oval three stone with pear sides

[sonyachancs]

I'm staring at a spinel on dana's site that is a 7.8x5.7mm oval (I swear you PSers are a terrible influence), and what do you think about it as the centre in a three stone?

I at first though i would like a round with pear sides, but i realised an oval set e-w would give me 1. the e-w setting I had been looking at when pondering my ER 2. even more finger coverage. the idea is to get 2 chrysoberyl pears on the side - and for the three stones to look almost like a fat marquise, if you get what I mean.

what do you think about the dimensions, and the stone (not linking here as I can't upload photos at the moment and don't want anyone to steal it too easily!) - he says it has brilliance, and I fancy that it is light enough so it wouldn't be too dark IRL. TIA!

ETA: typed the wrong name!

 

[FrekeChild]

Interesting idea. I'd like to see pics, I think?

 

[Niel]

I like it

 

[T L]

I'm staring at a spinel on dana's site that is a 7.8x5.7mm oval (I swear you PSers are a terrible influence), and what do you think about it as the centre in a three stone?

I at first though i would like a round with pear sides, but i realised an oval set e-w would give me 1. the e-w setting I had been looking at when pondering my ER 2. even more finger coverage. the idea is to get 2 chrysoberyl pears on the side - and for the three stones to look almost like a fat marquise, if you get what I mean.

what do you think about the dimensions, and the stone (not linking here as I can't upload photos at the moment and don't want anyone to steal it too easily!) - he says it has brilliance, and I fancy that it is light enough so it wouldn't be too dark IRL. TIA!

ETA: typed the wrong name!

Unless the stones were really small, it might be too wide. I have a three stone with an oval in the middle and pears on the sides, and it is a bit wide, but I combined them because I like the color combination, although not the most aesthetically pleasing look. I would recommend fat stubby pears if you can find them.

 

[sonyachancs]

Unless the stones were really small, it might be too wide. I have a three stone with an oval in the middle and pears on the sides, and it is a bit wide, but I combined them because I like the color combination, although not the most aesthetically pleasing look. I would recommend fat stubby pears if you can find them.

TL, do you have a photo of your ring?

my biggest issue is what you've already said actually - I worry it'll be too wide. I have size 5.5 fingers, and I'm not sure how much coverage it can take!

 

[chrono]

When considering a 3 stone coloured combo, you not only have to consider the hue but also the tone and saturation. Sometimes the combo works and sometimes it just looks odd. Secondly, matched pears are not common for chrysoberyls so trying to get a specific size might prove to be a bit of a challenge. Thirdly, I'm don't know if your finger can handle that much width. Assuming your pear is 4 mm each, you are looking at 4 mm + 6 mm + 4 mm = 14 mm. I have size 4.5 fingers are set my oval EW a few months ago. The side-to-side measurement is now 10 mm (10 x 8 mm oval) and the coverage is significant.

 

[T L]

Unless the stones were really small, it might be too wide. I have a three stone with an oval in the middle and pears on the sides, and it is a bit wide, but I combined them because I like the color combination, although not the most aesthetically pleasing look. I would recommend fat stubby pears if you can find them.

TL, do you have a photo of your ring?

my biggest issue is what you've already said actually - I worry it'll be too wide. I have size 5.5 fingers, and I'm not sure how much coverage it can take!

Here's a pic. I have big fat size 8 finger, and it's very wide. The stone in the center is 4 carats, and the side stones are 1.1 carats each, so they're bigger stones, but it still overtakes the width of my finger. My pears are also more thin, which is why I recommended fatter stubbier pears, if you can find them.

 

[chrono]

TL,
Do you have the dimensions of the stones (pear + oval + pear) in mms?

 

[sonyachancs]

okay, I've figured that pears aren't going to give me the width I need, so I started thinking about trillions (which isn't too unusual a shape for chrysos?)

I've photoshopped somthing together, using jeff's stones (thanks for taking such nice photos jeff!), with two trillions and a slight oval (just long enough to give me the e-w look (the stones I 'used' are a 7.97x7.17 middle, and 7mm trillions half hidden behind).

what do you think about color, proportion etc? I like the ratios of the stones together in the image, but have no idea if it'll be too thin (width-wise) IRL.

 

[chrono]

You'll need space for the prongs; I would get slightly smaller trillions, probably 6 mm to get that tapered marquise look.

 

[sonyachancs]

I've made it more to scale with 6mm trillions.. Is this type of setting (with the trillions half-hidden below) realistic?

 

[chrono]

You might have to go custom if you want the trillions to be tucked under the main stone. Then there is also the challenge of finding matched 6 mm trillion chrysoberyls. Anything is possible; it is a matter of time and cost.

 

[GregS]

I agree with others that said finding a matched pair of Chryso's with good color, in your size range will be a daunting task. Hiding a stone below a stone, even if only a portion of it, seems wasteful. Another thing to consider is how high the Spinel will sit in order to accommodate the side stones.

 

[minousbijoux]

I've made it more to scale with 6mm trillions.. Is this type of setting (with the trillions half-hidden below) realistic?

I love this if you can pull it off. I like your example here because the stones are well-matched saturation and tone-wise, which is critical. I'm sure there are examples where a a highly saturated stone does work well with those of low intensity, but in general, I would avoid the dilemma altogether by striving to match them. I also like the size of the center and the sides.

That said, I believe I found the spinel in question, and it appears extremely low in saturation to me - so that it actually appears a bit greyish/brownish in the photos. I would double check its color before ordering any side stones, as it may be hard to match this stone with chrysoberyls since they typically have a higher level of saturation.

Again, though, I love your design idea.

 

[T L]

TL,
Do you have the dimensions of the stones (pear + oval + pear) in mms?

I don't anymore, sorry, but the stone is cut just right, not too deep or too shallow, and it's 4 carats, so it's a very wide size as an oval, and the pears are longer than your average pear.

 

[T L]

You might have to go custom if you want the trillions to be tucked under the main stone. Then there is also the challenge of finding matched 6 mm trillion chrysoberyls. Anything is possible; it is a matter of time and cost.

Ask Tan or Jaimeen, as they have pairs quite often. I also have a color combination similar to that with an oval spinel in the middle which is a greyish blue/violet and trillion chrysoberyls. The stones were all from Tan, and I just had lanbo from ebay make me a custom fit setting and my jeweler set them. My spinel oval isn't cut that great though. I think how you're wanting to set them may have to be a custom job though.