Hi Everyone,
after lurching around for a while I''ve decided to join the fun.
I saw a 80 point round stone set in a 4 prong basket setting on Sunday in a shop window (so I can''t post a picture).What surprised me was how square the stone looked.
This was a very pleasant surprise to me for the following reasons.
I love the square shape, but I ''m not fond of radiants and princesses as they are to "chaotic" inside. I love symmetry and order, so a truly well cut round would be great. At the same time emerald cuts, flanders and assher cuts are not as sparkly. I love them for their understatedness, but I''d like a sparkler first.
I have considered the regent cut (which in a sense this stone looked like I thought they''d look like in real life), but they seem to be selling at a premium above even H&A rounds, and I really did like the way this ring looked squarish.
However when I look at websites such as goodoldgold (which has some beautiful rounds set in 4 prongs on its website.) they look very round with prongs.
I thought that there might be 3 explanations for this
1. The stone I saw wasn''t a modern round brilliant (though it certainly wasn''t a cushion cut, or a square)
2. The pictures on Goodoldgold of the stones are much larger than the real life size of an 80 point diamond
3. The prongs were different and/or the stones pictured were larger.
I don''t want to buy the one in the shop as it had no certification (they couldn''t even give me an exact colour or clarity ) and
it was hugely expensive, I can find certified hearts and arrows in F VS2 or above for less dollars than this ring cost in pounds (at an exchange rate of 1.6, and a simple basket setting) I''d prefer to save my money.
I''d be grateful for opinions, and if anyone has pictures of round stones in 4 prong settings that would be great.
Mari
after lurching around for a while I''ve decided to join the fun.
I saw a 80 point round stone set in a 4 prong basket setting on Sunday in a shop window (so I can''t post a picture).What surprised me was how square the stone looked.
This was a very pleasant surprise to me for the following reasons.
I love the square shape, but I ''m not fond of radiants and princesses as they are to "chaotic" inside. I love symmetry and order, so a truly well cut round would be great. At the same time emerald cuts, flanders and assher cuts are not as sparkly. I love them for their understatedness, but I''d like a sparkler first.
I have considered the regent cut (which in a sense this stone looked like I thought they''d look like in real life), but they seem to be selling at a premium above even H&A rounds, and I really did like the way this ring looked squarish.
However when I look at websites such as goodoldgold (which has some beautiful rounds set in 4 prongs on its website.) they look very round with prongs.
I thought that there might be 3 explanations for this
1. The stone I saw wasn''t a modern round brilliant (though it certainly wasn''t a cushion cut, or a square)
2. The pictures on Goodoldgold of the stones are much larger than the real life size of an 80 point diamond
3. The prongs were different and/or the stones pictured were larger.
I don''t want to buy the one in the shop as it had no certification (they couldn''t even give me an exact colour or clarity ) and
it was hugely expensive, I can find certified hearts and arrows in F VS2 or above for less dollars than this ring cost in pounds (at an exchange rate of 1.6, and a simple basket setting) I''d prefer to save my money.
I''d be grateful for opinions, and if anyone has pictures of round stones in 4 prong settings that would be great.
Mari
300x240.png)