Antique Illusion Wedding Sets

[missantique]

Hi, I''m new here but have lurked forever. My FH has gotten his grandmothers antique wedding set to give to me for my engagement ring, but I can''t see it until Christmas. His mother has told me that it is a illusion type setting that is very beautiful, but I have no idea what this looks like. She said that the engagement ring was something like a carat maybe a little over, and the matching wedding band is half a carat. Would anyone have any pictures that might be what my rings will look like? Or just something that might would give me an idea.


Thank you.

 

[KristyDarling]

I''m just guessing, but "Illusion" antique set means to me that perhaps there is some metal-work around the main stone to make it appear larger than what it really is....a common technique a couple generations ago.

Maybe something like this? Fay Cullen describes it as an "illusion-setting."

 

[missantique]

Wow, that''s really gorgeous. Thanks KristyDarling.

 

[Stone Hunter]

I''ve seen some that had a round stone but the metalwork is square. So it increases the size and changes the shape.

 

[Genafrgh]

Hi Missantique, illusion settings are my all time favorite! Here are a few pics of what you might expect:

Hope that helps!

 

[Skippy123]

stunning!!!

 

[AdaBeta27]

Typical illusion would be a boxy head like the one on the left, with either a baguette or a 5-stone with rounds on either side. Wedding band might be a 5-stone. Settings ranged from no side stones to rather elaborate side arrangements, depending on era. '30s and early '40s are more decorative & artistic. Late '40s and certainly '50s got plainer and moved to plain shank or baguettes. Also look at antique links in this thread: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/links-for-settings-antique-rings-online.16601/

The diamond on the left is 5.8 or 5.9mm, about 3/4 ct. size RB, and the illusion head reflector around it is 7mm diameter, to give illusion of 1.25 ct. I don't know the full width across the fake prongs, maybe 8.5mm. The ring on the right is about a 6.4mm OEC, diameter of 1 ct.

A 1ct diamond in this same style of illusion head (Stuller) but 1 ct size is 8mm across the round reflector, for illusion of 2 ct. Again, I don't know the distance across the prongs.

 

[AdaBeta27]

This is Stuller 1ct illusion head solitaire with same shank as above, only in white gold. And an enhancer added to give it vintage "frills." If the enhancer has a rounded piece of metal to go around tha base of the solitaire, that can be cut out and replaced with a squarish piece that will fit around this boxy squarish head. An enhancer would be a good option if your ring turns out to have a shank that is too plain for you. (This enhancer purchased as an estate item on ebay. Cat hair courtesy of 2 housecats, LOL.)

 

[AdaBeta27]

Could look like this '50s set from another PS thread (search for illusion and you will find it). Variations of 5-stone e-ring paired with matching 5-stone wedding band were really popular. I am hard on jewelry I wear to work. For daily wear, I prefer an illusion setting. It protects the stone, makes it look bigger, and is very comfortable to wear.

 

[Christa]

Doesn''t look like MissAntique is still around, but here''s my set anyway. It''s a 1930''s/40''s wg set. The center stone is only .35, so hers will obviously look different with a larger stone. IRL the "illusion" part is much less obvious--the edges of the diamond kind of blend in with the wg and make it look to a casual look, anyway, like a much larger stone. And I love that the setting protects the prongs and the stone--my original set had the prongs all smooshed and bent.