3 stone setting advice!

[wbarnwell]

Ok, so I am sending Idj some specifics about the type of setting I am looking for. I want something classic, and streamlined. Not bulky, no wasted space, minimal, sleek. not a trellis. The two settings I like the most I think are the bgd open gallery and the white flash trois brillant. Any other suggestions or ideas? Thanks in advance!

 

[bunnycat]

COuld you post some pics here?

 

[SB621]

I'm assuming IDJ had a better quote then WF or BGD?

And yes post pictures.

My only advice is to make sure all 3 stones match and make sure with your eyes. Forget what reports tell you. I have a slight issue with my sides being whiter then my center and it is truly bugging me.

 

[wbarnwell]

COuld you post some pics here?

Brian Gavin Open Gallery Accented:





White Flash Trois Brilliant:




From what I understand Brian Gavin used to work for White Flash, and from what I can see the two settings are nearly identical. I sent IDJ the pictures of the Trois Brilliant.

I'm assuming IDJ had a better quote then WF or BGD?

And yes post pictures.

My only advice is to make sure all 3 stones match and make sure with your eyes. Forget what reports tell you. I have a slight issue with my sides being whiter then my center and it is truly bugging me.

I have not been quoted directly from Brian Gavin Diamonds, or from White Flash. From looking at their online inventory, and taking their wire prices + an added 10% discount, White Flash could almost match IDJ. From what I can tell, I don't think that BGD would be able to.

IDJ has assured me that they are going to create a setting for me that will match the above settings, and exceed them. Obviously, that is for my own eyes to decide. As for the stones, they are all VS2 G's. I can always switch the stones out if the color doesn't match, or if I am not pleased with the proportions.

I do feel like Yekutiel is going to do his best for me, and I also believe that he is giving me an very competitive price.

Thoughts?

 

[SMC]

I like your setting choices a lot! I originally went to BGD for their 3 stone classic setting (like yours but without a raised center stone) because I really liked the classic Tiffany 3 stone. One thing to note about your setting choices is that a straight wedding band won't sit flush with it. There will be a tiny gap. It's no big deal and some people won't even notice or care, but I wanted to point that out so you're aware. I know you don't like the BGD trellis, but that setting will allow a band to sit flush with it (at least, that is what I was told).

 

[wbarnwell]

I like your setting choices a lot! I originally went to BGD for their 3 stone classic setting (like yours but without a raised center stone) because I really liked the classic Tiffany 3 stone. One thing to note about your setting choices is that a straight wedding band won't sit flush with it. There will be a tiny gap. It's no big deal and some people won't even notice or care, but I wanted to point that out so you're aware. I know you don't like the BGD trellis, but that setting will allow a band to sit flush with it (at least, that is what I was told).

Yeah, I definitely think that is something to consider. The one thing that I KNOW she likes are more simple settings, and although I personally find the trellis to be attractive, I think that her eye is more attracted towards straight lines, than the curves of a trellis, so I am trying to stay away from them. Maybe the wedding band is something that I need to speak with IDJ about. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

 

[SB621]

This is a very straight forward setting so I have no doubt that IDJ can recreate it.

I would make one change though and you might not care for it- but I think it would look amazing on the 3 stone. I would change the prongs on the center stone to double claw prongs.

 

[wbarnwell]

This is a very straight forward setting so I have no doubt that IDJ can recreate it.

I would make one change though and you might not care for it- but I think it would look amazing on the 3 stone. I would change the prongs on the center stone to double claw prongs.

Can you show me an example of what you are talking about?

 

[bunnycat]

This is a very straight forward setting so I have no doubt that IDJ can recreate it.

I would make one change though and you might not care for it- but I think it would look amazing on the 3 stone. I would change the prongs on the center stone to double claw prongs.

YES! That would spruce it up a bit....Double claws are really classy looking, and IDJ does very nice claws so I hope you take advantage of their benchwork on that aspect. Sorry, I'm one of those people who loves trellis rings because they are more ornate, but if simple straight lines are her preference, this ought to be nice. It's not a particularly difficult setting, pretty straight forward.

 

[04diamond<3]

This is a very straight forward setting so I have no doubt that IDJ can recreate it.

I would make one change though and you might not care for it- but I think it would look amazing on the 3 stone. I would change the prongs on the center stone to double claw prongs.

Can you show me an example of what you are talking about?

