Divisi setting from Whiteflash

[cinnamon013]

Date: 5/15/2007 5:03:05 PM
Author: belle
if your short (haha) on finger real estate, i think i single ornate ring is a great option.

This is one of the main reasons I was interested in this setting - to get one ring that would fit the finger real estate area!

 

[decodelighted]

In the meantime ... why not order a 2mm silver band ... just to check out the look of a plain polished band w/your existing ring. If it looks good -- you can order a 2 mm platinum band & that''ll probably be the cheapest option of all!

I know what you mean about wanting one ring -- I BEGGED my fiance/nowDH to just let me wear my e-ring solo but he''s traditional & thought I''d look eternally engaged rather than married ... so I wear two.

HA! Maybe I''m just jealous that YOU have the option to!

 

[kcoursolle]

I like your current setting much better than the divisi. Your current setting is thin and delicate and makes your center stone look like a total honker! Also, it''s goign to look awesome and give you more finger real estate when you put a matching wedding band with it.

I''m normally a huge spilt shank fan (I own one afterall), but I don''t love the divisi that much. I think it''s a little chunky with too much metal showing on the sides where the shank meets the head. Your center stone will not be shown off as well in this setting compared to the one you have, and you will have wedding band issues since this particular split shank is a bit think to add another band to.

 

[iheartscience]

I''m jumping on the DON''T CHANGE IT! bandwagon. Your ring is divine! It seriously looks perfect on you. And I think it will look amazing with the matching band...or two...

I''m not crazy about the Divisi setting, either-it''s pretty clunky looking. If you''re dying for a more ornate setting, I say keep looking, but I think you''ll have a hard time swaying us PSers when your setting looks so darn good on you!

 

[cinnamon013]

What do you think about setting? If you click on the link, there is a different view than the photo below.

http://www.whiteflash.com/Engagement-Rings/Styles/Diamond-Settings/Three-Side-Pave_1115.htm#



Along the thought line of keeping my micro pave band with the legato head:
I talked to Issac at Facets collection to see if he could recommend an eternity band that would not sit up too high and hit the legato head. He really felt the micro pave band that WF was my only option. Hmm. I had thought their small tcw eternity band would sit flush enough. He spoke about "matching" the band the best. I see on PS that lots of people don''t have issue with matching the band to the e-ring.

Later on this afternoon, I''m going to take a picture of my existing eternity band with my e-ring. They obviously won''t work together, but you can get an idea of the "bling" factor I''d be interested in if I stay with my current band. This ring won''t work cause it sits up so high it hits the head. Stay tuned for that picture when I get out of the office for lunch and take it...

 

[cinnamon013]

Impromptu photo shoot this afternoon. Sunny day in Denver! Man, photos are hard to take...

Photos here are to show why I originally thought to change to the Divisi setting (which now BTW seems to be out!) I want to wear a band with this e-ring setting, but I''m not thrilled about the band WF offers to match it. I guess the main reason is there is very little height on the ring. But this setting is a great one for showing off a great diamond. The following photos are mainly to show how a typical 1.5 tcw channel set round band will sit too high against this legato head.

I''m in no way suggesting I would wear these together. It''s just too much of a height difference for me. I do like a flush look. Also, my eternity band was purchased in April 03 and has seen everyday wear, so it has wonderful patina. Sort of clashes with the new micro pave setting.

 

[cinnamon013]

*

 

[cinnamon013]

*

 

[cinnamon013]

This one I''m holding them kinda weird and it is a little more dramatic in the depth difference. But with everyday wear of these two together, this would happen, and scraping of the head would occur.

 

[cinnamon013]

Ok, now just some shots of my ring. Check out the reflection of the trees in one of the sparkles in the diamond. This diamond is awesome!

 

[cinnamon013]

*

 

[cinnamon013]

*

 

[cinnamon013]

blinding

 

[cinnamon013]

*

 

[decodelighted]

Your ring is just BREATHTAKING ... it truly, truly is! I wouldn't change it FOR THE WORLD. Not to the Divisi ... not to the three sided pave one above ... NO. CHANGE. RING.

About a matching band -- I swear that this is doable. I have a very low-set w-band that would work with your low slung legato ... and it has diamonds in it. OR -- you could get a thin, low-depth solid platinum band ... they don't all sit up high .. some are more "flattened" ... it's just figuring out what's what. Maybe whiteflash could even MAKE you a plain platinum band that would fit up against that setting, be the exact same width & height.

