Side stones = too much goin'' on?

[KBerly]

lol i was just about to type that reena!

 

[SLH]

Julian,

This is one of my favorite rings. It belongs to a poster on DT. I believe the sidestones are ovals. The total carat size of the center stone is 3.98 carats and the sidestones are .50 each.
If you are set on sidestones, perhaps you can add sidestones that are not as long as baguettes. Best of luck to you.



Jennifer,

I am not mad at you girl! Your rings look absolutely beautiful.

 

[Jennifer5973]

Hey, SLH--thanks for the vote of confidence.

That is a great ring you posted--do you happen to know the woman's ring size?

I swear--the smaller the finger, the bigger the bling for the buck!

 

[SLH]

The center stone on this ring is over 8 carats. If you look at the design, the baguettes had to be severly angled.

 

[SLH]

Different angle.

 

[SLH]

Jennifer,

Her ring size is 6.5. You should see her collection of rings, her rings are breathtaking.

 

[Jennifer5973]

Thanks, SLH. I think the height of the center stone is also a factor in how much the sidestones mingle with the center stone. That 8 ct is amazing!

I will say again that I do love the classic baguette look....and you can get very slim, sliver baguettes too....

 

[christarose]

Hi Julian,

I don't think you'll ever get tired of looking at your ring, whichever option you choose

Here is one I've always thought was interesting from the Eye Candy folder (pg. 6) - just an idea if you want the best of both worlds.

Personally I think sidestones enhance the center, and make the ring more unique and personal to the wearer.

Jennifer, if I didn't say it previously (I haven't posted much), I've thought many times: your ring is exquisite!!! A perfect example of lovely, sparkling sidestones leading up to the stunning centre, the star of the show. You can be secure in the knowledge that your posts have been made in the spirit of this forum - helpful, insightful...not putting others down and parading it as honesty. I hope you have a better day tomorrow! Just look at your sweetheart who gave you that breathtaking ring & everything else will fade away!

 

[SLH]

Jennifer,

Funny you should mention the side view.

 

[Jennifer5973]

HOLY COW.

That is a stunner.... How big is that again

? Boy, the wheels are turnin'

Seriously, I think Julian's best bet is to look at all these great examples then go try on a bunch of styles. When I was looking for a matching band for my ring, I thought I knew what I wanted (and I drove people nuts here asking

) but it wasn't until I went and tried on 40-50 rings that I knew what was best for me when I saw it.

Christarose: Thank you. I do love my ring and really appreciate the compliments.

 

[Jennifer5973]

You know, it's a catch 22--on a size 4, the 3 ct alone would look enormous...but the extra bling of side stones can be awesome. We all love the many beautiful settings out there with accent stones! Tough call.

Julian: in the craziness, I just saw your compliments; thanks!

I've had people say that the setting/side diamonds enhance my stone, so it's possible. I had not thought that initially, but perhaps they do!

 

[reena]

julian, i am a size 4.25 and i recently tried on a 3.46 carat OEC diamond with slim baguettes similar to those on the ring just posted by SLH. honestly, it was to die for!

 

[sparkler29]

IMO, this discussion leads me to one thought...beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think that a person's e-ring is a reflection of their taste and their personality. So...Julian's 3 carat RB looks different on her hand than Jennifer's 3 carat RB looks on HER hand, and not just due to ring size differences. Depending on your style, taste and personality, a ring will look different on different people. I have a friend who is totally not into "bling" but her husband gave her a 3+ carat RB solitaire e-ring. Somehow, it works. I'm not saying this very eloquently, but my point is that we should keep this in mind when giving our opinions. There are no rules here!!!

Julian - I think sidestones could be a gorgeous addition to your solitaire! Perhaps pears? With a large center stone, however, I think that what others suggested would look even more gorgeous - a thin diamond eternity style band would make the center stone pop. YUMMY.

 

[sparkler29]

Oh, I just have to add...

Jennifer, your rings are AMAZINGLY beautiful!!!
Classy, elegant and simply stunning.

 

[katbadness]

Another design that is one of my perennial favorite..

