I decided I wanted to find a pretty, dainty engraved platinum wedding band so I posted a WTB on the preloved forum after missing out on a beautiful one for $350 by just THIS MUCH time. Several helpful posters provided me links to their favorite "watering holes" and I spent a lot of time looking. I found one at St. John & Myers (Ruby Lane), but while I was trying to negotiate a lower price, it was sold from the store. I liked it but didn't love it, but it was engraved with the day before my dad was born.
I gave Andrew a list of things that ticked my boxes, in case he found something else, because he was so responsive to my e-mails.
A couple of days later, he sent me a lousy cell phone photo of a ring he'd found that he thought I might like better, but it was several more days before the good photos made it online. This ring was dated three days before my dad was born. (What are the odds of two rings showing up at the same place with dates so close to my dad's birthday?) I liked this ring a lot better, but the price was higher, and it went higher still while we were negotiating. I was able to get it at a price I could live with. It's not a bargain, but it is well within range of similar bands that I didn't like nearly as well so I don't feel like I overpaid for it.
It has the ubiquitous flowers and some pretty leaves like so many rings from that era do, but the leaves are more "organic" and flowing. I really like the milgraining and the details in the engraving, although it's positively wasted on my middle-aged eyes.
The ring had to be resized from 7.75 to 8.25, but the bench did a fabulous job. I cannot tell where the metal was added either on the outside or the inside. I might be able to detect it if I measured carefully between flowers, but even though I can guess which third of the ring it's in (I specifically instructed that the engravings were not to be disturbed), I don't see it.
It's will make a nice stacker right-hand ring. It is absolutely gorgeous. It's 2.8mm wide.
One photo I took to show real life perspective and a vendor photo showing the engraving. IRL, it is a lot shinier than the vendor photo shows.
liz
I gave Andrew a list of things that ticked my boxes, in case he found something else, because he was so responsive to my e-mails.
A couple of days later, he sent me a lousy cell phone photo of a ring he'd found that he thought I might like better, but it was several more days before the good photos made it online. This ring was dated three days before my dad was born. (What are the odds of two rings showing up at the same place with dates so close to my dad's birthday?) I liked this ring a lot better, but the price was higher, and it went higher still while we were negotiating. I was able to get it at a price I could live with. It's not a bargain, but it is well within range of similar bands that I didn't like nearly as well so I don't feel like I overpaid for it.
It has the ubiquitous flowers and some pretty leaves like so many rings from that era do, but the leaves are more "organic" and flowing. I really like the milgraining and the details in the engraving, although it's positively wasted on my middle-aged eyes.
The ring had to be resized from 7.75 to 8.25, but the bench did a fabulous job. I cannot tell where the metal was added either on the outside or the inside. I might be able to detect it if I measured carefully between flowers, but even though I can guess which third of the ring it's in (I specifically instructed that the engravings were not to be disturbed), I don't see it.
It's will make a nice stacker right-hand ring. It is absolutely gorgeous. It's 2.8mm wide.
One photo I took to show real life perspective and a vendor photo showing the engraving. IRL, it is a lot shinier than the vendor photo shows.
liz
300x240.png)