Thoughts on a emerald ring please

[junebug17]

Needfullshinythings, you're right, the OP asked for opinions and you have every right to express yours. It's just that I've been looking obsessively at these types of rings for over a month now, and the price is quite fair compared to what I've been seeing so I commented, sorry I came across as argumentative…maybe the rings I've been looking at are overpriced, who knows lol. It's hard to determine the worth of these older pieces sometimes. I think your suggestion to make an offer is an excellent one.

Meely, good luck with your decision! If you buy it post pics!

 

[needfullshinythings]

No need to apologise Junebug, Its the coloured stones forum !!! Peace & Love

 

[junebug17]

No need to apologise Junebug, Its the coloured stones forum !!! Peace & Love

Thanks NST - Absolutely!

 

[JewelFreak]

Junebug, I agree with you about the price. I love the setting because it's not overwhelming & clunky; the diamonds look clean enough & well colored; presuming the emerald isn't synthetic, I think it's a decent price. I love those types of vintage settings too & think, if you keep it, Meely, you'll be happy with it. You can always look for a "better" bargain, but if this ring grabs you, you will not regret grabbing it. Look forward to hearing what the outcome is.

-- Laurie

 

[Acinom]

It's a gorgeous ring! I totally have a weak spot for these rings and this one looks great

 

[meely]

Well I've had confirmation that it will be arriving tomorrow morning along with something else I bought, an alexandrite necklace (think my OH might start to regret delaying the big purchase of a diamond engagement ring if I'm not careful!) So I will take it to the jewellers in the afternoon, they are going to look at it to give me am opinion on whether it is synthetic or not if they are unsure it will travel up with the jeweller to London on Monday. I didn't speak to the jeweller on the phone so when I see him tomorrow il enquire as to how they test to determine whether it is the real deal, presuming that is that he doesn't declare it synthetic on the spot !

 

[partgypsy]

I hope it is a natural emerald for you. My 2 cents I'm not as big of a fan of antique and halo styles, but that is really a beautiful beautiful piece. The diamonds are nicely shaped and balanced around the center stone and the metalwork has nice detail. Assuming authenticity it seems a very reasonable price.

 

[meely]

Hi everyone. So it's arrived! It's not victorian to my mind I reckon probably 40s or 50s so although it's feels vintage it doesn't feel massively old which is a slight disappointment. Equally I do not like the settings of most of the emerald rings I have seen previously which I think are 60s - 80s. This feels traditional but perhaps lacks some if the little quirks and details that a significantly older piece might have. On to the emerald hmmm. Well it's not pale but it is bright almost a little lurid. The inclusions are big and near the surface but compared to a lot of emerslds they aren't bad. The diamonds look good they really sparkle as for how included they are or what colour no idea. The rings massive and when I first tried it on I was thinking no way but having stuffed a massive amount of tissue behind it to make it fit I like it a lot more. It's bigger than I expected and I wonder does it look real? I think that's to do with that colour of the emerald. Not some pics excuse my hands I've been gardening.

 

[needfullshinythings]

Hi Meely, gutted for you. I was hoping you would show a nice set of period hallmarks on it, unfortunately they are often " described " as Victorian or Edwardian but only have an 18ct stamp which like you said puts it mid centuryish. Did the seller advertise that it had hallmarks ?

 

[meely]

Hi there, I'm not sure I'm gutted by it it's just not what I was expected if that makes sense. No they said marked but they say that whether it's marked of hallmarked but seeing as she said victorian I assumed it was. Maybe she thinks it is but the diamonds look more modern to me. There's no patina to the gold, the wear isn't there etc. anyhow in trying to uoad some photos but having a pribs at the mo will post them up as soon as I can!

