Up close pictures of real Tiffany Legacy

[T L]

I know they're used, but the workmanship is horrible. These ebay listings really show that, and people wonder why I always recommend LOGR over the real thing. These are details from two separate diamond legacies for sale.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tiffany-Co-Plat...gner_Jewelry&hash=item35af3a1ab1#ht_833wt_881

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tiffany-Co-Plat...ner_Jewelry&hash=item336491527b#ht_1021wt_881

 

[FrekeChild]

ROFLMAO!!!!!

 

[T L]

OMG, look at that lumpy metal and millgrain, especially in the bottom left.

http://cgi.ebay.com/TIFFANY-CO-LEGA...ner_Jewelry&hash=item4157ced901#ht_8783wt_881

 

[K9]

That looks absolutely horrid compared to LOGR.

 

[packrat]

hahaha nice.

 

[Arcadian]

maybe they used it as a meat tenderizer?

and the diamond spacing looks...off...

wow..nasty.

-A

 

[T L]

Here's one with a pink sapphire, and the appraisal, which does not state any treatment, and the Sales manager signed it, not a G.G.

http://cgi.ebay.com/TIFFANY-CO-LEGA...ner_Jewelry&hash=item415808b6b9#ht_5305wt_881

 

[minousbijoux]

Is that the setting, or is that one wonky cut sapphire?

 

[T L]

Is that the setting, or is that one wonky cut sapphire?

It's the patented legacy cut, which is actually pretty nice, but the bezel is not surrounding it symmetrically, so it looks wonky in there.

 

[PrecisionGem]

I know nothing about these kinds of settings, nor do I like the whole halo thing, but it seems that the real Tiffany setting have the stone much lower into the ring than the LOGR's I have seen posted. The LOGR's look ok head on, but when you guys show a side view the stone seems to stick up way too much and the halo thing looks weird. I wonder why the LOGR copy isn't more like the real Tiffany setting, or am I missing something. Personally I think they are all wretched, I like the stone to stand on it's own with out all that bling, and I like GOLD gold.

 

[ked123]

Precision Gem hit the nail on the head. I recently received my 8 mm LOGR and also spent time a few weeks back looking very closely at the Tiffany legacy. The only difference I can really see is that the LOGR sits up much higher. The Tiffany version seems to "sit" in the setting better (and has milgrain along the bezel to match the outer edge).

As for the setting, I was looking for something with a little bling as I have a diamond solitaire for my engagement ring. I do agree that in some cases it detracts from the gemstone, however.

 

[T L]

I know nothing about these kinds of settings, nor do I like the whole halo thing, but it seems that the real Tiffany setting have the stone much lower into the ring than the LOGR's I have seen posted. The LOGR's look ok head on, but when you guys show a side view the stone seems to stick up way too much and the halo thing looks weird. I wonder why the LOGR copy isn't more like the real Tiffany setting, or am I missing something. Personally I think they are all wretched, I like the stone to stand on it's own with out all that bling, and I like GOLD gold.

Well, the LOGR isn't an exact copy, but it's close enough to fool people, and that it does a good job at.

Some people like bling and some people do not, but the point is that the workmanship of an overpriced piece from a well known design house is just horrid, and you can buy better crafted copies for much less, from LOGR and elsewhere. Even if it is overpriced, you would expect that they would at least do a decent job on the workmanship, but it's so obviously horrible (bling or no bling) that no one who sees it up close would want it.

 

[LD]

Gene you can sit the gem lower by buying a slightly bigger legacy from LOGR - it's easy to do. The prong one they have does tend to sit high but I don't think the bezel one does. TL/Freke - do you have photos of your bezeled ones?

 

[JewelFreak]

If you're gonna market thousands of these to all those mall stores, I guess you bang them out & skimp on the QC to save cost. If you don't advertise expensively and expansively, they'll stop paying too much just for the name & the blue box.

--- Laurie

 

[LD]

Here's Cell's gorgeous Topaz in LOGR Legacy - I don't believe this sits any higher than the original Tiffany setting?

 

[Candice]

my LOGR aquamarine sits just like cellantini's its sits no higher than the tiffany version, just the crown of the stone pops up over the bezel.

 

[PrecisionGem]

I think I have mixed up my impression of the prong set LOGR's and this Tiffany one. Looks like the LOGR bezel set sits about the same. I guess it's the prong set ones that the stone looks so high on. Looking straight down it seems ok, but when I see a profile it looks rather awkward.

So what's the deal with GOLD gold? Doesn't anyone wear gold any more?

 

[LD]

I think I have mixed up my impression of the prong set LOGR's and this Tiffany one. Looks like the LOGR bezel set sits about the same. I guess it's the prong set ones that the stone looks so high on. Looking straight down it seems ok, but when I see a profile it looks rather awkward.

