Confession: I''m ready to upgrade or is it the setting?

[MrsT]

OK, I posted pictures of my ring in the wrong venue so now I''m trying again.

I confess I haven''t been to happy with my upgrade ring. I can''t decide if its the size of the diamond on my size 8 finger or just a boring setting with not enough bling for me.

I have been glued to this computer for a few weeks just drooling over everyones beautiful rings and tiny hands!

I''m wondering if just changing the setting will help me love my ring. Maybe just changing the setting will be all I need to do to finally be happy.

An upgrade of the center stone will be minimap and for size only. I maybe can afford going up from 2.00ct to 2.50ct. I wish I could get a 3ct but that is not going to happen. I may go from a "G" color to an "H or I" just to get the size.

Will I notice a difference in size by increasing to 2.5?

If I change my setting I''m going back to the original plan of an eternity ering with a flush fit wedding band. I''ve been drooling over everyones sets in "Show me your eternity sets" and trying to determine the correct size for the side stones and what kind of basket. I''m very worried about comfort and seek a design that has a low profile.
If I stick with my 2.00ct I think 8 - 10pt accent stones are large enough without being overpowering.

I''m going to try some photos now.

Another problem is I can never seem to post the pictures properly. Bear with me while I try again since I''m getting an error msg.

 

[MrsT]

This time it worked. I''m going to post some more.

 

[MrsT]

My specs are:
2.06 G SI1
1.00 ct baguettes in settin./ Christopher Designs mounting

 

[MrsT]

Last one.

 

[Lorelei]

Your diamond is beautiful Mrs T and big! You would notice a difference with a jump to 2.5 cts with well cut stones, and the colour grades you are considering would be fine. I was trying to find some pics to show you but nothing in a similar size comparison that I could find unfortunately. Maybe if you are considering changing the setting, a Tiffany style solitaire might help the diamond pop more, you could still have the pave band.

 

[MrsT]

I thought I''d try one more.

 

[vespergirl]

I think your ring is gorgeous! I really love your setting too. However, thinner settings do make stones "pop" more, so maybe your stone would look bigger if you had, say a 2 mm width setting. I think it looks huge now, though! Then again, my stone is 2 cts too, so maybe I just like that size

 

[Tuckins1]

If you want to change the setting, the eternity setting would be a lovely choice... As for the center stone, it doesn''t look small on your hand!! It''s gorgeous!!!

 

[MrsT]

I thought about the plain band. But below is JadeL''s ring one of many I''m nuts over.

Again this might not work.

 

[MMT]

I think your diamond is beautiful and plenty big. If you go with a smaller setting the diamond will definitely pop more. Good luck!!

 

[Rhea]

A smaller setting will make a huge difference. Could you try on some 2.5 carats and 2.0 carats in smaller settings to make up your mind?

 

[erica k]

I would go with a more delicate setting rather than upgrade the stone. I think your stone is a great size and color, and I think changing the setting would help it pop more.

8 pointers would probably be perfect with that size stone in an eternity setting. You should try on some eternity sets to get a better sense of how your 2ct would look.

 

[chelsea3]

I agree, the center diamond is gorgeous! The setting is also gorgeous, but somehow, the two do not enhance each other. Changing the setting is a wonderful idea and adding smaller side stones will make the center POP. Your center stone really is beautiful and I wouldn''t sacrifice the color for a larger stone, I would sacrifice the sides and try a different setting. Good luck and have fun with it!

 

[kairos]

I know what you are saying too. I have a ring similiar to yours, 2 carat center and a band made of small round stones with 2 additional wedding bands made of the same round stones on either side. I think my total band size is a half an inch wide. Sometimes when I look at my ring it seems like my center stone gets lost and I have thought, as well, that another half carat would make all the difference...cause, you know, us girls with long fingers can carry the big diamonds!

 

[somehowcollide]

Ooh, I love your stone AND your setting. I really think it looks great on your hands, and not small at all. Ultimately, you must do what makes you happiest, and I think you''ve already made up your mind about changing your setting.

Good luck!!

 

[akmiss]

Date: 8/18/2008 4:14:29 PM
Author: vespergirl
I think your ring is gorgeous! I really love your setting too. However, thinner settings do make stones 'pop' more, so maybe your stone would look bigger if you had, say a 2 mm width setting. I think it looks huge now, though! Then again, my stone is 2 cts too, so maybe I just like that size

ditto on the thinner band! Maybe a 2.5mm pave setting

You could also add a delicate halo for the extra bling.

look at this beauty ~
http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=345

or you could add pear sides like kaleigh's Tiffany ER ~
www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=312

 

[marcy]

Your ring is gorgeous. I do agree that having a thinner band will make the diamond really pop and the center diamond will look bigger.

 

[ImpatientOne]

I, too, vote for keeping the center stone and going with a different setting!

 

[trillionaire]

I agree, fantastic stone, a 2mm setting will make it look ginormous! My mother always said, "Less is more"

The Leon link above is out of this world too, it you are interested in a setting like that. The detail work is just

 

[Cleo]

That''s a beautiful stone & not in the least bit small on you.

In fact, you can borrow my tiny hand if I can borrow your 2 carat rock!!

I also vote for resetting it with a narrower band, which I think will really help your lovely diamond pop.

x x x

 

[Gemma12]

Another vote for a narrow band and keeping the center stone! That is a beautiful stone and I don't think it looks small on you at all.

 

[Cleo]

How about having a new band made using the existing baguettes, but setting them east-west to give you a narrower ring?