 

[needfullshinythings]

100% understand you Meely. It wasn't what you expected, back it goes. Save your pennies and something " special " will come along sooner than you think. I will keep my eye out for you. I got my friends wife to take a couple of rings I got for her to work yesterday so I could get a couple of pics. Neither of them are vintage though, 1 mid century ( emerald ) other modern ( sapphire ) they were for insurance replacements so I had a crazy budget, both 18ct 1.3ct EM & .60 Dia ( £400 ) 2ct Sapphire & 1.5ct Dia. ( £1600 ) she was most pleased with her " princess Di " ring. I think Junebug might like that 1. Chin up Meely

 

[T L]

Hi there, I'm not sure I'm gutted by it it's just not what I was expected if that makes sense. No they said marked but they say that whether it's marked of hallmarked but seeing as she said victorian I assumed it was. Maybe she thinks it is but the diamonds look more modern to me. There's no patina to the gold, the wear isn't there etc. anyhow in trying to uoad some photos but having a pribs at the mo will post them up as soon as I can!

I'm not sure, but I believe that British Victoran gold jewelry should have the proper hallmarks associated with that particular time period. That's something you may want to ask about next time you look at a piece from a particular time era. Hallmarks can be there, but not necessarily the era you want. The antique jewelry section of this forum might know better. There's an enclyclopedia of British hallmarks as well, and hopefully they're not commonly forged (you never know though).

I'm very sorry for your disappointment.

If you do buy quite a bit of antique jewelry, you may want to invest in this book.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jacksons-Hallmarks-English-Scottish-Present/dp/1851491694

 

[needfullshinythings]

That is correct TL, hallmarking disappears mid 30's ( no longer compulsory ) although some jewellers did continue to mark their pieces. It wasn't until the 70's that it became compulsory again, I think it has lapsed again recently post millennium.

 

[junebug17]

NST, I love both those rings, and you're right, I especially like the sapphire one! You know me well!

Ah, sorry the ring didn't quite meet your expectations meely - sounds like you have reservations, and chances are you will continue to do so. A few thoughts - I'm enamored by very old rings too, but in some cases that also means they need some rehab, and there's something to be said for a ring that's in very good condition. The diamonds look like old cuts to me in the pic, but perhaps they are transitionals. I'm not an expert on antique rings, so I can't really offer any opinions on how old this piece is. Maybe a jeweler who deals with antiques could help. And I hear you on the size, I love big rings but there's such a thing as too big! I will say that sometimes the longer you wear a ring, the more appropriate it looks on your finger and your eyes get used to it on your hand. I was unsure about my halo ring, but now that I've worn it for almost a year, it seems normal! But obviously you know yourself best, and what you'd be comfortable wearing. If you have misgivings about the ring, I guess that's a sign this one isn't for you. If you're not loving this ring, there are more out there!

 

[chrono]

I am sorry the ring didn't work out for you. I do think it is pretty though.

 

[meely]

Everyone thanks for your comments. It's been to the jewellers he thinks it is columbian and natural. He says sometimes they can be injected to enhance colour so he is taking it on Monday to check. It's a bit shallow in cut he says so the stone is a bit darker in the middle. However he showed me one in his shop that was also like that and said it was common. Not sure it's something that particularly bothered me. He thought the diamonds looked nice. I asked him about the price and he thought it was very fair. He can resize it but it won't be a concentric circle. The diamonds are good in his opinion. Thoughts on this?

 

[meely]

And some more photos

 

[junebug17]

I think it is gorgeous and looks absolutely beautiful on you. I don't feel it looks too big on your hand, at all. I'm sorry if you mentioned this before, but how many sizes are you going down? I've been told rings will be oval shaped, but the jeweler was able to pull it off and they ended up being round. It wouldn't bother me to have an oval shaped ring, but I know it would drive others crazy. I've often thought if and when I get a vintage piece like this and it needs to be sized down, I will go one size and then have a ring sizer put in if need be.

 

[chrono]

The more oval the shank is, the more stress you are putting on the stones and prongs. When the jeweller mentioned injecting colour, he meant dyed oil or dyed resin which makes the gem look cleaner and a deeper green. If the stone is shallow, it means that you can see your skin or setting underneath. This area leaks light and it looks dark when worn because you are seeing the shadow of your finger underneath. This area will also look dead/dull compared to the edges. It is a cut issues, meant to preserve as much material weight as possible. It might be common but whether one accepts it or not is another matter.

