Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

3 stone ring setting

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
I've done about a thousand searches on 3 stone rings looking for settings. The trellis is beautiful but I the BGD 'diana' caught my eye, its a little different. I was wondering if anyone has seen it in person or has the setting. The setting has a more upward motion for the stones which takes away from the finger coverage imo. Just doesn't seem like the finger coverage would be the same as the trellis design. Im concerned about finger coverage.

Please share your opinions and thoughts...

diana
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/three-stone/diana-platinum-5981p

trellis
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/three-stone-trellis-18k-white-gold-5376w18
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,670
I have not seen either of them but I agree with what you are saying. I dont like how the sides stones are tucked so far under
the center stone on the Diana. Plus the sides stones are really tilted so when you look straight down on it you see the sides of
the stones and not the top. I dont really like that.
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,540
tyty333|1461688807|4023816 said:
I have not seen either of them but I agree with what you are saying. I dont like how the sides stones are tucked so far under
the center stone on the Diana. Plus the sides stones are really tilted so when you look straight down on it you see the sides of
the stones and not the top. I dont really like that.
I'm laughing because those are exactly the things that make me love this new setting! :bigsmile: I'm always a sucker for tilted sides tucked far under a larger center - I love seeing those "half moon sides" instead of RBs flanking the centerstone ::)

I agree with tyty that if finger coverage is a priority the trellis, which exposes more of the sidestones parallel to the finger curve, is a better bet, though.
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
I appreciate your comments ladies!! :))

I was with you tyty, that the coverage would not be to good because I'm more familiar with the Trellis design. So I called and asked BGD if they had photos of the ring on the hand so I could get a better prospective.

Yssie honestly, initially when I saw the design what caught my eye was how the diamonds fan out. Reminds me of a flower. I think the side diamonds are set nicely and compliment the center stone. IMO the design is extremely eloquent with a touch of uniqueness for a 3 stone!

The photos i recv'd are of ring in the video on the website stones are .25/.75/.25 diamonds size 6 ring. On the hand...it looks GORGEOUS!!! The finger coverage wonderful. My stones are a little larger at .32/.92/.32 so the finger coverage will be perfect for me.
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,670
Yssie|1461698911|4023866 said:
tyty333|1461688807|4023816 said:
I have not seen either of them but I agree with what you are saying. I dont like how the sides stones are tucked so far under
the center stone on the Diana. Plus the sides stones are really tilted so when you look straight down on it you see the sides of
the stones and not the top. I dont really like that.
I'm laughing because those are exactly the things that make me love this new setting! :bigsmile: I'm always a sucker for tilted sides tucked far under a larger center - I love seeing those "half moon sides" instead of RBs flanking the centerstone ::)

I agree with tyty that if finger coverage is a priority the trellis, which exposes more of the sidestones parallel to the finger curve, is a better bet, though.

Ha ha...I guess different taste and all! If I'm gonna spend money on something that is SOOOO expensive, darn it, I want to seeee it! I
want to see ALLLLlll of it! :lol: :oops: :lol: :oops:
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,630
That setting is very much like some of Scott Kay's settings which I consider a solitaire with side accent stones as opposed to a true 3 stone ring. I would not get that design as a right hand ring, for example. But for an e-ring with a little extra detail, yes, very pretty.

Victor Canera's Lily is about the most beautiful 3 stone setting I have ever seen:

https://www.victorcanera.com/rings/engagement/the-lily-round-trilogy
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
diamondseeker2006|1461704933|4023902 said:
That setting is very much like some of Scott Kay's settings which I consider a solitaire with side accent stones as opposed to a true 3 stone ring. I would not get that design as a right hand ring, for example. But for an e-ring with a little extra detail, yes, very pretty.

Victor Canera's Lily is about the most beautiful 3 stone setting I have ever seen:

https://www.victorcanera.com/rings/engagement/the-lily-round-trilogy

Diamondseeker I saw Victor's and I agree very nice setting. The 'diana' sits high so, yes, it would be for e-ring not right hand ring.

The halo setting I currently have my 6.3mm round is has lost 4 diamonds from the halo. I have already repaired the first, then when 3 fell out a day or so ago. :wall: I just washed my hands, dried them and no stones. :errrr: :think: Hence resetting my 1 carat into a more custom, substantial piece. Doesn't hurt DH and I will be hitting our 25th this year. But do I really need a reason to upgrade?? Nope. lol
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
tyty333|1461704183|4023898 said:
Yssie|1461698911|4023866 said:
tyty333|1461688807|4023816 said:
I have not seen either of them but I agree with what you are saying. I dont like how the sides stones are tucked so far under
the center stone on the Diana. Plus the sides stones are really tilted so when you look straight down on it you see the sides of
the stones and not the top. I dont really like that.
I'm laughing because those are exactly the things that make me love this new setting! :bigsmile: I'm always a sucker for tilted sides tucked far under a larger center - I love seeing those "half moon sides" instead of RBs flanking the centerstone ::)

I agree with tyty that if finger coverage is a priority the trellis, which exposes more of the sidestones parallel to the finger curve, is a better bet, though.

