Don''t know what to do...

[esumsea]

My 2 cents, wait for what you really seem to want. It is always worth the wait.
GOOD LUCK!

 

[chrono]

Great news!

Jon is going to do a video with my RB, a PoH and that cutie modern cushion. This way, I''ll be able to gauge their light performance and my shape preference. Another good tit bit is that Jon has also possibly found me a PoH that''s 6.5 mm and fits my budget. I''ll have to wait until he gets the details.

 

[chrono]

Okay, all you PSers are probably sick and tired of me posting but...there''s a 1.45 ct K VS2 PoH in the works that measures 6.5 mm.

This is going to be a tough decision
1. 1.45 ct K VS2 PoH (6.5 mm)
2. 1.28 ct J SI1 RB (6.9 mm)
3. 1.01 ct F SI1 cushion (5.7 x 6.1 mm) which I''ll most likely get a larger one

The first two are about the same price. The 3rd option is there just to see what cushions are all about since I love that shape.

I currently have a J so J''s are okay in my book. I like the RB because it''s very big and has MB but it isn''t square. I like the PoH because it''s square and has great optics like a round but is still stretching to hit my minumum magic 6.5 mm mark. I mean, a 1.45 ct is smaller than the 1.28 ct? Okay, I guess I have to accept that fancies are like that.

But it''s also one step down to a K.

So much to mull over...

 

[chrono]

Bumping...
I know the boards are slow during the holiday season but I''m just antsy right now.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 12/28/2007 11:41:15 AM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 12/28/2007 11:15:25 AM
Author: Ellen
This is exactly what I''ve wanted to post, but didn''t. I guess I felt like I might be swaying your decision....

Plus there were all those people telling you to hold out. I feared for my life.

I''m not a-scared! LOL

The Chainsaw boldly goes where no other dares. LMAO!

 

[mrssalvo]

chrono, if size and sparkle are what you are after, hands down a round will win every time. It sounds like size is what you are really wanting so I''d go for the round, try it out, see how it works. there have been other fancy owners to switch to a round and never look back. you can then decide if you can really be forever happy with the shape or if you want to trade again for a cushion/POH/jubilee that has the same spread as the round when you upgrade again. honestly, if I had to choose between a smaller cushion and a larger mm round, i''d take the round although in my heart of hearts I just adore and covet a cushion, the size whore in me just couldn''t do it.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 12/28/2007 1:53:29 PM
Author: Chrono
Okay, all you PSers are probably sick and tired of me posting but...there''s a 1.45 ct K VS2 PoH in the works that measures 6.5 mm.

This is going to be a tough decision
1. 1.45 ct K VS2 PoH (6.5 mm)
2. 1.28 ct J SI1 RB (6.9 mm)
3. 1.01 ct F SI1 cushion (5.7 x 6.1 mm) which I''ll most likely get a larger one

The first two are about the same price. The 3rd option is there just to see what cushions are all about since I love that shape.

I currently have a J so J''s are okay in my book. I like the RB because it''s very big and has MB but it isn''t square. I like the PoH because it''s square and has great optics like a round but is still stretching to hit my minumum magic 6.5 mm mark. I mean, a 1.45 ct is smaller than the 1.28 ct? Okay, I guess I have to accept that fancies are like that.

But it''s also one step down to a K.

So much to mull over...

Unfortunately they are. Otherwise, I would be wearing a Square H&A''s as my upgrade right now.

I''d go for the round myself. Which is what I did.


What does your gut tell you Chrono?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/28/2007 1:53:29 PM
Author: Chrono
Okay, all you PSers are probably sick and tired of me posting but...there''s a 1.45 ct K VS2 PoH in the works that measures 6.5 mm.

This is going to be a tough decision
1. 1.45 ct K VS2 PoH (6.5 mm)
2. 1.28 ct J SI1 RB (6.9 mm)
3. 1.01 ct F SI1 cushion (5.7 x 6.1 mm) which I''ll most likely get a larger one

The first two are about the same price. The 3rd option is there just to see what cushions are all about since I love that shape.

I currently have a J so J''s are okay in my book. I like the RB because it''s very big and has MB but it isn''t square. I like the PoH because it''s square and has great optics like a round but is still stretching to hit my minumum magic 6.5 mm mark. I mean, a 1.45 ct is smaller than the 1.28 ct? Okay, I guess I have to accept that fancies are like that.

But it''s also one step down to a K.

So much to mull over...

check out the poh in person then go from there....
rounds in that size will be available again and again but the poh wont.

 

[chrono]

MrsS and Ellen,

I really don''t know. If I could pick one, I wouldn''t be debating over this here on PS now, would I?