So what's the deal with GOLD gold? Doesn't anyone wear gold any more?

I agree about the prong set. My legacy prong version has my stone sitting very high but I like it that way. If I were to bezel set then dropping it like the Tiffany would be my preference.

Gene - do you mean yellow gold? I have some yellow gold settings but find that my preference over the years has changed to w/gold or platinum. Think it's just personal preference! Yellow gold doesn't seem to be as fashionable at the moment! Don't even get me started on rose gold though .......

 

[pixies]

Gene, I like yellow gold and rose gold! My wedding set is white gold. Originally, I wanted yellow sapphire sides for my three stone ring. If I had went that route I was planning on the outer bezels being yellow gold. Unfortunately, I couldn't find sapphires quick enough so I "settled" for diamonds . If a certain gemstone would be better suited for colored gold, I would definitely go that way. I think rose gold looks better with my skin tone though. I really want a rose gold solitaire like Kelpie's stunning tourmaline ring!

Cellanti's legacy LOGR is stunning! Much better than the ebay Tiffs!

I know people have a love/hate relationship with halos. I like them better for colored stones (vs diamonds) because I feel they hold their own in them a bit better.

 

[PrecisionGem]

One of things I don't like about the halo's is this. When I sell stones to jewelers, it normally to a custom goldsmith. The work I see in these shops I think is exquisite, unique and very creative. Custom stones work well for the type of work they do. You almost never see these halo type things in these shops, but I do see them in Sam's Club, Walmart, and mall jewelry stores, not to mention eBay. Sadly for me, the stones that fit these things are the more common type cuts. The rings just don't have that 'one of kind' look to them, they all start to look the same, like they are some mass produced product. I own no jewelry, but if I did, I would want a unique one of a kind piece.

 

[T L]

The thing I like about halos are the fact they can accentuate the size of a stone. I like diamonds and bling, and whether it's a halo or not, I am more often am drawn to a blingy setting. The halo isn't very unique, but I think some shank and gallery designs on some halos can be very unique and pretty, aside from the non-unique idea of the halo itself. Leon Mege, and some very upper crust jewelers use halos, so just because you see them at Walmart, Sam's Club, etc. . . doesn't make them not worthy or not beautiful. However, for people that don't like a lot of bling, and strictly like all metal, then I can see why a halo, any halo, would not be appealing.

Nonetheless, the Tiffany halos above are very unappealing. I'm pointing this out, because as a consumer forum, I think it's important to expose what a sham these overpriced settings are, and how some of these big name jewelery houses have let quality decline significantly.

 

[tiffanyornot]

I find it odd that many on here denigrate the original legacy setting in this thread (and denigrate Tiffany's in many other threads) yet many here are trying to purchase replicas of Tiffany settings and trying to fool other people with them.

If Tiffany's is overpriced and a worthless retailer, why buy copies of their designs (classic, legacy or otherwise)? If they never existed, you would not be able to imitate their designs.

More to the point: If Tiffany's sucks, don't buy an imitation of their settings!

 

[T L]

I find it odd that many on here denigrate the original legacy setting in this thread (and denigrate Tiffany's in many other threads) yet many here are trying to purchase replicas of Tiffany settings and trying to fool other people with them.

If Tiffany's is overpriced and a worthless retailer, why buy copies of their designs (classic, legacy or otherwise)? If they never existed, you would not be able to imitate their designs.

More to the point: If Tiffany's sucks, don't buy an imitation of their settings!

No one said that Tiffany had bad design, they have poor workmanship for the price paid on the Tiffany Legacy. As a consumer, and because this is a consumer forum, I think it's important to note it as I have seen this same poor workmanship in their print ads for the piece, and in their various stores. Actually the first time I bought an imitation Tiffany Legacy, I had no idea it was an imitation until much later on when people were calling it a "Legacy." I simply like halos, and this one fit the bill for some cushions I owned. Honestly, it's not the most unique design in the world.

 

[FrekeChild]

One of things I don't like about the halo's is this. When I sell stones to jewelers, it normally to a custom goldsmith. The work I see in these shops I think is exquisite, unique and very creative. Custom stones work well for the type of work they do. You almost never see these halo type things in these shops, but I do see them in Sam's Club, Walmart, and mall jewelry stores, not to mention eBay. Sadly for me, the stones that fit these things are the more common type cuts. The rings just don't have that 'one of kind' look to them, they all start to look the same, like they are some mass produced product. I own no jewelry, but if I did, I would want a unique one of a kind piece.

If it's any consolation I'm holding off on setting the stone I have of yours in a custom setting that I can't afford yet! And it WON'T be a halo!

