Affordable ring for my girl...

[sunkist]

Date: 3/28/2006 8:51:49 PM
Author: argh&stuff
Does anyone know how I can ask Valeria101 to 'draw' the stuller setting with a tulip head more like the Water Lily head?


I can't figure out a way to contact anyone, or flag anyone on this forum...

You could post a new thread with her name in the title...

ETA : (The personal message thing was deactivated a few weeks ago, so it's a little harder to contact users personally, but PS had their reasons)

 

[argh&stuff]

Thanks for posting, Indecisive.

They quoted 795 for the setting, as a whole. In white gold, but then we asked to have the surprise diamonds removed, mostly because we''re hoping it''d be a cost dropper, but also because we can''t see them on the original ring. Then we asked about the band being thinner, considering how small her finger is.

Well, I''ll just be prepared that it won''t be a substantial price difference.

I think that setting''s just not gonna happen, then.

Someone posted that cathedrals really are higher settings; maybe that should be a consoling thought as I look toward something else?

I don''t know.

 

[argh&stuff]

Okay, I titled a new thread with her name in it. I hope she finds it.

 

[BrownEyes]

WOW!

That .468 ACA diamond is absolutely GORGEOUS! What a beautiful IS image ... not to make you nervous Argh, but if I were you, I''d put a deposit on that stone and complete your purchase ASAP, then hold out for that perfect custom setting while you save a little bit more ... the loose stone will be sent in a temporary setting ...

OR, have it set in one of WF''s lovely but not too expensive 4 prong Tiffany settings ...

I think the "4 - 6 - 8" numbers are kind of cool (and a good omen, too!), and remember, I saw that lovely .46 diamond in a cathedral setting and it really was to die for ...

Continued good luck to you ... you are so sweet to put so much thought into this important purchase!

 

[blueauratus]

I have been following your thread and although I do more reading than posting I came across this setting and thought you may like it. Its from Diamonds by Lauren''s website.

Good luck!
~Sara

 

[Small]

Date: 3/28/2006 10:20:11 PM
Author: BrownEyes
WOW!

That .468 ACA diamond is absolutely GORGEOUS! What a beautiful IS image ... not to make you nervous Argh, but if I were you, I''d put a deposit on that stone and complete your purchase ASAP, then hold out for that perfect custom setting while you save a little bit more ... the loose stone will be sent in a temporary setting ...

OR, have it set in one of WF''s lovely but not too expensive 4 prong Tiffany settings ...

I think the ''4 - 6 - 8'' numbers are kind of cool (and a good omen, too!), and remember, I saw that lovely .46 diamond in a cathedral setting and it really was to die for ...

Continued good luck to you ... you are so sweet to put so much thought into this important purchase!

I agree! Did you find out more about the hold policy? I''d put this one on hold or someone is going to get it right out from underneath you...it''s

 

[february2003bride]

I agree with the others- that is a gorgeous stone!! I''d get that on hold soon!

 

[argh&stuff]

Okay everyone....

Jen has been calling me NON-stop since I got off work, wanting to talk about how she''d not heard from WF yet. I told her that was probaby because they think the MAN should do the work. (Haha... I know a lot of you females are active in your ring search, but she can be extreme with calling poor Jamie all the time.)

Anyway, she got an email just a bit ago, and is THRILLED.

They didn''t give a quote for the water lily without the surprise stones, maybe because she was SO shocked at the price that was quoted originally.

But, they did give a quote for a ring that she seems pretty excited about.

It would be the "sleek lines solitaire" (in white gold, rather than platinum), with the tulip head. She says the tulip head they posted looks better than the Stuller, but I''m not sure I see a difference. But hey, if she''s happy, who am I to say anything?

This is the image she got:

 

[argh&stuff]

Planted on this band.


(She called and talked to WF... the band''s width is 2.8mm on the bottom, and tapers up to 1.7mm--I think that''s what she said-- at the top, with like 2.2mm or so on the mid section.)

She sounded pleased with that. Should it be delicate enough for her?

 

[firebirdgold]

Woohoo! Sounds like we have a Winnah!

Whee!