Size or shape? Don''t take this the wrong way but RBs are so common. I like squares because they are unique. This is obvious in my choice of an EC e-ring and most of my gemstones are cushions.

I am having touble accepting the fact that this PoH is so small compared to the RB. To me, this is the hardest part. It''s just too small and I''m not sure if I can justify spending the same amount of money for a smaller stone with lesser colour. To be fair, the PoH has slightly better clarity but that SI1 RB is super eye clean, and has MB to boot.

Everything seems to be pointing in favour to the RB. The only thing holding me back is the shape.

 

[lyra]

Date: 12/28/2007 3:30:50 PM
Author: Chrono
MrsS and Ellen,

I really don''t know. If I could pick one, I wouldn''t be debating over this here on PS now, would I?

Size or shape? Don''t take this the wrong way but RBs are so common. I like squares because they are unique. This is obvious in my choice of an EC e-ring and most of my gemstones are cushions.

I am having touble accepting the fact that this PoH is so small compared to the RB. To me, this is the hardest part. It''s just too small and I''m not sure if I can justify spending the same amount of money for a smaller stone with lesser colour. To be fair, the PoH has slightly better clarity but that SI1 RB is super eye clean, and has MB to boot.

Everything seems to be pointing in favour to the RB. The only thing holding me back is the shape.

How dare you!!!!

How about trying a round in a square setting? It''s worth a try if you''re really itching for size, which I can understand.

 

[Ellen]

Chrono, I do understand. I was the same way when I was looking for my upgrade. I seriously wanted a square, thought rounds were so common. But, I found the decision as trying as you are. And this was a one time shot for me, so I went with another round. Yes, lots of my friends (in fact most) also have rounds. However, mine is still distinctly different, because mine is cut so well. It clearly outshines the rest. Not to sound braggy, but it''s true.

And I love it, and I still love squares, and hope to own one someday. But if I don''t I''m quite content. Maybe you would find the same? or maybe not. But as Al pointed out, you can do both. Get the round, live with it, wait and see what comes down the pike for squares...just play it by ear.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 12/28/2007 3:39:04 PM
Author: lyra

How dare you!!!!

How about trying a round in a square setting? It''s worth a try if you''re really itching for size, which I can understand.

I meant to suggest this as well.

 

[chrono]

Round in a square setting sounds great. I''m off to look for something like this but if anyone sees any, please post some here. Thanks Lyra and Ellen.

Storm,
I still haven''t forgotten the PoH. Jon will be doing a vid for me with all 3 stones lined up but I won''t be able to see it until next week.

 

[sera]

Date: 12/28/2007 3:39:47 PM
Author: Ellen
Chrono, I do understand. I was the same way when I was looking for my upgrade. I seriously wanted a square, thought rounds were so common. But, I found the decision as trying as you are. And this was a one time shot for me, so I went with another round. Yes, lots of my friends (in fact most) also have rounds. However, mine is still distinctly different, because mine is cut so well. It clearly outshines the rest. Not to sound braggy, but it''s true.


And I love it, and I still love squares, and hope to own one someday. But if I don''t I''m quite content. Maybe you would find the same? or maybe not. But as Al pointed out, you can do both. Get the round, live with it, wait and see what comes down the pike for squares...just play it by ear.

Ellen is right... a round shape may be common, but a RB with PS-level quality is very uncommon, and it will stand out far beyond the everyday-rounds!

I''ve gone through this same dilemma as I mentioned earlier. As much as I would like a greater spread, I didn''t want that as much as I wanted a square stone. I decided my dream Asscher would need to wait for a RHR because I didn''t want to sacrifice that much spread. I went with a PoH which had better spread than an Asscher but obviously less than a round (which I did not want).

I went with my gut decision and I''m very happy. If I had to make it again, I would make the same decision. Like was mentioned, go with your gut. Decide want you want most: size/spread (RB) or shape (wait for a Jube or get a PoH or other option), or a happy medium (cushion). You could always get a Jube or PoH later as a RHR and go with size now. Or like was suggested- "try out" the RB or cushion.

Hopefully the video will help you decide (please let us know when it''s available for viewing).

 

[Gypsy]

Here''s my FAVORITE round in a square setting is one Dee Jay tried on but didn''t get by Jack K. I would have Maytal do you something simlar to this Jack K.

I''ll see if I can hunt up a pic of it for you.

 

[Ellen]

Here is one of my absolute faves,

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-vatche-antique-ring.53611/

 

[Gypsy]

 

[Gypsy]

Date: 12/28/2007 4:08:45 PM
Author: Ellen
Here is one of my absolute faves,

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-vatche-antique-ring.53611/

Ellen I LOVE that Vatche! One of my favorites too!