Your channel-set band is thicker than a lot of wedding bands today -- the current style is skinny & low. It shouldn't be hard to find .. really!

ETA: Here is the band I have that is SUPER LOW ... there are pictures of it with my much higher e-ring around here somewhere.

 

[cinnamon013]

Both of these babies wish they had less dry hands to live on! But in Colorado, that''s a bit difficult. At least for a girl like me who just can''t get dedicated to a lotion schedule!

Ok, now that you''ve seen more photos of the petite little micro pave with legato head...is your vote still to go with the 2.4 mm wide band that matches? It just seems like it''s all toooo dainty to think about matching that really small band with it.

 

[decodelighted]

Orrrrr ... I wonder how something 1.2 mm wide ... like this would look flanking your existing e-ring ... one on either side. There are even pink gold or yellow gold versions that could make an interesting combo. Or ones with sapphires etc...like this pink gold w/pink sapphires for $550

 

[:)]

Ditto on the no change train. Gorgeous ring and diamond as is. Agree Divisi is a bit too chunky for my taste, and I think would detract from your diamond.

C/ regards to the matching band - I actually think if you get a band with stones that are too large, that it actually overwhelms/detracts from your beautiful stone. 2.4 is actually not that dainty.

 

[cinnamon013]

Date: 5/16/2007 3:39:21 PM
Author: decodelighted
Your ring is just BREATHTAKING ... it truly, truly is! I wouldn''t change it FOR THE WORLD. Not to the Divisi ... not to the three sided pave one above ... NO. CHANGE. RING.

About a matching band -- I swear that this is doable. I have a very low-set w-band that would work with your low slung legato ... and it has diamonds in it. OR -- you could get a thin, low-depth solid platinum band ... they don''t all sit up high .. some are more ''flattened'' ... it''s just figuring out what''s what. Maybe whiteflash could even MAKE you a plain platinum band that would fit up against that setting, be the exact same width & height.

Your channel-set band is thicker than a lot of wedding bands today -- the current style is skinny & low. It shouldn''t be hard to find .. really!

ETA: Here is the band I have that is SUPER LOW ... there are pictures of it with my much higher e-ring around here somewhere.

Thanks for the compliments! And the vote of encouragement that there are other bands I can consider beyond the WF one that matches. I do think that a tcw similar to yours would be low enough. I do super duper like that band of yours, very unusual, very pretty.

Yep, the eternity band I own is wider, and was purchased before they were all the rage. Since I wore it for a long time as a band alone, it looked great with it''s larger substance. Before that, I wore a fairly wide (for my short fingers) Diana band that is platinum and 18k yellow gold. It''s at home feeling lonely now that I don''t wear it. I''ll have to post a picture of it as well. I wore it for 7 years all by itself, no e-ring, then moved it to my right hand when I got the eternity band. My husband has a matching band Diana band. It is lovely, but I only have 2 fingers it will fit! It also doesn''t go with my new e-ring. Partially because it has a large curve in the middle where the platinum is, and partially because it''s a size 4 and squeezes my finger with 2 rings on. My new e-ring is a size 4.5. Those fingers have gotten a little fatter over the years...

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 5/16/2007 3:40:40 PM
Author: cinnamon013
It just seems like it''s all toooo dainty to think about matching that really small band with it.

My hunch is that you''re still adjusting to the "new look" ... it''s a BIG departure from your channel-set wedding band ... but SUPER SUPER SUPER FLATTERING to your stone & to your hand. I kid you NOT.

It seems *delicate* in direct comparision to your wedding band ... but, assuming the matching w-band is the same width as the new e-ring ... I think, as a SET, it would look AMAZING! Not *too* delicate ... just subtle & blingy and feminine and PERFECT!

I also think other combos of thin bands with it -- whether solid or engraved or set with colored stones could be cool too. But the matching Whiteflash one seems like a no-brainer ... and then you could try out other stackables over time for variety ... if you get a hankering to.

 

[mrssalvo]

I''d have WF make 2 matching bands, one for either side of your e-ring. that will make the set seem more substainial if that''s what you are wanting. here are butterfly''s Ritani''s which are all under 2mm each, I love this look. I actual plan on doing the same thing with my e-ring, one band for either side. makes it fun to mix it up once in a while too...