OOOO, that'd look gorgeous!! Here's an example:



or this from JA which has thinner prongs

http://www.jamesallen.com/#!/engagement-rings/solitaire/18k-white-gold-double-claw-prong-surprise-diamond-engagement-ring-item-1428

 

[bunnycat]

Looks like this:

 

[wbarnwell]

Looks like this:

[/quote
'
Nice! Good recommendation. I just forwarded that along to Yekutiel

 

[wbarnwell]

So, after speaking with Yekutiel, I think we are going to stay away from the double prong. It's a cool feature, but he feels that it takes away from the "wow" of a RB. I trust his judgement.

The prongs will look like this from the top:


It will look like this from the side:


2.5mm at the bottom, and will taper to 2.2mm at the top.

 

[SB621]

What size finger is she and what size is the center?

I'm surprised he said that. I actually think it would look much more elegant with the double prongs. But to each their own. He might shoot this down too but I would go a little thinner on the band (pending her finger size). If the bottom is 2.5 and her wedding band is similar then that is 5mm of metal- which I personally find uncomfortable- however some don't. Did you GF try something similiar on?

 

[wbarnwell]

What size finger is she and what size is the center?

I'm surprised he said that. I actually think it would look much more elegant with the double prongs. But to each their own. He might shoot this down too but I would go a little thinner on the band (pending her finger size). If the bottom is 2.5 and her wedding band is similar then that is 5mm of metal- which I personally find uncomfortable- however some don't. Did you GF try something similiar on?

Yeah, I mean he said its a matter of taste, but I feel that he and I are on the same page, so I am going to stick with his advice. Although, I do not doubt that a double prong would be nice - my girlfriend didn't see anything like that so I can't' say that she would like it personally.

She is a 5.25 finger size, and the center stone is 6.13x6.15mm. He recommended that for this type of setting he wouldn't go under a 2.5, although it does taper to a 2.2.

 

[bunnycat]

What size finger is she and what size is the center?

I'm surprised he said that. I actually think it would look much more elegant with the double prongs. But to each their own. He might shoot this down too but I would go a little thinner on the band (pending her finger size). If the bottom is 2.5 and her wedding band is similar then that is 5mm of metal- which I personally find uncomfortable- however some don't. Did you GF try something similiar on?

Yeah, I mean he said its a matter of taste, but I feel that he and I are on the same page, so I am going to stick with his advice. Although, I do not doubt that a double prong would be nice - my girlfriend didn't see anything like that so I can't' say that she would like it personally.

She is a 5.25 finger size, and the center stone is 6.13x6.15mm. He recommended that for this type of setting he wouldn't go under a 2.5, although it does taper to a 2.2.

Fair enough, he's seen the stones and so if that's his rec, then he knows what's best. Will he at least claw the single prongs like shown in BGD picture? Claw (tapered) prongs are just so much more elegant than the rounded ones.

Eta- I saw he will be doing it tapered like the BGD one. That's going to look very classy!

 

[wbarnwell]

What size finger is she and what size is the center?

I'm surprised he said that. I actually think it would look much more elegant with the double prongs. But to each their own. He might shoot this down too but I would go a little thinner on the band (pending her finger size). If the bottom is 2.5 and her wedding band is similar then that is 5mm of metal- which I personally find uncomfortable- however some don't. Did you GF try something similiar on?

Yeah, I mean he said its a matter of taste, but I feel that he and I are on the same page, so I am going to stick with his advice. Although, I do not doubt that a double prong would be nice - my girlfriend didn't see anything like that so I can't' say that she would like it personally.

She is a 5.25 finger size, and the center stone is 6.13x6.15mm. He recommended that for this type of setting he wouldn't go under a 2.5, although it does taper to a 2.2.

Fair enough, he's seen the stones and so if that's his rec, then he knows what's best. Will he at least claw the single prongs like shown in BGD picture? Claw (tapered) prongs are just so much more elegant than the rounded ones.

Eta- I saw he will be doing it tapered like the BGD one. That's going to look very classy!

Yes, that was my understanding. He said the prongs will look exactly like the BGD one.

 

[wbarnwell]

I am getting PUMPED, this is so much more ring than I really imagined I was going to be able to afford.

 

[SB621]

I am getting PUMPED, this is so much more ring than I really imagined I was going to be able to afford.

Good Deal! Now all that is left is the hard part! Good luck on your proposal!

 

[wbarnwell]

I am getting PUMPED, this is so much more ring than I really imagined I was going to be able to afford.

Good Deal! Now all that is left is the hard part! Good luck on your proposal!

