Comparing WF tiffany settings

[rmkwebdesign]

A recent post caught my eye regarding tiffany settings, where the author said that many of the settings look "huge" in there enlarged web photos, but in reality, the differences between many of the settings were miniscule.

I'm looking at two WF tiffany-style settings, their "classic" and "narrow-v head" rings. Links to the two photos are:

Classic: http://www.whiteflash.com/pimg/jewelry/gi_WF-4167_f.jpg

Narrow-V Head: http://www.whiteflash.com/pimg/jewelry/gi_PR-ER26B-Pt_f.jpg


So...my question. Any opinion on these two? I see the difference in the picture between the prongs, but how tiny will that be in "real life?"?

EDIT: The photo attached is only of the classic.

 

[rmkwebdesign]

This is the Narrow-V Head

 

[lyra]

I wish we could see top views!! I like the look of the narrow head (theoretically at least), because I personally don''t like the look of big prongs that tend to obscure the diamond more, and make it look smaller. I think the narrow head option looks quite nice, and I think the prongs are definitely less prominent. Since it''s WF, I''m assuming it is top notch in quality, and that the prongs would perform just as well.

 

[FireGoddess]

That looks noticeable enough to me that it will be noticeable IRL. Not to the extent of the magnified pictures of course, but I think it will be easy to discern the V shapes versus the U shapes, and the notch in between the base of the prongs on the V version. And I am LIKING that narrow V head!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

The classic came about when people asked for the other setting to be made more like the real Tiffany setting. I''d definitely choose the classic.

 

[snlee]

I'd definitely go with the Classic setting. I love how you can see more of the diamond from the profile view. You would be able to see the difference in real life. How fun choosing! Both settings are beautiful!