Written by Circe » June 20th, 2012, 1:35 pm:Written by Gypsy » June 20th, 2012, 12:33 pm:WOW Circe! It's perfect. Great find. The head won't fit her stone. BUT-- it might be worth it to see if there is a way to adjust it for her stone.Aw, darn - on my chart, a 1.2 stone is exactly 6.8. Back to the drawing board ... (though, like Gyps says, worth checking with a jeweler - from the look of the setting, a qualified bench with a laser welder would be able to lift the basket out and drop a bigger one in)
Written by Gypsy » June 20th, 2012, 12:33 pm:WOW Circe! It's perfect. Great find. The head won't fit her stone. BUT-- it might be worth it to see if there is a way to adjust it for her stone.
"Experience is inevitable in life; learning from it isn't."
Written by diamondseeker2006 » June 20th, 2012, 1:49 pm:Okay, that is what I was thinking because I knew a 1.2 was around 6.8mm! I wondered if her stone was cut too shallow or something making it too big!This is a steal of a deal for a e-ring setting and wedding band. I like it enough to buy it myself except I wear a 5.5 and would not size down that much.
Written by Gypsy » June 20th, 2012, 1:55 pm:I hope she's still checking this thread OR is getting notifications.
Written by Yssie » June 26th, 2012, 11:39 am:I'll be honest, I don't see three-sided pave on a 2.5k budget ending well. That sort of delicate style needs expert craftsmanship to achieve the aesthetic and maintain sufficient durable for daily wear, and that sort of craftsmanship is pricey, whether it's cast or handforged.I prefer the simple and clean lines of the other anyway - I don't like the baguettes + pave, too many competing styles.
Written by Gypsy » June 27th, 2012, 3:46 pm:No on the pave. Yes on the carre.
« Return to RockyTalky