I don't know the spec for the ring, though.

 

[reena]

glub, glub

(that's me, snorkeling in an ocean of my own drool)

 

[roppongi]

Julian...

I might be the minority here but I think sidestone would look lovely. I have slight hands and my fingers might be a size 4. My engagement ring is a RBC 3 stone with a 3.01 center and .55 sides...my wedding band is a 3 carat eternity band. I wore my engagement ring as a solitaire for the longest time and it just looked plain to me. Everyone gave me their opinions and when it was done most said that the side stones made the center "pop." In fact, hubby has agreed to make the sides bigger for my birthday.

Good luck with your decision and have fun during the process.

Roppongi

 

[JCJD]

Hi Julian,

I agree with the other posters - try some settings on and see what you like. But I have another suggestion: Have you thought about surprise diamonds instead of sidestones? It would add a bit of personality and individuality to your solitaire (although there's nothing wrong with a "plain" solitaire!!

). I also like ChooChoo's idea of an engraved band. Let us know what you decide!!

JCJD

 

[AGBF]

Wow! I was silently following this thread and pondering whether I would prefer a stone alone or with sidestones, then I saw someone put up a picture of *my* ring and its guards! Just goes to show! (Not sure WHAT it shows, but it was a real surprise suddenly to see my ring(s) .)

Deb

PS-If you saw my ring and the guards you can tell I relate to the "dilemma" of whether to set a stone alone or with others!!! BOTH looks can be so darned gorgeous!

 

[lindsal]

That last Leon shot is def. to die for, joining Reena in choking on ocean of drool.

Julian the only thing I can suggest is keeping trying on settings until something speaks to you, or you have a wake you up from the dead of sleep vision of what *your* ideal setting for that goregous honker of a 3 ct is.


(BTW, and not to send this thread off in yet another direction.. but Reena, in response from post the other day, I grew up in Pittsford. What about you?)

 

[moremoremore]

OMG...LOL...YES- that is what I mean!!! Perfect use of the highly underused RODENT FACE!!!


Lauratabs: Seriously, I have one simple word for you. And that iS TACT. Do you know what that is?

As Jen said, your comment was plainly rude on its face and not in the spirit of the forum. The fact that you do not even recognize that your comment could even be PERCEIVED as rude tells me that no matter how much we go back and forth on the issue, you just don't get it and won't get it.

I admit that many times, I have seen rings on this forum that do not float my boat. Dare I say some even make me gag...just a lil' bit

..but WHO says that? I think Jen's ring is beautiful...that's just my opinion which you do not have to share...but COME ON. Do you seriously not recognize that your comment would be hurtful? Again, TACT and consideration for other people's feelings. This is something that a great majority of us here in P.S. have mastered.

It is my opinion that your comment is akin to a personal attack which is prohibited here (us gals take our rings pretty personally here!)

If you want to take part in the discussion...that's great...but to single out one poster's ring and make such a pointed negative comment like that is not appropriate here.

This is a nice place to be, and I hope you can stick around and state your opinions while being more TACTFUL in the future.


P.S. I just saw how we have all 'moved on' lol...but I didn't see this until this morning...Sorry!

 

[ame]

----------------
On 9/21/2004 7:48:03 PM Julian wrote:

Hi!


So I'm looking at settings for my 3.01 carat RB.


My question is -- would baguettes on the sides (say .2-.5 carats each) make the solitaire look smaller or larger? Also, my e-ring size is 4.


I'm also wary of taking the drama away from the center stone.
----------------

I really think you should do it up with your wedding band and leave your solitaire be. OR have a wrap made to fit around your solitaire that you can take off at will so you have the sidestones when you want the bling or don't when you don't .

I have been battling with myself over sidestones as well and I think Im just going to say no to them and if I decide to get them Ill do it later. or with a wrap. Im scared to do it and hate it.

Since yours is so wonderfully large and will be such on your finger, Id say leave the band be. You can go all out with a great wedding band, eternity tyle, to get more sparkle.