 

[chrono]

Wow, that Vatche ring is really something.

Keep it coming, I love those pictures.

I can't believe how bad DSS has bitten me. However, it doesn't seem to affect my OEC or my EC.

Just in case DSS bites me again, I am reluctant to spend a lot of money on a setting for this diamond. I splurged on the last one thinking it's my forever RHR, but look at me now.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 12/28/2007 4:19:28 PM
Author: Chrono
Wow, that Vatch ring is really something.

Keep it coming, I love those pictures.

I can''t believe how bad DSS has bitten me. However, it doesn''t seem to affect my OEC or my EC.

Just in case DSS bites me again, I am reluctant to spend a lot of money on a setting for this diamond. I splurged on the last one thinking it''s my forever RHR, but look at me now.

Well yes, that is something we must think about.....

If only for a fleeting second.

Gypsy, good to see you posting, hope that means you''re feeling better!

 

[sera]

Here are 4 more... the Natalie K has space between the stone and halo, which would bother me, personally. I believe Dee*Jay had some adjustments made on hers so there wasn''t a space between her round stone and square halo? I have a side view of hers but not a top view.

Natalie K:

 

[sera]

Alex Soldier (this particular ring is made for a larger RB stone, but it gives an idea of options):

 

[sera]

Durnell:

 

[sera]

Michael B:

 

[chrono]

Umm, are there any round in a square peg settings without halos? As much as I adore them in pictures, they just don't look good on me. I'm so sorry but I don't want to sound unappreciative.

I'm so glad that you all are so helpful.

 

[sera]

Date: 12/28/2007 4:45:28 PM
Author: Chrono
Umm, are there any round in a square peg settings without halos? As much as I adore them in pictures, they just don''t look good on me. I''m so sorry but I don''t want to sound unappreciative.

I''m so glad that you all are so helpful.

IDK what that is, sorry.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 12/28/2007 4:45:28 PM
Author: Chrono
Umm, are there any round in a square peg settings without halos? As much as I adore them in pictures, they just don''t look good on me. I''m so sorry but I don''t want to sound unappreciative.

I''m so glad that you all are so helpful.

well, the halo is what is going to give the visual effect of the square or squarish shape. micheal b settings have the prongs shaped a certain way that can make a stone appear more square, but that''s the only one I can think of.

here is fortheloveofdiamonds michael b..

 

[Joolskie]

Date: 12/28/2007 4:45:28 PM
Author: Chrono
Umm, are there any round in a square peg settings without halos? As much as I adore them in pictures, they just don''t look good on me. I''m so sorry but I don''t want to sound unappreciative.

I''m so glad that you all are so helpful.

Hi Chrono... I am chiming in here late. But better that than never, right?!? LOL! I was away from the computer all day.

If you were to consider the round... I would suggest some form of a four-pronged setting. With four prongs, there is a visual squareness created that I find does not occur with six prongs. My e-ring stone is an RB in a four prong basket and the prongs create little corners. Between the corners is a little bling bulge. LOL!

It is a tough call regarding your stone choices. Are you in it for the size? ''Cuz that RB sounds delish. Put that baby in a four prong setting and you could have a nice compromise. But, you have stated that square shapes are what you are truly into. And I would wonder if that RB, while a great size, would make you happy.

My suggestion would be to check out the PoH video from Jon before making any final decisions. My feeling is that if you want square, you should get what you want.

 

[sera]

Date: 12/28/2007 5:26:59 PM
Author: mrssalvo

Date: 12/28/2007 4:45:28 PM

Author: Chrono

Umm, are there any round in a square peg settings without halos? As much as I adore them in pictures, they just don''t look good on me. I''m so sorry but I don''t want to sound unappreciative.

I''m so glad that you all are so helpful.

well, the halo is what is going to give the visual effect of the square or squarish shape. micheal b settings have the prongs shaped a certain way that can make a stone appear more square, but that''s the only one I can think of.


here is fortheloveofdiamonds michael b..

OH... that''s right... I''ve seen many rings where the RB appeared more squarish due to the 4-prong setting. Especially those that appear like 3 beads making a triangular shape with the point of the "triangle" pointing away from the diamond. If I come across a photo I will post it.

Other than a halo or certain 4-prong settings I can''t think of anything else... IDK what else to suggest... maybe a band the width of the diamond would "hide" a RB shape (?), but that''s a very substantial look that isn''t for everyone.

 

[Ellen]

Someone recently posted a ring with realllllly square prongs, and I loved it. But for the life of me, I can''t remember who.