In that case I feel the artistry will add up to more than the “sum of the parts” and I will end up with a piece of jewellery which overall is worth having.
But that is much more the exception than the rule for me. I like my CS to be the star and the setting usually to take a back seat.
However I’ve got a 13ct cabochon ruby which is clarity enhanced and I had it set in an expensive and dramatic halo of huge pear shaped diamonds - inspired by an award winning setting by a very famous designer. When I look at it I have this bizarre feeling that I want to strip it if it’s finery as if it doesn’t “deserve” all the diamonds I’ve lavished on it! I am toying with giving it a more appropriate setting and using those pear diamonds in a tennis bracelet.
On the other hand I have a project in hand right now where the setting is going to cost about three times the cost of the stones because it’s something of a work or art and will take a lot of detailed custom craftsmanship. In that case I feel the artistry will add up to more than the “sum of the parts” and I will end up with a piece of jewellery which overall is worth having.
But that is much more the exception than the rule for me. I like my CS to be the star and the setting usually to take a back seat.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 25,228
@Rfisher mentioned that her stunning Sako ring falls info the ‘inexpensive stone in luxurious and expensive setting category’. I love the amazing result.
That’s such a beautiful and unique setting that it just works so well with the gem, they aren’t competing with each other. They enhance each other’s beauty. It’s like a perfect marriage. It’s really a work of art.
Featured Topics
300x240.png)