Please help with my Emerald E-ring search

[erinl]

I know that credit/or buying above a budget is never a good idea and I am not advocating that, but I noticed that embassy includes paypal as a method of payment. I bought a stone with paypal and used their 6 month no interest option. That may give you a bit more time to make your budget/cost of ring and stone come together. Just a thought.

If it were me, I would rather have a beautiful emerald in a simpler setting and upgrade the setting later, even if I had to buy the setting myself!

 

[Jereni]

I like both stones 1 and 2 a lot! They look like they have nice classic emerald color. Or, at least what I think of when I think of 'emerald' green

 

[LD]

#1 - I'm concerned about #1. Look at the photo where you can see it standing on the long length - can you see there are two or three lines of jardin running along the length? I think that will be very noticeable IRL. Ask Garrett about it. If the lines are not noticeable (and maybe he could photograph this one and #3 on the back of his hand so you can compare them against each other?

#2 - I don't like the inclusions and I think that IRL this will be just a little too small.

#3 - strangely I like this one because it has more of a blue element to it. The window does worry me but it doesn't look huge. It is very cheaply priced considering the carat weight so I would ask Garrett what's the difference between 1 and 3 to warrant such a price jump. I suspect it's the colour but its worth asking.

#4 - don't like this one at all. It looks too velvety and you can't see the facets properly - I would be rubbing this one trying to get it clean all the time (which of course wouldn't work)

 

[chrono]

Since all are from the same vendor, I would ask if he can photography them all together and also get his personal opinion, especially since I have no idea how accurate the photographs are.

 

[Eggvillan]

good suggestions... i've requested some additional pictures, and i'll let you know how it goes.

as always, thanks again!

I think that IRL this will be just a little too small.:

..... and i had been working so hard at trying to ignore the size

yeah, i agree - i think its a touch too small. i think the center stone needs to come close to the 7x5 mark

 

[Eggvillan]

#4 - don't like this one at all. It looks too velvety and you can't see the facets properly - I would be rubbing this one trying to get it clean all the time (which of course wouldn't work)

LD - im not sure that i know what you mean by "velvety"

also - i feel like the "problem" with the facets might just be due to the photography. It looks like the edges are clean and clearly defined to me....

 

[chrono]

The velvety appearance happens when there is lot of microscopic or small inclusions spread evenly throughout the stone internally, diffusing the brilliance into a soft glow. Some like this effect but some don't. Some like just a touch of it but others like a stronger effect.

 

[Kitten35]

FWIW, I would be tempted to spend maybe a *little* more on the stone, and a little less (even if it meant non-diamond sidestones; perhaps use another white natural stone such as white sapphire) on the setting. Or even a stylin solitaire. Now, I am not your GF, but personally I would prefer quality of the emerald the most and then the sidestones, or wouldn't mind not having sidestones. There is no rule that says you have to have sidestones or diamonds, unless she really wants this particular style. That would allow you to have a bigger budget for the stone itself.

Also, American Set has some really nice settings *with* sidestones if you are decided on that already. They have these in similar style to what you wanted:


http://www.ebay.com/itm/14K-GOLD-BAGUETTE-DIAMOND-RING-SETTING-SEMI-MOUNT-/251206368172?pt=US_Engagement_Ring_Settings&hash=item3a7d10fbac

http://www.ebay.com/itm/14k-WHITE-GOLD-BAGUETTE-DIAMOND-RING-SETTING-ENGAGEMENT-/251208048364?pt=US_Engagement_Ring_Settings&hash=item3a7d2a9eec

Those the baguettes are set horizontally instead of vertically, but they also had (slightly more expensive) ones with princess, etc on the side instead.

I own a setting from them and it is quite substantial. Now, others on here may be able to tell you if it is appropriate for everyday wear and if it is "engagement ring" quality; that is something which I am not really sure. I don't wear mine everyday. But they have good customer service and so far at least from my experience, good products.

I hope you don't mind me saying but putting a lovely Emerald in that setting would be criminal. I own that setting and quite frankly, it's rubbish. I've never set a stone in it because I haven't had the heart to use it. The OP's idea of vertical baguettes is, in my opinion, much more classy and unique. I appreciate this is very much a personal opinion but as the OP has certain time limits, he needs to be aware that this setting, I don't believe, will meet his tastes or desire for quality. Sorry.

Hi LD,
No, I don't mind. That is why I said others may have a better idea of it being everyday wear or engagement quality. In addition, the ring I own is a solitaire--there are no sidestones, so I can't speak to the quality of sidestones that American Set includes. The one I have is quite substantial, but it is a relatively thick shank. I have been happy with it--but I also do not wear it daily. I was simply suggesting an inexpensive alternative for an inexpensive setting that could be upgraded later allowing him to put more money in the stone. I agree about the vertical baguettes as well, again, this was just a suggestion. Personally I'd spend a little more on the stone and buy a simple plain solitaire setting, always classic, upgrading later to sidestones, but this may not be what he is looking for.