 

[Daniela]

Look, three carats is huge to begin with, but I'm going to disagree with the majority as well. I really don't think that side stones are going to be the straw that broke the camel's back as far as the bling factor goes. I am going to speak up for side stones in this case and say: do it. Re-work the design, angle the sides if you have to, do whatever, but if you want the side stones, then get the side stones. Everyone has a different tolerance for bling. In my neighbourhood, there isn't a soul with a diamond over a carat. In yours, there might be tons of people sporting larger stones. But all that aside, I really don't think you should worry too much about too much bling, because let's be honest: bling is what a three carat stone is all about, no matter where you live!

And I also don't necessarily agree with the talk about "detracting from the center stone." I prefer to think of the ring as a whole, and whether or not the side stones would enhance the ring generally. Depending on the setting, they could easily enhance the beauty of the overall ring, and even the beauty of the center stone.

Just my 2 cents!

Daniela

 

[cflutist]

----------------
On 9/22/2004 11:56:23 AM Daniela wrote:



And I also don't necessarily agree with the talk about 'detracting from the center stone.' I prefer to think of the ring as a whole, and whether or not the side stones would enhance the ring generally. Depending on the setting, they could easily enhance the beauty of the overall ring, and even the beauty of the center stone.

Just my 2 cents!

Daniela
----------------

I tend to agree with Daniela. I feel that side stones complement the center stone, whether it is a 1ct RB or a 3.01ct RB. Jennifer5973's ring is a great example of this concept.

In my own case, my e-ring has a .15 and two .10s on the side which taper upwards to the center stone. I am a size 3.75 but the difference is the width of 8 mm for my pear versus 9.4 for a RB. Maybe that's why it worked okay for me?

 

[Julian]

Well, I think Jennifer's ring is the most beautiful thing I have EVER seen.

It's so classy, tasteful and stunningly brilliant. I'd do backflips and be so proud to own a ring like hers.

Perhaps the "take a lesson" part referred to the advice Jennifer so kindly gave -- in that my finger would perhaps be too small for such a graceful ring such as hers. I have monkey hands, not the long slender princess fingers of Jennifer!!!

No one could ever think anything of her ring but that it was the most beautiful thing on earth! It's truly my dream ring.

I apologize for the firestorm here -- I didn't know sidestones were so controversial!

 

[yellowfan]

Jennifer,

Your ring is beautiful! Would love to see your handshots!



Julian,

I have a solitaire with a 1ct baguette wrap, that tapers from larger stones to smaller stones. That way I can wear alone or with the band. I have been thinking of getting a small pave setting that will still fit in the wrap. Best luck to you.


Lori

 

[Patty]

Julian, I think Jennifer's ring is stunning but with your ring size so small, I like reena's idea of going with very small stones on the band to add some interest. Those Michael B. ones she posted are gorgeous!

 

[gingerBcookie]

Jennifer - GORGEOUS ring.

I admire your avatar everytime I see it!

As for sidestones, personally I love them, and I especially love them as accents rather than sidestones per se, the way I want my e-ring. I want the sidestones (pears) to be much much smaller than my center stone (RB) so that there is some sparkle on the sides, but not to take away too much from the main attraction, but rather to accent it. So if you truly want sidestones, I say the moral of the story is go for it and work with your stone, your side stones' size/type/style to make it work with your ring/hands. I alos love solitaires, but just decided for myself i wanted sidestones to give my ring a more distinct look. It's really something you have to decoide for yourself. Have you tried a bunch of both types on?

 

[christarose]

Hi AGBF!

Sorry I didn't "quote my sources" better! When I found this forum, the picture of your ring with its wraps was one of the first that made me "catch my breath"

- I love how close together the shared-prongs are, so that the bands have a very scalloped, rather than straight edge (does that make sense?) It's also so nice to have the option of changing it when you want. Anyway, I thought it was a great example of sidestones enhancing and not detracting from the centre stone!

 

[ame]

----------------
On 9/21/2004 11:26:31 PM christarose wrote:



Here is one I've always thought was interesting from the Eye Candy folder (pg. 6) - just an idea if you want the best of both worlds.

----------------

I LOOOOOOOOOOOVE that.