Dearest gem afficianados...

[Indylady]

What is more important to you, the gemstone, or the setting?


I will certainly say that a setting can easily bring out the best qualities in a gem, and just as easily overshadow or detract from the look of a gem. If you are on a budget, and you see a few gems that you like, do you go ahead and collect them all? Any chance that you would set them in cheap temporary settings? Or do you hold onto a gem until the perfect setting comes along, or do you avoid ending up with a stock of gems that are all set, and take each project one by one?

I thought that I buy a gem and then set it before I would move on to the next. At least, that is what I have been trying to do. However, I keep coming across gems that I feel like are once in a blue moon opportunities; I''m generally more interested in a gem than a setting, and I feel like settings can be easily ordered at any time, unlike a gems. However, it seems like a shame to set really beautiful gems into cheap settings. What''s a gem lover to do?

 

[MakingTheGrade]

Simply put: the gemstone.

Haha, I actually generally try to spend less on the setting than the stone, and thus far has succeeded thanks to etsy. It keeps my budget in check.

I try not to have too many projects at once, but if it's really a rare stone or opportunity that really grabs me, I won't hesitate to buy it, and hold off on a setting for later.

 

[fierypyropixy]

Date: 10/23/2009 9:36:27 PM
Author:szh07
What is more important to you, the gemstone, or the setting?



I will certainly say that a setting can easily bring out the best qualities in a gem, and just as easily overshadow or detract from the look of a gem. If you are on a budget, and you see a few gems that you like, do you go ahead and collect them all? Any chance that you would set them in cheap temporary settings? Or do you hold onto a gem until the perfect setting comes along, or do you avoid ending up with a stock of gems that are all set, and take each project one by one?


I thought that I buy a gem and then set it before I would move on to the next. At least, that is what I have been trying to do. However, I keep coming across gems that I feel like are once in a blue moon opportunities; I''m generally more interested in a gem than a setting, and I feel like settings can be easily ordered at any time, unlike a gems. However, it seems like a shame to set really beautiful gems into cheap settings. What''s a gem lover to do?

Definitely the gem, in the Pricescope sense with all our loose gem buying and focus on really quality cuts and color and such.

With buying loose gems, it always seems like finding that perfect color in that perfect size AND that perfect cut is . . . your one and only chance. Even if you contacted the cutter and he had the same rough, and it seemed like the same quality and color, and he cut it in the same design . . . there would be SOMETHING different, even the slightest bit. At least, that''s how I justify it, the once in a blue moon opportunity you mentioned.

I too thought it was crazy to have these boxes and boxes of stones without settings, b/c I love to wear my pretties. But . . . see the above bit about the voice of doom telling me "IT''S YOUR ONLY CHANCE" and . . . well . .. now I''m behind.

I actually like the cheap settings . . cheap doesn''t have to mean tacky or ugly. . . I like it when it''s a gorgeous stone with a non-interfering plain band. I buy them solely on the fact that they can stand on their own.

 

[Lovinggems]

So far 2 of my settings have been more then the stone and one is about the same price. I have only set 3 so far, yes I''m slow.

I like to have a nice setting to complement these gorgeous stones, so far the stones I bought aren''t terribly expensive, save for the dems so it''s hard to find nice settings cheaper than the stone.

 

[chrono]

The setting can wait. It will almost always be there unlike the stone. Stones are not made to order. Once it is sold, another like it may not show up again.

 

[Fly Girl]

Definitely the stone. I get the stone, and I do go designer with some of them. But, I can''t afford that for everything. Others I put into inexpensive Stuller settings so they can be worn and admired. The rest are still in boxes waiting their turn. At some point I will need to clean house and sell off a few. Hopefully they will be loved by their new owners.

 

[Cind11]

I think the stone is the most important but the setting is pretty darned important too. I''d rather wait and save for a really nice setting rather than settle for one that isn''t all that special.

 

[Spirit]

ditto for what Cind11 just said!

 

[T L]

Date: 10/23/2009 9:36:27 PM
Author:szh07
What is more important to you, the gemstone, or the setting?


I will certainly say that a setting can easily bring out the best qualities in a gem, and just as easily overshadow or detract from the look of a gem. If you are on a budget, and you see a few gems that you like, do you go ahead and collect them all? Any chance that you would set them in cheap temporary settings? Or do you hold onto a gem until the perfect setting comes along, or do you avoid ending up with a stock of gems that are all set, and take each project one by one?

I thought that I buy a gem and then set it before I would move on to the next. At least, that is what I have been trying to do. However, I keep coming across gems that I feel like are once in a blue moon opportunities; I'm generally more interested in a gem than a setting, and I feel like settings can be easily ordered at any time, unlike a gems. However, it seems like a shame to set really beautiful gems into cheap settings. What's a gem lover to do?