Just a thought.

x x x

 

[D2B]

I agree with many of the PP, you have a beautiful stone and great porportions for your finger. If you want more bling and sparkle I would get a thinner setting, with mabybey round brilliants on the sides for maximum sparkle with round brilliant half or full eternity. it will make your stone pop. Your side stones are beautiful but that type of cut will not have the sparkle factor compared to a round JMHO.

good luck.
d2b

 

[Maisie]

I love Jadeleaves ring. Its just perfect. I don''t think you need a bigger stone, just a different setting. Your diamond is so beautiful! Maybe you can put a coloured stone in your current setting?

 

[MrsT]

Thanks everyone for the honest opinions and compliments.

I am happy with my center stone. My pics don''t do it justice.

Just a note on the "Chriscut" baguette by Christopher designs. Those baguettes really sparkle.
Which is why I''ll probably keep the ring and set a colored stone in it. I was thinking of a yellow grossular garnet but they apparently are hard to find. I might even put in a CZ and use the ring when I travel.

What other shape stone could I use in my current setting? Would a cushion look nice?

Akmiss: I requested a price quote at LM and Mark Morell. LM was sky high for just the ering - 7k. I love his work but can''t afford it. Mark Morell is pretty steep too but better price for the pair than LM. I''m going to also get a price from
Whiteflash.

I think I know that 8 - 10pt accent stones would be a good size. Probably the 8pt if I want my center to pop.
What really puzzles me is how some designs of the eternity style bands have a low profile and others are deeper.
I know this has to do with the size of the accent stones. The larger the stone the deeper the profile.
All I know is that my daughter has a fake eternity with a height of 3mm and that is very uncomfortable on my finger but I like the size of the stones.

I''ve been to some of my jewelers in the area. One does amazing pave work. Of course every ring I like has a 3ct stone in the center. I''ve seriously considered the style below but worry that I''m a bit too mature for that kind of thing?
I''m married 27 years already. My local jeweler does the same thing with a round halo and any day now is calling me in to see a matched set he made for a lucky bride to be.

 

[MrsT]

I love the simple shared prong designs like I pictured above. But these styles are lovely too.

 

[Lorelei]

Mrs T you are not too mature for that type of style, if you like it then go for it!

 

[Jenn5504]

I think both of the styles you''ve mentioned considering are beautiful and classic. Either would be a LOVELY choice. I agree that a bit smaller setting than your current will make the stone pop more. Your current setting is beautiful, but I''d LOVE to see your AmAzInG center stone in one of these other styles you''ve mentioned! It''s just a matter of which you like on better. I have a tiffany style solitaire with a shared prong eternity band and adore the style but often think I may have been better off with something like the halo pave you showed. I''m such a huge fan of both styles........

 

[Mrs.Hall(almost)]

Hi Mrs T.
I can totally sympathize with you! Although my setting is okay now, upgrading has definitely been on my mind. I am a ring size 7 1/2 and I see you are coming from, I figure I will at least need a 2 ct in order to get the desired size finger coverage. My Fiance has allowed me a final upgrade before the wedding, so I want to upgrade to a 3/4 eternity e-ring setting and band duo! Oh and trust me I have Mara''s Show me you eternity sets posts at the top of my web browser and I worship it daily! I think you will definitely notice a difference between the 2 and the 2.5 however I believe the size (mm) of the band will impact it tremendously. I am considering 10 pointers and I have tried it on and I know it will definitely make my "Future Stone" pop!

 

[MrsT]

[Mrs T you are not too mature for that type of style, if you like it then go for it!]
Thanks Lorelei. I will get to see a custom set like these soon and I''ll be able to try it on.

Mrs.Hall:
You may be a 7-1/2 but if the avatar is a pic of your hand, you have nothing to worry about. What size stone is in the setting you are wearing in the avatar? Your hand shot is really nice. Congratulations on almost being Mrs.Hall!

Shopping update:

Yesterday I was able to try on many of the different ideas I had for resetting. I am perplexed over what I learned.

First try was a Tiffany style band slightly raised head with an eternity band of 10pt stones.
They put a 2ct cz in the ering for effect. This didn''t look good on me. Maybe a wider band might but they didn''t have one.

We then moved to full eternity ering/wedding band with 10pt stones. On my finger this looked bulky and just ok. Beautiful rings but not flattering. It looked nice on the salesperson''s hand. Of course I couldn''t fit it on my finger so it was kind of hard to tell.

From there we tried channel set - 3 types, and then she had to help a customer and I started discussing with the other gemologist the properties of a higher color stone. She brought out an "H" which looked great to me.

Guess what I did then? I started trying on all the rings again with the 3ct cz in them!

There was one more style I hadn''t tried after that and I wasn''t going home until I did.

Here is where I get perplexed. What really looked best on my hand was a 4stone ering with 20pt side stones.
We matched it with a 5stone band and it looked really great with the 2ct. Then I slipped in the 3ct and it looked awesome! What puzzled me was that the 2ct didn''t get lost in this setting with the larger 20pt sides.

I stared at it for some time trying to understand why this looked best on my hand. One thing I noticed was
the prongs were not petite shared prong.
The accent stones were set with a tiny (not overpowering) bar.
This made the accent stones seem more like individually set stones with a scallop effect. I''m not describing this right.
It wasn''t pronounced but a subtle scalloped edge to the overall look.

I can''t figure out why, but this seemed to be right for my bone structure.
I would rather have 3 side stones on each side rather than just 2 accent stones on each side of the center stone.
I don''t think this would effect the look that much. It was nice to know that my 2ct worked and if I ever found a suitable larger center stone, I could easily change it over. The best picture I could find is the memoire with 20pt side stones.
This isn''t the petite bar prong style but it has the scalloped look I''m trying to describe.

Thanks everyone for reading and offering your thoughful suggestions.