Ha ha...I guess different taste and all! If I'm gonna spend money on something that is SOOOO expensive, darn it, I want to seeee it! I
want to see ALLLLlll of it! :lol: :oops: :lol: :oops:

Seeing is Believing!!!! ;))
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
55,630
ZestfullyBling|1461706552|4023919 said:
diamondseeker2006|1461704933|4023902 said:
That setting is very much like some of Scott Kay's settings which I consider a solitaire with side accent stones as opposed to a true 3 stone ring. I would not get that design as a right hand ring, for example. But for an e-ring with a little extra detail, yes, very pretty.

Victor Canera's Lily is about the most beautiful 3 stone setting I have ever seen:

https://www.victorcanera.com/rings/engagement/the-lily-round-trilogy

Diamondseeker I saw Victor's and I agree very nice setting. The 'diana' sits high so, yes, it would be for e-ring not right hand ring.

The halo setting I currently have my 6.3mm round is has lost 4 diamonds from the halo. I have already repaired the first, then when 3 fell out a day or so ago. :wall: I just washed my hands, dried them and no stones. :errrr: :think: Hence resetting my 1 carat into a more custom, substantial piece. Doesn't hurt DH and I will be hitting our 25th this year. But do I really need a reason to upgrade?? Nope. lol
:lol: I agree!

I don't blame you. I wouldn't be able to deal with lost halo stones, either. Sidestones is a perfect alternative to add substance but without the fragility of pave!

I really can't wait to see it!
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,608
I don't like thise hidden/tucked under side stones on the Diana setting at all. I like the Trellis much better. It's more elegant and flowy and it will be better for blingpact.
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,540
ZestfullyBling|1461706581|4023920 said:
tyty333|1461704183|4023898 said:
Yssie|1461698911|4023866 said:
tyty333|1461688807|4023816 said:
I have not seen either of them but I agree with what you are saying. I dont like how the sides stones are tucked so far under
the center stone on the Diana. Plus the sides stones are really tilted so when you look straight down on it you see the sides of
the stones and not the top. I dont really like that.
I'm laughing because those are exactly the things that make me love this new setting! :bigsmile: I'm always a sucker for tilted sides tucked far under a larger center - I love seeing those "half moon sides" instead of RBs flanking the centerstone ::)

I agree with tyty that if finger coverage is a priority the trellis, which exposes more of the sidestones parallel to the finger curve, is a better bet, though.

Ha ha...I guess different taste and all! If I'm gonna spend money on something that is SOOOO expensive, darn it, I want to seeee it! I
want to see ALLLLlll of it! :lol: :oops: :lol: :oops:

Seeing is Believing!!!! ;))
:bigsmile:

DS hit it with the Scott Kay reference - that's exactly what I thought of too. I like the Lily but I kind of just want to shove those sides under the center a wee bit... then a wee bit more... well, at least I'm consistent :lol:


Zest - any chance BGD would be okay with you posting those hand pics on here? I'd love to see! That "center with sides" effect is exactly what I'm looking for too, and I love the setting details :love:
 

MollyMalone

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
3,083
Yssie|1461712507|4023962 said:
* * * Zest - any chance BGD would be okay with you posting those hand pics on here? I'd love to see! That "center with sides" effect is exactly what I'm looking for too, and I love the setting details :love:
My godson's almost-fiancee is intrigued by the Diana (I sent her the link), so there are now at least 2 more people keenly interested in seeing hand shots!

P.S. I love your user name, Zestfully Bling -- it always makes me smile whenever I see your posts :))
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
Well Yssie since you asked....there is no name on the photos just hand with setting so Im sure they probably wont mind :naughty:

diana1.jpg

_37047.jpg
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
MollyMalone|1461713797|4023965 said:
Yssie|1461712507|4023962 said:
* * * Zest - any chance BGD would be okay with you posting those hand pics on here? I'd love to see! That "center with sides" effect is exactly what I'm looking for too, and I love the setting details :love:
My godson's almost-fiancee is intrigued by the Diana (I sent her the link), so there are now at least 2 more people keenly interested in seeing hand shots!

P.S. I love your user name, Zestfully Bling -- it always makes me smile whenever I see your posts :))

Thank you Mollymalone :))
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
Yssie|1461712507|4023962 said:
ZestfullyBling|1461706581|4023920 said:
tyty333|1461704183|4023898 said:
Yssie|1461698911|4023866 said:
tyty333|1461688807|4023816 said:
I have not seen either of them but I agree with what you are saying. I dont like how the sides stones are tucked so far under
the center stone on the Diana. Plus the sides stones are really tilted so when you look straight down on it you see the sides of
the stones and not the top. I dont really like that.
I'm laughing because those are exactly the things that make me love this new setting! :bigsmile: I'm always a sucker for tilted sides tucked far under a larger center - I love seeing those "half moon sides" instead of RBs flanking the centerstone ::)

I agree with tyty that if finger coverage is a priority the trellis, which exposes more of the sidestones parallel to the finger curve, is a better bet, though.