 

[Kitten35]

FWIW, I would be tempted to spend maybe a *little* more on the stone, and a little less (even if it meant non-diamond sidestones; perhaps use another white natural stone such as white sapphire) on the setting. Or even a stylin solitaire. Now, I am not your GF, but personally I would prefer quality of the emerald the most and then the sidestones, or wouldn't mind not having sidestones. There is no rule that says you have to have sidestones or diamonds, unless she really wants this particular style. That would allow you to have a bigger budget for the stone itself.

Also, American Set has some really nice settings *with* sidestones if you are decided on that already. They have these in similar style to what you wanted:


http://www.ebay.com/itm/14K-GOLD-BAGUETTE-DIAMOND-RING-SETTING-SEMI-MOUNT-/251206368172?pt=US_Engagement_Ring_Settings&hash=item3a7d10fbac

http://www.ebay.com/itm/14k-WHITE-GOLD-BAGUETTE-DIAMOND-RING-SETTING-ENGAGEMENT-/251208048364?pt=US_Engagement_Ring_Settings&hash=item3a7d2a9eec

Those the baguettes are set horizontally instead of vertically, but they also had (slightly more expensive) ones with princess, etc on the side instead.

I own a setting from them and it is quite substantial. Now, others on here may be able to tell you if it is appropriate for everyday wear and if it is "engagement ring" quality; that is something which I am not really sure. I don't wear mine everyday. But they have good customer service and so far at least from my experience, good products.

I hope you don't mind me saying but putting a lovely Emerald in that setting would be criminal. I own that setting and quite frankly, it's rubbish. I've never set a stone in it because I haven't had the heart to use it. The OP's idea of vertical baguettes is, in my opinion, much more classy and unique. I appreciate this is very much a personal opinion but as the OP has certain time limits, he needs to be aware that this setting, I don't believe, will meet his tastes or desire for quality. Sorry.

Hi LD,
No, I don't mind. That is why I said others may have a better idea of it being everyday wear or engagement quality. In addition, the ring I own is a solitaire--there are no sidestones, so I can't speak to the quality of sidestones that American Set includes. The one I have is quite substantial, but it is a relatively thick shank. I have been happy with it--but I also do not wear it daily. I was simply suggesting an inexpensive alternative for an inexpensive setting that could be upgraded later allowing him to put more money in the stone. I agree about the vertical baguettes as well, again, this was just a suggestion. Personally I'd spend a little more on the stone and buy a simple plain solitaire setting, always classic, upgrading later to sidestones, but this may not be what he is looking for.

 

[Eggvillan]

Still waiting for the pics from embassy emeralds....

I'm leaning heavily toward #1 (the $2,200 one that it probably out of my budget).... i kind of want to just pull the trigger on it already!





in the meantime, anyone know what "Minor enhancement ce" might mean? Also - I'm still having trouble identifying a window - i think this is windowed - any other thoughts? https://www.emeralds.co/store/gemstones/emeralds-gem/1-73-ct-emerald-fine-natural-colombian-emerald-gem.html



thanks again!!

 

[Eggvillan]

Okay -

he sent the comparison pics...

any last thoughts before i pull the trigger? (probably on what we've been calling #1)

 

[LD]

Am I right that #1 is as follows:-

Top photo - extreme left (you can see the jardin running along the bottom of the stone)
Next photo - extreme left again (jardin not as visible in this one)
Next photo - bottom left
Bottom photo - bottom left

If it is, it's my favourite.

What I see is:-

Square cut - too cloudy - won't perform as well and to my eyes it's just not pretty.

Largest emerald cut - the bluest of them all. I like it in some photos but not in others. It's lighter in colour and also has a suggestion of cloudiness in the 1st and 2nd photos although I like it head on. I think this has a small window but nothing too worrying.

Smallest emerald cut - I hate the jardin that runs right across the stone. I'd give this one a swerve if I were you.

#1 - Apart from that one line of jardin (which is only evident in some photos), I like it. It has a good depth of colour. Have you asked whether it's visible at arm's length (that's typically how you could judge it ie as if it were on your hand.

Hope that helps.

 

[Eggvillan]

Just an update - on Monday, I purchased #1...

i'll post pics/thoughts when i receive it. I'm pretty cleaned out, and don't have the cash to have it set right away... but this was a necessary first step!


I have 10 days after i receive it to return it. This is from Embassy Emeralds, and it comes with a cert from CDTEC...

"CDTEC (Centro de Desarrollo Tecnologico de la Esmeralda Colombiana or Colombian Emerald Technological Development Center) is a state of the art gemological laboratory created in a joint venture by the Colombian government's Ministry of Mines and the Colombian Emerald Federation (FEDESMERALDAS) to promote confidence and sales in Colombian emeralds through scientific analysis and certification. Emeralds certified by the CDTEC lab undergo inspection by both a certified chemist and a GIA trained gemologist using the latest digital equipment."


Should i be bringing it somewhere for an independent inspection / appraisal? If so, any ideas where? The only place i could think of around me (providence RI area) would be http://www.bostongemlab.com/

OR... should i trust the CDTEC cert and the rest of you who have had good experiences with embassy, and assume that everything is squared away?

thanks again to everyone for all of your help!