Having seen a LOT of milgrain, antique, modern, I am embarrassed of Tiffany's. I cannot believe those people paid that much money for rings that have milgrain that looks like that!

 

[ked123]

That blue topaz LOGR is just gorgeous. I've been trying to replicate the Tiffany ring as closely as possible and I've read more PS threads on this than I'd care to admit. I think from the previous posts I've read (and forgive me if I am talking out of turn) Cellentani had some additional modifications done by a local jeweler to make her ring look as nice as it does.

I just received my 8 MM LOGR and while it is a very nice piece for what I paid for it, it definitely does not look as nice as the blue topaz LOGR ring posted above.

IMO, the Tiffany ring I see in the store looks nicer than the LOGR. It sits perfectly in the setting, the milgrain on the bezel matches the milgrain on the outer rim, and the stone is more "dainty".

However, I'm willing to make the sacrifice to have something not quite perfect to save $7K!!

 

[TheDoctor]

Sorry, the ebay items posted are not authentic Tiffany articles.
They would have never left the factory looking like that. There are several Asian counterfeiters who have produced a vast amount of knock-offs with full-packaging, laser engraving and the works.

http://www.jckonline.com/2011/04/06/tiffany-sues-more-online-copycats

No different than the Rolex counterfeiters who capitalize on people's online obsessive behaviour. Look for the name, the deal, click buy now. There is a sucker born every minute. (PT Barnum)
The reason they are being sold on Ebay is that the owners soon realized that they are poor quality fakes bearing a brand name. Ebay is the world's largest garage sale for BS articles. Can't blame Tiffany for suing those who use their name for their own selfish purposes. This site, and those who use it, need to take responsibilty for how venerable brands are represented within the confines of its forums. Who knows...who might be next to appear in court.

 

[T L]

Sorry, the ebay items posted are not authentic Tiffany articles.
They would have never left the factory looking like that. There are several Asian counterfeiters who have produced a vast amount of knock-offs with full-packaging, laser engraving and the works.

http://www.jckonline.com/2011/04/06/tiffany-sues-more-online-copycats

No different than the Rolex counterfeiters who capitalize on people's online obsessive behaviour. Look for the name, the deal, click buy now. There is a sucker born every minute. (PT Barnum)
The reason they are being sold on Ebay is that the owners soon realized that they are poor quality fakes bearing a brand name. Ebay is the world's largest garage sale for BS articles. Can't blame Tiffany for suing those who use their name for their own selfish purposes. This site, and those who use it, need to take responsibilty for how venerable brands are represented within the confines of its forums. Who knows...who might be next to appear in court.

Okay, I will admit they could be copies, but the dealers selling them are not Asian, and isn't that the patented Legacy diamond cut on the stones? How would they fake that unless there are sellers out there faking that cut as well. It might be easy to fake that cut in colored stones, but in diamonds???? In other words, how can you be 100% absolutely sure that those rings above are fake?

 

[T L]

That blue topaz LOGR is just gorgeous. I've been trying to replicate the Tiffany ring as closely as possible and I've read more PS threads on this than I'd care to admit. I think from the previous posts I've read (and forgive me if I am talking out of turn) Cellentani had some additional modifications done by a local jeweler to make her ring look as nice as it does.

I just received my 8 MM LOGR and while it is a very nice piece for what I paid for it, it definitely does not look as nice as the blue topaz LOGR ring posted above.

IMO, the Tiffany ring I see in the store looks nicer than the LOGR. It sits perfectly in the setting, the milgrain on the bezel matches the milgrain on the outer rim, and the stone is more "dainty".

However, I'm willing to make the sacrifice to have something not quite perfect to save $7K!!

I upgraded the diamonds on my LOGR 8x8 and 9x9, and they look great, and really just as good as Cell's. There might be some quality control issues, which is expected with one of these ebay factories. I suspect the same thing with Tiffany, because when I went to their store, the bezels were not symmetrical, and the millgrain was shoddy. This was the case in their print ads too. I hope that they fixed these problems and the quality control is getting better for the real Tiffany Legacy.

 

[truecolors]

This one appears to be authentic... there is a certificate and valuation letter attached.
Retail value is $34,000. Price is $25,000, but it 's Buy It Now ebay auction, so I'm thinking I can get it for a little less than that.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Tiffany-Co-1-85-TCW-Legacy-Diamond-Ring-/300545685553?pt=Designer_Jewelry&hash=item45f9eb3831

Do you think this is safe to do? Has anyone else bought jewelry on eBay before?

 

[ked123]

I would not make a purchase of that magnitude on ebay. I do, however, have an LOGR replica Tiffany gemstone ring that I bought off Ebay for around $600.