 

[junebug17]

^Agree with chrono, my concern with sizing too much is risking the diamonds or emerald becoming loose in the setting - I did have one bad experience where I went from a 7 to a 4.25 and the diamond popped out of one of the prongs - and it was a solitaire. That's why I mentioned I would size conservatively, and then add a ring guard or sizing beads to make up the difference.

As to the quality of the emerald, I'll let the experts handle that! In the end, it's up to you as to what you will accept in the appearance of the stone.

 

[T L]

^Agree with chrono, my concern with sizing too much is risking the diamonds or emerald becoming loose in the setting - I did have one bad experience where I went from a 7 to a 4.25 and the diamond popped out of one of the prongs - and it was a solitaire. That's why I mentioned I would size conservatively, and then add a ring guard or sizing beads to make up the difference.

As to the quality of the emerald, I'll let the experts handle that! In the end, it's up to you as to what you will accept in the appearance of the stone.

Really, even a halo like that? I would think they're the easiest of rings to size, but if there's diamonds on the shank, or melee everywhere, then no.

 

[chrono]

TL,
Yup, 1 size - no problem. Going down 3 sizes, even on a simple halo, may mean losing melees.

 

[T L]

I really love this shot.



So are you going to keep it?

 

[T L]

TL,
Yup, 1 size - no problem. Going down 3 sizes, even on a simple halo, may mean losing melees.

But those aren't what I would consider melee, but big diamonds. Prongs can be easily tightened on them to ensure safety after resizing.

 

[chrono]

But if the shank is oval shaped, even if the prongs are tightened after resizing, it has to be rechecked more often due to the added stress placed on the stones. I asked this of the jeweller when I was considering resizing down 2 to 3 sizes, and ended up going with only 1 size down and wearing it on my middle finger.

 

[T L]

But if the shank is oval shaped, even if the prongs are tightened after resizing, it has to be rechecked more often due to the added stress placed on the stones. I asked this of the jeweller when I was considering resizing down 2 to 3 sizes, and ended up going with only 1 size down and wearing it on my middle finger.

Okay, thanks for clarifying.

I had a baguette ring sized down 4 sizes, but my jeweler tightened the prongs, and there was no problem. I guess it depends on the individual piece as well.

 

[chrono]

It's just 2 stones, right? As opposed to a halo of 10 or more stones?

 

[T L]

It's just 2 stones, right? As opposed to a halo of 10 or more stones?

Yes.

 

[meely]

Thanks for all the responses.

Needfulshinythings thank you for posting your rings. It sounds like you got them for good prices, what a lucky person your friend is to have you as her dedicated jewel hunter!

Chrono I agree about the emerald my standards are obviously not going to be as high as yours (lack of knowledge I think this boils down to) . I need to have a good old think about it.

I'm indecisive and often don't purchase things then regret it.

With regard to the resize I am 4 3/4, the ring is 9 1/2. It is huge on me! The problem is it's not a halo it's what we call a cluster over here in fact so the outer stones are much larger than a typical halo and it's wide you couldn't say it doesn't give good finger cover! I think it would have to have a donut or be mounted on to a band if that makes sense to make it fully round, because it's a cathedral it's just too wide. The same jeweller has just had to do the same thing for my mum so it doesn't particularly worry me if I did go down this route.

 

[meely]

Thanks for your comments TL, I agree it does look nice and no I haven't decided yet!

What was interesting to me was that the jeweller had two other rings in the window that I tried on, both preloved. Now one was smaller, emerald cut with smaller halo. I didn't particularly like it it was set in white gold/platinum which for emerald for some reason I'm not do keen on. But the size was smaller and it was too small! It was a darker colour but that was not so attractive to my eyes.
The other was a similar size emerald and a similar colour, it was a nice design with diamond baguettes and rounds going round it very much a cocktail ring. However the stone was much more included and I just didn't like it. So perhaps the stone being duller in the middle is a worthwhile trade off. The second ring was 50% more expensive, the setting was lovely but had I been in The market for a cocktail ring I still would not have bought it because it was so included, if my stone had been in it to me it would have been a lot more attractive.