Thank you, thank you. The hardest part is going to be holding onto this ring! I'm not going to propose for another 5-6 months! Just wanted to build some credit, so I took out a short term loan to buy the ring, and once it is paid off, then comes the question.

 

[wbarnwell]

Re: 3 stone setting advice! [update]

Just got these renderings back from IDJ:






Not bad, eh?

Still thinking I want to do single claws on the center stone, though. What do you think?

 

[bunnycat]

Maybe. Double claws might be a little crowded looking at that size. I'd do whatever he thinks is going to look best at this point.

 

[SMC]

I think that it looks good. I would trust whatever IDJ thinks is the best too.

 

[wbarnwell]

Maybe. Double claws might be a little crowded looking at that size. I'd do whatever he thinks is going to look best at this point.

Yeah, we already ruled out double claws, now I'm just wondering if I should go with single claws, instead of normal prongs.

 

[yssie]

1. G VS2 by what standards? Are these GIA/AGS stones? EGL USA?
2. I don't like the way the prongs on the sidestones come out at an angle relative to the prongs on the center - I think it looks a bit awkward and doesn't really complement the otherwise very linear and geometric design. I much prefer the way WF and BGD addressed the issue of how to angle the sidestones: the basket on the center is a V instead of a |_| and the sidestone prongs sit adjacent the legs of the V

 

[JulieN]

The sides need to angle away from the center more, for my taste, just ever so slightly. Or be set lower than the center.

 

[wbarnwell]

1. G VS2 by what standards? Are these GIA/AGS stones? EGL USA?
2. I don't like the way the prongs on the sidestones come out at an angle relative to the prongs on the center - I think it looks a bit awkward and doesn't really complement the otherwise very linear and geometric design. I much prefer the way WF and BGD addressed the issue of how to angle the sidestones: the basket on the center is a V instead of a |_| and the sidestone prongs sit adjacent the legs of the V

The diamonds are GIA certified. I've already presented them in other threads, but from everyone who has commented, as well as in my opinion, they should be great. I would be happy to post them here if you wanted to throw in your .02

Yeah, I agree it looks awkward in the picture, I'm trying to find out if that is how they will actually look IRL. The way it looks in the CAD doesn't even seem like that would work, practically. But yeah, I agree with you about the way that WF and BGD have gone about it. Their settings are the inspiration for this one.

 

[yssie]

1. G VS2 by what standards? Are these GIA/AGS stones? EGL USA?
2. I don't like the way the prongs on the sidestones come out at an angle relative to the prongs on the center - I think it looks a bit awkward and doesn't really complement the otherwise very linear and geometric design. I much prefer the way WF and BGD addressed the issue of how to angle the sidestones: the basket on the center is a V instead of a |_| and the sidestone prongs sit adjacent the legs of the V

The diamonds are GIA certified. I've already presented them in other threads, but from everyone who has commented, as well as in my opinion, they should be great. I would be happy to post them here if you wanted to throw in your .02

Yeah, I agree it looks awkward in the picture, I'm trying to find out if that is how they will actually look IRL. The way it looks in the CAD doesn't even seem like that would work, practically. But yeah, I agree with you about the way that WF and BGD have gone about it. Their settings are the inspiration for this one.

Nope, if you'd said anything other than GIA or AGSL I'd have been concerned
I was thinking that too - the sidestone prongs actually split away from the centerstone prongs at the tips, and I'm wondering if they'll actually be able to grip the stone IRL without the extra support of an adjacent prong? It sounds like you'd already contacted IDJ before I posted though, so you didn't need my post

 

[bunnycat]

1. G VS2 by what standards? Are these GIA/AGS stones? EGL USA?
2. I don't like the way the prongs on the sidestones come out at an angle relative to the prongs on the center - I think it looks a bit awkward and doesn't really complement the otherwise very linear and geometric design. I much prefer the way WF and BGD addressed the issue of how to angle the sidestones: the basket on the center is a V instead of a |_| and the sidestone prongs sit adjacent the legs of the V

I do like the look of Yssie's picture on the right better for this and I definitely think the main stone needs to be clawed. The side stones may be too small to do that? (Can't remember if I've seen pics of all stones with claws or if it's just the main one.) I'd go for claws all around if it's feasible.

 

[SB621]

In addtion to everything that Yssie has said, which I 100% agree with, I would also raise the center just a smidge. Do you see how it is raised just slightly higher in the BGD setting? I think it makes it look more elegant.