I feel the same way, that settings can be easily ordered up, but I have to admit that some of my settings, even though they were "cheap" so to speak, are absolutely fabulous, and some people think the "setting + the stone" looks extremely expensive. Some cheap settings do look cheap though. If you were to inspect the setting with a loupe, you might see that the workmanship isn't perfect, but at arms length, especially if you upgrade the diamonds (we're talking LOGR here), the settings can sometimes look very expensive.

I was at a store with an expensive sapphire ring set in a platinum halo mount. It was $25,000. I actually preferred my $500 spessartite LOGR pear setting more (my diamonds were bigger too)!! I'm very proud of that ring. Likewise, I've seen expensive settings with terrible workmanship like some of the print ads for Tiffany&Co with shoddy bezels. Some Stuller settings are very beautiful. Consequently, would I set a fine gem in a cheap setting with frozen spit diamonds and lightweight?? No way. I returned my first spessartite version of that setting because the diamonds were the only thing wrong with it. However, I have no problem with some of the more expensive LOGR's if you pay for the diamond upgrade, they can be quite beautiful and a good value. Some people probably think I'm nuts, but for me, the stone is paramount.

 

[marcy]

Gemstone.

 

[jstarfireb]

Pre-PS, it was actually more about the setting. As long as something pretty was in it, didn''t matter what the stone was! I also never bought loose stones until recently, so they always came together. Now I''m more focused on the gemstone, except for certain settings. Like the lotus...I''m was willing to put ANYTHING in a lotus just to own one!

 

[ma re]

Gem is certainly more important, but it''s also important to recognize which setting would be best for that stone and I could never just get any setting so that I could just wear the stone as soon as possible. Due to my budget restrictions and quality preferences, my purchases are few and far between so I can only settle for the right setting for any given stone - no compromise.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 10/23/2009 11:22:22 PM
Author: Cind11
I think the stone is the most important but the setting is pretty darned important too. I'd rather wait and save for a really nice setting rather than settle for one that isn't all that special.

ditto this - sorry, folks can throw their rocks at me;
But I'd rather keep my stones un-set and save up for custom, than go the ebay Chinese setting route.
Because I don't consider myself a "gem collector" as such - I buy what I like, to make
it into jewellery I will love.

 

[LD]

Gemstone Gemstone Gemstone!

Unfortunately though what happens (and be warned!) is that you will keep finding gemstones, adding them to your collection and then you have a mountain to set! I need to buy about 200 settings

For my "best" gemstone purchases I sometimes put them in a temporary cheap setting and re-set later OR, more often than not, put in a bespoke setting straight away. However, I have sometimes bought a cheaper setting, put a stone in and gone "WOW"!

 

[AustenNut]

I''m not yet fully into the PS world of gembuying and jewelry making. About a month ago I bought my first stone (an ebay BE sapphire) and I''m just bought some stones from multicolour that I''m awaiting. But then I plan on setting them right away once the whole batch get here. I''m buying gems with the intention of wearing them. And once out of the super-inexpensive gems, a stone really has to sing to me for me to buy it.

As far as choosing settings go, there are a couple of factors in play. Budget being one. But also, I tend not to wear a lot of glitzy jewelry, so a simpler, plainer (and less expensive) setting will actually probably work well for me. But we''ll see how things go once everything starts coming in and I order the settings.

 

[Arcadian]

Gems are essentially unique, and are true once in a lifetime opportunities.

I feel that settings should ALWAYS compliment the gem its paired with. On the other side of that, there are some settings that I truly adore, and would probably wear them without a stone if I didn''t think I''d get funny looks

-A

 

[ma re]

^ Arc, I know girls who wore bubble gums in their settings after some stones fell out, LOL

 

[movie zombie]

THE STONE.

the setting is secondary. i don''t understand the concept of having to have a particular setting and then buying a stone to fit it.

mz

 

[Indylady]

Ma Re- That was the thought I was originally running with; making only a few, perfect pieces. Since I''ve gotten more and more engrossed in gems, however, I keep being distracted from finding settings.

LD- That is one of my worries! Right now I have about 30 gems that are all unset! There are only two or three that I am really serious about setting soon. I think my family would think I was nuts if I added to my gem collection without setting some of them soon!

Fiery- I know exactly what you mean. I would love to wear my gems. I''m starting to end up with boxes piled in my drawers, and it seems so sad for them to leave them in a drawer day after day!

I''m seriously thinking about ordering a couple of cheap silver or 14k pendant solitaire castings from Liebcor so that I can finally start wearing my beautiful gems!

 

[Arcadian]

Date: 10/24/2009 12:47:14 PM
Author: ma re
^ Arc, I know girls who wore bubble gums in their settings after some stones fell out, LOL

You really shouldn''t give me ideas.

-A

 

[Stone Hunter]

For me I am interested in the stone, not the setting. I think the setting is there to protect and enhance the stone, but the stone is the STAR! So stones first settings second.

Just my opinion.

 

[chrono]

SH,
You could not have expressed my opinion any better. The stone is the star. The setting is secondary and is there to help showcase it better.