Hey, tracking this is almost as much fun as picking my own e-ring!
*hee hee*

Good luck!

ETA: oh yeah, forgot to say, I think it's a great combination of a delicate look on the top without sacrificing sturdiness and longevity!

 

[argh&stuff]

They quoted 400 for that band, with that head.

The Stuller band (shown numerous times before on here) is 110, I think the lady told me. It''s thinner, but it has the bypassing cathedral thing, and I''m not sure how that''d look with a tulip head. They said the head would be an additional 35 dollars or so. Also, that band would sort of "require" the interlocking wedding band, and now she sort of likes the idea of little diamonds in the band, which wouldn''t be an option with the interlocking band.

Pricescope made a picture of the original cathedral she likes pieced with the tulip head from water lily. It was like this:

 

[argh&stuff]

Doh! I mean, like this:

 

[argh&stuff]

Wren,

Do you think the Stuller is too thin, or that one setting is better than the other?

I mean, I know she wants thin, but I also know she''d want something safe for her diamond, too.

And, what about the height of the diamond in that sleek lines band? I distinctly remember her saying she didn''t want something sitting up too high. (While I know some say the cathedral makes the diamond sit higher, I think the tulip head would sit the same height, regardless of whether or not it had a cathedral building up to it or not, but again, I dont know. I''m just assuming.)

 

[Small]

Argh,
That sleek lines is going to be very close to what pricescope created for you with the other head. I really, really love what they came up with for you. I think that is going to look wonderful

!!! I have a cathedral that looks very similar to the sleek lines, and I adore it

Good luck! I know this has been such a search for you but it seems like everything is coming together...now all you have to do is reserve that stone before someone swipes it right out from under you

 

[Small]

ARgh,
I have a 3mm cathedral and I find that to be thin (not too thin I like it but just right). I think the sleek lines is going to be right up your girls alley. 2mm is very thin IMO! With the taper up of the sleek lines she''s going to have that thinning affect with the safety of a bit wider band at the bottom. I don''t think you can go wrong with that choice.

 

[argh&stuff]

Small, I am still deciding between the two. (I know, I know. I need to make some decisions, but I want to feel comfortable with what I do.)

Someone said the number .468 was cool. I agree, but hadn''t thought of it. On the other hand, the other is the same way, only backwards: .420.

Anyway, I think this may be the way I go. I just hope it''s not too thick. 2.8mm may be too thick for her. I dont'' know.

Small, is there any way you might have a picture of the ring you have that looks similar to the one I might be able to get for my girl? I''d REALLY like to see, if you do. Maybe even on your finger? That way, I''d have at least an idea of how high it''d sit up on her... even though it''s not the same, same, and even though your carat is probably a good deal different than the size we''re thinking of.

Do you think, having read my thread, that she''d prefer the sleek lines to the stuller?

And, does that tulip head look any different than the Stuller one? To anyone? I''m not seeing it...

 

[argh&stuff]

I''m not trying to second guess myself or anything, and I''m very thankful to all of you for helping me to learn so much, so quickly. When this process is all done (although I sometimes can''t imagine it ever ending!!), I will miss coming here and talking to you nice people every night.

Having said that, I have LEARNED a lot in regard to what I need to look for, but I still don''t have that much of an "eye" for the fashion of jewelry, or for what''s best, or the best buy, or the best for my girl.

I like both of them...

On the bright side, now she''ll know of TWO contenders, and no matter what, she''ll have an element of a surprise. Haha... I love it! She''s been so determined to know everything all along.

Help me decide, guys.

 

[Small]

Argh,
Show me the ring...I have a .92 RB from Wink...its probably on page two by now. I have hand shots there

Mine will sit a bit higher I believe than what you are getting. I''ll see if I can link it

 

[argh&stuff]

Gah, I leave a lot of posts, don''t I?


Sorry all.

And not to double post, but look at what Valeria made for me.

The only question I have is, would the tulip sit that high up on it? I know it''s photoshop, and not perfect, but maybe the stuller would be better able to help the diamond sit more flush?