Ha ha...I guess different taste and all! If I'm gonna spend money on something that is SOOOO expensive, darn it, I want to seeee it! I
want to see ALLLLlll of it! :lol: :oops: :lol: :oops:

Seeing is Believing!!!! ;))
:bigsmile:

DS hit it with the Scott Kay reference - that's exactly what I thought of too. I like the Lily but I kind of just want to shove those sides under the center a wee bit... then a wee bit more... well, at least I'm consistent :lol:


Zest - any chance BGD would be okay with you posting those hand pics on here? I'd love to see! That "center with sides" effect is exactly what I'm looking for too, and I love the setting details :love:


Im absolutely taken by this setting. IMO it looks absolutely lovely on the hand!!
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
20,540
LOVE that. Oh my goodness they nailed it!!! :love:

Good luck with your decision Zest!! You have two beautiful options - can't really go wrong here :bigsmile:
 

MissGotRocks

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
12,189
I like the Scott Kay setting. When the stones are really tucked under the center stone, you have to be careful IMO for the diamonds not to look bunched up like a flower bouquet. Some of those settings have a beautiful side view but top down you obviously don't get as much spread across the finger. I love the side stones tucked but getting the right amount of 'tuckage' (not a real word of course!) and the right angle of the stones is very important to the overall look of the ring.
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,670
diamondseeker2006|1461726641|4024033 said:
I'd just recommend going to look at Scott Kay, also, since it is likely a local jeweler carries it. Their setting has less metal on the sides and I kind of like the cleaner look.

http://www.scottkay.com/product/three-stone/m0722r310pp/

I like the Scott Kay better too (if I had to pick one). I like the side view better and it doesnt look as top heavy. If I was getting one
I would be interested in knowing the height of the rings.
 

Sagefemme

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 8, 2015
Messages
291
I love the BGD setting; it is very lovely in side view. The SK is not lovely in side view (although annoyingly, they don't show us a true through finger view). One difference is the BGD side stones are set at almost the same height as the center and the SK the stones are much lower than the center. The Diana would be a great solution for the small fingered gal with a bigger 3-stone plan. There's a setting for every situation, I guess.
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
Here is a photo of the Scott Kay I found on PS. Didn't find a side view just a top view.

Did a comparison of the top views of both settings...

scottkay_3stone.jpg

6784_diana7525.jpg
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,670
They look a lot alike to me. It does seem like the Diana side stones are ever so slightly more tucked under than the SK. I'm thinking
those that like the "tuckage" will like that better and those who dont like the "tuckage" as much will like the SK better.

So the real question is which one do you think you like better?
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
Side view comparison...

scottkay_3stone_profile1.jpg

profile_diana_1.jpg
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
tyty333|1461786633|4024270 said:
They look a lot alike to me. It does seem like the Diana side stones are ever so slightly more tucked under than the SK. I'm thinking
those that like the "tuckage" will like that better and those who dont like the "tuckage" as much will like the SK better.

So the real question is which one do you think you like better?



I agree tyty, they are similar.

I like the lines and flow of the 'diana'. I'm so super duper excited!!! :dance:
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,670
ZestfullyBling|1461787687|4024283 said:
tyty333|1461786633|4024270 said:
They look a lot alike to me. It does seem like the Diana side stones are ever so slightly more tucked under than the SK. I'm thinking
those that like the "tuckage" will like that better and those who dont like the "tuckage" as much will like the SK better.

So the real question is which one do you think you like better?



I agree tyty, they are similar.

I like the lines and flow of the 'diana'. I'm so super duper excited!!! :dance:
Diana it is then! Post pics when you get it!!!
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
Was provided a stone line up from BGD just to get an idea of how my stone and the side stones match up...

1329_stonelineup.jpg
 

JDDN

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
2,319
Beautiful proportions!! :love:

And I LOVE the Diana....can't wait to see the finished ring!!
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
21,670
Pretty!
 

msop04

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
9,776
Although both are beautiful, I just love the flow of the BG setting... it's just lovely! I can't wait to see the finished ring!! :love:
 

ZestfullyBling

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
1,976
I appreciate both your comments and compliments jddn, , tyty, Cinderellie (luv your screen name!!),& msop!!

I absolutely love diamonds so all three look really nice to me. I like the proportions. Just hope the size of the side stones will provide decent finger coverage with my 6.3mm center diamond :pray: :think: . Well... I will see soon enough...
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade
    Three-stone engagement ring upgrade
    Vintage OEC Bracelet
    Vintage OEC Bracelet
    June’s Birthstone Trinity
    June’s Birthstone Trinity

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.

New posts

Top