 

[cinnamon013]

Date: 5/16/2007 3:45:25 PM
Author: decodelighted
Orrrrr ... I wonder how something 1.2 mm wide ... like this would look flanking your existing e-ring ... one on either side. There are even pink gold or yellow gold versions that could make an interesting combo. Or ones with sapphires etc...like this pink gold w/pink sapphires for $550

Both of those are just what I'm thinking of! But when I called Isaac at the Facets Collection, he acted like something like that would be too tall! However, I guess his smallest is .45 tcw. And the ones you show are .25 tcw. Yeah! I like them very much. You've linked your own band, as well as these to www.estatediamondjewelry.com. Have you had good experiences with this company? These prices are good, and the quality of the rings in the photos is very nice!

 

[cinnamon013]

Date: 5/16/2007 3:54:21 PM
Author: mrssalvo
I''d have WF make 2 matching bands, one for either side of your e-ring. that will make the set seem more substainial if that''s what you are wanting. here are butterfly''s Ritani''s which are all under 2mm each, I love this look. I actual plan on doing the same thing with my e-ring, one band for either side. makes it fun to mix it up once in a while too...

These small bands look similar to the small ones decodelighted just linked me to as well. Small bands to add some substance.

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 5/16/2007 3:56:26 PM
Author: cinnamon013
Have you had good experiences with this company? These prices are good, and the quality of the rings in the photos is very nice!

I absolutely LOVE my wedding band! I''ve worn it everday -- all day long -- shower, cleaning, sleeping etc for about 7 months now w/no lost stones, no bending ... looks like new. The only *slight* drawback of this design is that the edges are not rounded at all ... so when my fingers swell a bit, it''s swelling over a "corner" rather than a "curve" -- does that make sense. It''s just this type of ring. The other skinny eternity bands seem more rounded -- just this "link" band is uniquely squared.

We ordered my DH''s ring from Facets BTW -- so I''d recommend them as well ... however, they didn''t have what *I* was looking for .. only EDJ did.

 

[cinnamon013]

Date: 5/16/2007 3:54:12 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 5/16/2007 3:40:40 PM
Author: cinnamon013
It just seems like it''s all toooo dainty to think about matching that really small band with it.

My hunch is that you''re still adjusting to the ''new look'' ... it''s a BIG departure from your channel-set wedding band ... but SUPER SUPER SUPER FLATTERING to your stone & to your hand. I kid you NOT.

It seems *delicate* in direct comparision to your wedding band ... but, assuming the matching w-band is the same width as the new e-ring ... I think, as a SET, it would look AMAZING! Not *too* delicate ... just subtle & blingy and feminine and PERFECT!

I also think other combos of thin bands with it -- whether solid or engraved or set with colored stones could be cool too. But the matching Whiteflash one seems like a no-brainer ... and then you could try out other stackables over time for variety ... if you get a hankering to.

You are probably right about the adjustment to the smaller look. I just found a picture of the Diana band I wore for years. Here it is.

 

[cinnamon013]

*

 

[cinnamon013]

All three of my rings having a play date.

Hahaha. Now I remember why I wasn't going to post this one. I had (shhhh) spit/licked that diamond before this shot and it speckled the top of it. I think I was sitting in traffic when I snapped these last three photos. When I went home to post them a few weeks ago, I noticed the spots on the diamond and didn't post back then. But at least you get the idea of all 3 rings together.

 

[decodelighted]

I wasn''t going to post this picture because the lighting is a little weird ... but it shows the depth of the "link" band to my e-ring. It''s also a recent (couple days ago) picture -- so it shows the band after 7 months of constant, rough wear.

 

[cinnamon013]

Date: 5/16/2007 4:08:09 PM
Author: decodelighted
I wasn''t going to post this picture because the lighting is a little weird ... but it shows the depth of the ''link'' band to my e-ring. It''s also a recent (couple days ago) picture -- so it shows the band after 7 months of constant, rough wear.

That is awesome...

 

[cinnamon013]

Date: 5/16/2007 3:46:46 PM
Author:
Ditto on the no change train. Gorgeous ring and diamond as is. Agree Divisi is a bit too chunky for my taste, and I think would detract from your diamond.

C/ regards to the matching band - I actually think if you get a band with stones that are too large, that it actually overwhelms/detracts from your beautiful stone. 2.4 is actually not that dainty.

You and the other wise PS''rs have been so helpful with your feedback. It really helps to get feedback. Thanks!