Center 2 ct stone is overpowered

[valeria101]

Somethng like this, perhaps...

I hope you do not mind the little Photoshop exercise.

 

[rockinrings]

Wow! Thanks so much for taking the time to photoshop my ring. That''s amazing! That is the perfect tool for someone like me that can''t picture things on my own. Incredible.

 

[decodelighted]

Sapphire, sapphire, sapphire!!!!! Put the 2 ct round in something different completely.

ETA: After seeing the photoshop, I think I'd prefer a square cushion Sapphire, as someone else suggested ... so you'll have TWO great shapes on your two hands. OR, I also saw recently a round stone set in a cushion halo ... which is another option for your 2ct center. 20 years ... why not have 2 great, fabulous, phenomenal rings!!!!

 

[rockinrings]

Why I couldn''t agree more. Two lovely rings. I can live with that! This has even inspired me to pull out my original wedding ring set and have it repaired, sized and cleaned. I haven''t worn in in 7 years since one of the small stones fell out. I probably wouldn''t wear it much with these two new rings, but I''ll be so thrilled to have it back in proper shape. What a great encouragement you all are. Thanks. So sapphire is the unanimous choice for the 2nd ring? I''m fair skinned and red haired.

 

[belle]

the sapphire gets my vote too. it will be smashing!

 

[decodelighted]

Sapphires seem very, very classic to me ... esp. with diamonds & white metals. With your red/fair coloring an Emerald might be great too. I think any colored rectangular/cushion stone set north/south so that it stands out over the width of the setting would be STUNNING! I love that setting your husband picked out & think it''s great you''re sentimental about keeping it ... isn''t it great how we can reinvent things over time & keep appreciating things differently! Can''t wait to see pictures of whatever you decide on. Thanks for sharing your story!

 

[WTNLVR]

Most definately a sapphire

 

[Kaleigh]

Sapphire gets my vote too.

 

[cutes814]

Date: 9/1/2005 11:48:02 AM
Author: laney
The other idea would be to put that 2ct on a plain tiffany solitare band.. THEN on your band - take the head out, and replace that area with the same pattern of diamonds. So, the ''band'' is actually a ''band''. So you keep your sentimental value.. and then have the solitaire ring next to it.

Laney took the words right out of my mouth. When I first saw this ring and your first post. I thought "no a bigger stone will not help, it''ll still get lost in that setting because the setting is so powerful." I thought the best thing to do was exactly what Laney described.

Take the 2ct out and place in a simple solitaire setting and turn that setting into an actually band. That would be perfect.

 

[LittleRock]

Well you know I have to jump on the sapphire bandwagon too!!!!

 

[rockinrings]

Update - I went to look at sapphires today and I must agree they are quite beautiful! Thanks to all for the tip. Here''s the new problem that I encountered though. The sapphires that I really liked were too large to put into my setting and so I began looking at other settings and I''m sure everyone can guess the rest of the story. Actually, I didn''t buy one, but only because I''m still concerned about my original problem. So, here''s a new consideration. How would an oval diamond look in the current setting? More importantly, how would the sparkle of an oval compare to the RB. Something has to be different because the prices of the ovals were considerably less than the RB. I was looking at 3 carat stones. Why the difference in price between oval and RB?

 

[valeria101]

Date: 9/4/2005 9:59:35 PM
Author: rockinrings

Why the difference in price between oval and RB?

Fashion... I supose. It could also be that rounds tend to waste more material when cut. Regardless, there is a premium for the round shape in any gemstone I can think of.

If your only reason to keep the old setting is sentimental, than it can probably wait for the right stone too. While you get the sapphire that you like now

Have you seen THIS

You mention brilliance... and that does play some part, but then, saphire is more likely to be cut to bring up the most color - which does not mean top brighteness in the same time. As much as I can tell, they are never as bright as diamonds, but that helps color stand out too and makes it the one reason for sapphire prices. Color stone cut is quite a bit more complicated than diamonds''

No wonder no one turned up a 100 page tutorial like the one about H&A round diamonds here. There is one (small and useful) at PalaGems. I tend to always mention that page because it is relatively comprehensive and well done. There are others I might have seen along but do not remember.

Hope some of this helps

 

[Demelza]

The sparkle of an oval will most likely be less than that of a well cut round. All things being equal, a round brilliant will almost always have the most fire and brilliance. That is not to say that other shapes aren't equally beautiful in their own right -- but if you're wanting to maximize the sparkle factor, I'd say stick with a round.