Jump to content

If You Were A Woman (or Are) Would You Like This?


missingmn
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I have done some browsing (~4k budget for engagement and wedding ring) and have found the following:

 

PR_JEA1019.jpg

 

Diamond is the following:

 

Stock NumberAA471238Certificate:GIA Shape: PrincessCut: Select Idealâ„¢Carat: 0.73Color: GClarity: VS2Regular Price: $2465Wire Transfer Price: $2393 Diamond Proportions:Measurements: 5.01-4.91-3.6 Length to Width: 1.02Depth Percentage: 73.3 %Table Percentage: 71 %Girdle: TN-TKCulet: None (Pointed)Polish: ExcellentSymmetry: Very GoodFluorescence: None (Inert)

 

The band I chose is:

 

JFB1019W.jpg

Will 0.70 carat do it size-wise or should i bump up to 0.80-0.90? 1 ct is out of my range by too much.

 

thx!

b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi1

Taste is a very subjective thing- but I can see that this particular ring was not designed for a princess cut. That means the center diamond would sit very high- much higher than the stones beside it, , and the prongs won;t match.

The photos you've posted are all "mock ups" not actual photos of diamonds or rings. Or if they are actual photos, they are re-touched heavily. That leads me to question what the actual product will look like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmmm...the one directly above is designed to accept a round diamond- the head ( the part that holds the center diamond) for a princess cut is different...

10242c.JPG

Here's a head's on view of a princess cut- it's yellow, but the essence of the point is the same....

This ring has "ball" type prongs- as opposed to the "Corner" type that was photo-shopped onto the photo in post#1.

 

Personally, I prefer the balls...but either way the setting directly above ( in post #3) is for a round diamond.

 

Looking at the side view of the ring with the yellow princess cut, you can see other, important differences.

10242d.JPG

In the photo above the center diamond is only a bit higher than the sides- in the rings above, the center diamond will stick out - be a lot higher than the ring itself.

That might be what some people want, but it does make for a less comfortable ring- one which is more likely to snag things, and need repair....

 

Then we havew the entire shape of the head itself.

The photos inmy post have a square head, to match the square diamond. The rings you're looking at are shown with round heads!

Edited by diamondsbylauren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The head, or prong assembly for the center stone, is a separate assembly in both of the rings you’ve pictured. It can be changed with a fairly large variety of choices to accommodate whatever you want but there are some important limits. First is the distance between the two side stones. If your stone is to small for the provided space it will look goofy and if it’s too big it simply won’t fit. This bridge can be replaced as well, so the width can be whatever you want but it drives up the labor, and consequently the price, of the setting job. The other issue is the thickness of the bridge. The prongs come together at the back of the stone, below the culet. This is usually about 2-3mm tall before you get to the culet. The bridge itself is going to be 1-2mm thick and your stone is 3.6mm deep. Add all this up and you’ve got 8.6mm tall with the stone you described above and with no space at all below the stone. Depending on the setter, it might go as high as 10mm. That’s not insane but it is quite a bit, especially for a design that looks to be about 3mm wide at the shoulders and a 5mm stone. If she’s got a lifestyle like a medical professional where she takes on and off gloves a hundred times a day this will make her crazy.

 

David’s picture is a different style of head but notice the way it’s attached. The prongs don’t join together below the stone and the bridge is gone completely. It connects from the sides. He’s got a couple mm below the stone but that’s it.

 

It’s not an either/or issue and it’s possible to compromise. There are quite a few other choices for how to do this assemblage. Talk to your setter about it but if the shop doing the setting is going to be someone other than who you’re buying the ring from, talk to them first, before you buy the ring. You can probably get the look you’re seeking with a more modest altitude but the engineering details of the ring are important concerns.

 

Neil

Edited by denverappraiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great points Neil!

One thing I['ve found is that the art of making rings is really just that.

Using a peg head (such as the "high" ones Neil and I are are talking about) is almost like fitting together a simple puzzle. It's far easier than just about any other solution.

 

Another reason the photo-shop approach seems quite risky from the buyer's point of veiw.

If a company manufactures rigs, they can take actual photos of them. Then a buyer can properly evaluate the quality of the work.

 

But remember, if a shop makes rings with peg heads, that's what they do.

Simply knowing to ask for something does not mean a shop can do it- although many may take the job anyway.

 

Finding true artisans to manufacture rings is a very difficult endevour. An that's here on 47th street, where there's thousands of shops!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The head, or prong assembly for the center stone, is a separate assembly in both of the rings you’ve pictured. It can be changed with a fairly large variety of choices to accommodate whatever you want but there are some important limits. First is the distance between the two side stones. If your stone is to small for the provided space it will look goofy and if it’s too big it simply won’t fit. This bridge can be replaced as well, so the width can be whatever you want but it drives up the labor, and consequently the price, of the setting job. The other issue is the thickness of the bridge. The prongs come together at the back of the stone, below the culet. This is usually about 2-3mm tall before you get to the culet. The bridge itself is going to be 1-2mm thick and your stone is 3.6mm deep. Add all this up and you’ve got 8.6mm tall with the stone you described above and with no space at all below the stone. Depending on the setter, it might go as high as 10mm. That’s not insane but it is quite a bit, especially for a design that looks to be about 3mm wide at the shoulders and a 5mm stone. If she’s got a lifestyle like a medical professional where she takes on and off gloves a hundred times a day this will make her crazy.

 

David’s picture is a different style of head but notice the way it’s attached. The prongs don’t join together below the stone and the bridge is gone completely. It connects from the sides. He’s got a couple mm below the stone but that’s it.

 

It’s not an either/or issue and it’s possible to compromise. There are quite a few other choices for how to do this assemblage. Talk to your setter about it but if the shop doing the setting is going to be someone other than who you’re buying the ring from, talk to them first, before you buy the ring. You can probably get the look you’re seeking with a more modest altitude but the engineering details of the ring are important concerns.

 

Neil

 

 

thx Neil!

 

I am definitely learning alot and i see what you mean about snagging. I am going to see if bluenile or union have a setting more like the one you pictured in your post.

 

best regards,

brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian, I'm David, the guy showing you pictures, and telling you about ball settings.

 

 

You're welcome.

 

 

 

 

No that's NOT a ball type setting.

 

oops sorry David. so it's not a ball setting but it does have a low profile. what type of setting is it? do you think it would look good with a princess cut and be functional (less snagging)?

 

regards,

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
  • Create New...