shape
carat
color
clarity

Couple of questions about settings.

Deathspi

Shiny_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
385
I'm having a go at setting some stones for the first time, and was just wondering about a couple of things. They are probably stupid questions but there we go! ;)

1. Will an octagon cut stone fit an emerald setting? (with no change in measurements)

And 2. I have a round stone with the awkward size of about 6.7mm and for some reason I can only find settings for 6-6.5, 6.5 or just 7mm stones. Would I be able to fit it in a slightly smaller/bigger setting? I know there is room for a couple of mm's, but I don't know if it's better to go a bit bigger or smaller.

Thanks in advance.
 
Deathspi|1293910709|2811737 said:
1. Will an octagon cut stone fit an emerald setting? (with no change in measurements)
No, sorry, this one's a no-go if the octagon is the same width and length.

2. I have a round stone with the awkward size of about 6.7mm and for some reason I can only find settings for 6-6.5, 6.5 or just 7mm stones. Would I be able to fit it in a slightly smaller/bigger setting? I know there is room for a couple of mm's, but I don't know if it's better to go a bit bigger or smaller.
It all depends on the setting. If the prongs are straight, as in vertical, then you should use a smaller setting than the stone size and this should be limited to about .3mm smaller than the setting calls for. The prongs need to be long enough and will then be bent outwards slightly. This can cover up smaller stones in a halo setting, so you need to be O.K. with that.
If the prongs taper outwards, then you should use a larger setting than the stone size and about the same .3mm difference as a maximum, (in this case the stone will sit deeper and so the setting depth and stone depth need to be compared to make sure that the culet of the stone does not protrude into the finger area).
 
Thanks for the reply. The octagon is an 8X6, I just wondered if the cut corners would would make a difference in an emerald setting. As for the round, i'll probably keep a look out for a proper 6.5-7mm setting and if I still have no luck, ask the vendor if they can ajust the setting. Don't want to try to wing it and end up with a setting that the stone doesent fit!
 
An 8x6 octagon sounds very close to an emerald, I've even seen some setting manufacturers interchange the two names, so it might work. Do you have any pictures of the octagon? With round stones it's pretty easy to fit sizes that are a bit off, though it really does matter if those prongs are vertical or tapered. Post some pictures of settings when you find some that you like and it will be much easier to make an accurate comment about how it might fit.
 
With the octagon, if the straight edges align with the prongs of the setting it might be possible BUT be aware that at the sides, top and bottom where you have the points of the octagon, it may hang over the setting too far. It's not out of the realms of possibility though. You might be better putting it into a setting for a princess cut stone. As Michael has said, if you have pictures it might be easier to tell.

With the round 6.7mm stone, it will probably fit into either a 6.5mm or 7.0mm setting. Don't go with the 6mm setting as the .7 difference is a bit too much and your stone will most definitely look too big and hang over the sides.
 
Okay, here is the 8x6 octagon:

35981.jpg

LD, I thought that might be the case, that the edges might go over...

This is the sort of setting i'm thinking of getting for the round.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270686061343&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.co.uk%3A80%2F%3F_from%3DR40%26_trksid%3Dp5197.m570.l1313%26_nkw%3D270686061343%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1

I assume that the settings with prongs that go outwards are these type of settings?
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/6-5mm-14k-W-Gold-Solid-Diamond-Semi-Mount-Ring-/170584904318?pt=US_Fine_Rings&hash=item27b7a7127e

Trouble is, when I see 6.5 settings, I think i'll only be going over by a couple of mm, but alot of them say 'between 6 and 6.5' which makes me think that it's ment to be somewhere between that, and the seller is giving room for a few mm either way. If I bought it then, I would be going over by too much.
Hope that makes sense! ...Maybe I would be better off just asking, what size setting would you use? :)
 
Deathspi, I've purchased ebay settings from overseas before (although not jewelryhoo), and for an in-between size stone, I've found it most helpful to send them the exact measurements of my stone. Several times, on halo settings, I've reqested the inside dimensions of the halo to determine if my stone would overlap.

The setting in your first link is a basket setting, and the prongs can usually be adjusted outward ever-so-slightly. Care must be taken to not over-do it, or you'll weaken the prong.

The second link is a type of peg head, and I'm not sure how much these can be adjusted - jewelers can usually replace the head for a different size. Stones usually sit a little higher in these, if that makes a difference.

Your garnet, with it's cut corners, actually is an emerald shape. One tricky thing with octagon shapes is that some corners are cut a litte deeper or shallower, so I find that a diagonal measurement is also critical, not just a length x width.
 
I agree with Cell that your octagon cut is actually a classic emerald cut - it's absolutely stunning by the way! What stone is it? I'm totally in love with it! :love: If you search for setting for an emerald cut it should help you to narrow your search. If the seller has said that the mount will fit between 6-6.5mm then it should be ok but I'd still be tempted to go for the 6.5mm.

In terms of your round, I like the first setting you've linked to and interestingly I have a very similar setting from LOGR. It was advertised as a 6mm setting and my sapphire is 5.7mm so I thought it would be ok. However, my sapphire is over 1ct so is actually very deep. If you look at the photos you can see how high it is in the mount (I quite like it like that) but it could look too big for the setting for those who prefer a more subtle look. So, if you want a more "normal" look then take a look at the depth of your stone and judge it from there.

EDIT: I've just realised something! No wonder my stone didn't fit - look at LOGR's photo and then mine! Mine has a double halo but the one in the advert only had a single halo!!! I seem to have got the wrong ring and never even noticed! :bigsmile:

Sapphire Blue3_1.JPG

Sapphire4 .JPG

LOGR for round 6mm.jpg
 
LD, sorry to hear about your setting, no wonder your sapphire didn't fit! (which is also a gorgeous colour by the way!)
The garnet I have is a tanga/rhodolite from Litnon. It's actually described as an octagon/emerald cut, but I have a stone with exactly
the same cut which was origionally sold to me as an octagon...I think Micheal E was right about vendors exchanging the two names.
I have been looking at emerald settings for it, but like I said, I don't want to buy a setting that looks good on paper, but find that the prongs don't cover the corners properly.

I will measure the depth of my round later in the month as I'm away from home at the mo, but I agree with cellentani that telling the vendor the size might be best. The second ring I linked to was only an example of what I thought Micheal E was talking about when he mentioned prongs that taper outwards, I won't actually be using it.
 
While an octagonal stone might fit into an emerald setting of the same measurements, you will have several pointy ends exposed that will be at risk of damage. However, what you have shown IS an emerald cut so it should fit into the standard 8x6 mm emerald cut setting.

For the 6.7 mm round stone, it should fit into a 7 mm round setting.
 
Lovely. Thank you everyone. :)
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP

Featured Topics

Top