 

[Small]

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/another-happy-wink-customer-here-it-is-my-92-rb.42258/

there is my ring Argh. If you need more hand shots I can probably take some tomorrow...right now I''m going to feed my kids. Both the .42 and .468 are fabulous

I think you won''t go wrong with either. That setting is going to be beautiful

 

[argh&stuff]

Well, Valeria has been helping me find a cathedral that''s more like the niwaka one, the arms need to curl up toward the stone, rather than simply shooting toward the diamond. That will make it more like the cathedral''s metal is reaching up toward the stone, to make it more flush.

If anyone wants to check that thread, Calling for Valeria101''s help, and offer suggestions, that''d be great.

I THOUGHT I just about had it figured out, people! It''s a never ending task, I see...

 

[argh&stuff]

And, the ones I''ve seen so far have been cheaper than the 400 from Wf, too. Lucky me.

 

[argh&stuff]

Thanks again to Valeria, she showed me the difference in the cathedral arms, and how the niwaka curved a bit more than the sleek lines. She also found a ring with Wink that is 250, but I have to find out if the original head can be replaced with a tulip head.

Here is the comparison. If it''s possible to do the curlier one, it''s a close match to the niwaka, huh?

I also don''t know the width of the band, though. If it''s fat, I''ll not be nearly as excited.

 

[argh&stuff]

Again, guys, I''m sorry, but I have to double post this:

I just emailed her what Valeria did with the comparison between the WF and the Wink settings... she literally SQUEALED! Asked if it was "outrageously priced," and when I told her no, it was actually less, she squealed some more.

I did warn her that I dont know about the head being changed like that, and that I don''t know the thickness, but I don''t know that she was paying any attention.

She thinks that''s her own little Niwaka now...

Thank you ALL so much for helping me with this, and keep your fingers crossed that it''s not wide (can anyone tell by looking??) and that the original head doesn''t have to be there.

 

[indecisive]

I have a question that relates to this... but I want to know for myself too. I have heard of rings beeing shaved down to make them thinner. Is this safe? Expensive?

 

[argh&stuff]

I''m a little concerned that the one I posted above that looks like the niwaka is too high with the arms? Does that mean it''d be too high for the 1/2 carat stone?

 

[Small]

Date: 3/29/2006 10:50:58 PM
Author: argh&stuff
I''m a little concerned that the one I posted above that looks like the niwaka is too high with the arms? Does that mean it''d be too high for the 1/2 carat stone?

I don''t see why it would be but Wink will tell you his honest opinion. I almost changed settings at the last minute and he spoke to me about the setting. He didn''t sway me either way but gave me his take on each setting. I was appreciative of his honesty. He''s a great guy to work with...he''ll give it to you straight!!!

 

[JulieN]

It will be fine? Yes, I think the swapping heads will be fine. I'm sure these vendors (Wink or WF) will not send out something that is hideous, or simply does not work. I believe that cathedral, it is 2.5 mm and it is available from Roseco. I think order it in the 2.5 and if she STILL wants it smaller, then get it shaved down, because 2.5 really is very thin. Gold also wears away over time, and if she wears it all the time, it might be 2 mm in 20 years, but if you start at 2 mm, you might have to replace the shank eventually. It is also available in rose gold, and you would do a white gold or platinum head of course, so does she like rose gold?

The bypass cathedral, the one that was photoshopped by PScope, could have a matching diamond band to go with it. There are many examples on Niwaka.

 

[argh&stuff]

Can it be in white gold, though? I will google rose gold, because I don't know what it is. All she wears is white gold though. (I know this because the first gift I got her was yellow gold earrings. She wore them for 3 months before I realized it was the ONLY yellow gold she ever wears. I learned!!)

**My girl informs me it can be white gold. She's been emailing Wink all day. Guess that means she didn't get much work done!

 

[argh&stuff]

Okay, I need HONEST opinions here. Which of the three (stuller with the "twisted" cathedral, WF cathedral, or Wink's cathedral) do you all think would be the best, ideally, considering the size of the stone, and all that?

Please, everyone, voice your opinions!! I can't be any more confused or conflicted than I already am, I promise!!