Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Final Poll... PROMISE!!

Traps or baguettes with baguette band??

  • Traps

    Votes: 17 30.9%

  • Baguettes

    Votes: 38 69.1%
  • Total voters
    55
Emeraldsaremyfavorite

Emeraldsaremyfavorite

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Mar 29, 2015
Messages
722
FF28C1C1-43D0-476C-A1A5-2E3BEE16DA22.png6E3E28B7-CED4-4C06-8A0D-D65E1235CA1C.png BF20DA4A-0A26-4E05-8E03-3BC2C45FDC9B.jpegC770D25B-B239-4EB9-8DAB-A854FEDFC962.jpegEB85972D-D306-4AA4-A700-442DA13093C9.png 3B0C4C18-5768-4EDE-AEFC-3D7A1C975F23.png OK, I’m driving myself and everyone else crazy! So I have ruled out a micro pave Halo, I just want the Emerald cut to stand out. Now, I am wavering on simple baguettes - on the thicker side, with a baguette band OR my original trapezoids with the pave band. I know my stone is large at 3.56 ct, however all the ones in the photos I am listing are 6 carats. I want a large looking EC in the end. Will I get shrinkage issues if I went with a tapered baguettes? Will the traps with the micro pave band make more of a statement?? I’m really confused!

I think I had to rule out the traps with bullets due to a size 4 finger...

HELP!!
 
I’m voted for baguettes. Very pretty EC.
 
Crap you guys!!! Just had David send me two CADS with traps I will be getting tomorrow. Hate putting people out:(
 
Emeraldsaremyfavorite said:
Crap you guys!!! Just had David send me two CADS with traps I will be getting tomorrow. Hate putting people out:(
Click to expand...
I’m sure he’ll understand. This is your project; your $$$$$. He’ll want you be 1000% satisfied with it, and love it.
 
Definitely baguettes. It makes your emerald cut the star of the show :appl:

BUT, this is YOUR RING. If you don’t feel the same love for baguettes as we do, go with traps!

As they say, “you do you” :mrgreen2:
 
Thank you all so much! I will post some CAD pics tomorrow once they arrive. I think the key to baguettes would making them not look too spindly. A little more substantial. And if I keep the traps maybe really tapering them down, forgoing all the pave work and adding a baguette band. Simplifying things a bit. Things to think about! Appreciate more than you know:)
 
202DA080-64E2-4F4C-A361-DE8D1066D656.png Adding this with a baguette band. Of course only if I have room on a size 4 finger. Wondering if all the pave detail will get muddled on my initial inspiration ring... this is small traps and small baguettes/bullets
 
a couple of the pics look like double baguettes. I could be wrong, but is that worth considering?
 
Poor DK. I like it but agree that it is probably too wide to work. I was considering the same for my diamond but assume it wouldn't work. Maybe do the measurements and measure the top of your finger, I imagine it would have to be quite angled and therefore quite high profile.
 
I've had a 3 stone with baguettes...got rid of it. I consider baguettes boring and dont really add much. I'm especially not big on baguette bands. They
just dont have the sparkle that other cuts have and since they are usually smaller you cant see the steps. I had a girlfriend comment on my baguettes
that she thought they were just part of the metal of my setting (like I said, didnt add much). But thats just my opinion...obviously lots of people like them.
I just dont want you going for a bigger emerald and then feeling like you didnt get a bigger look out of it since you would be trading traps for baguettes.
 
Baguettes all the way!!!
 
tyty333 said:
I'm especially not big on baguette bands. They
just dont have the sparkle that other cuts have and since they are usually smaller you cant see the steps.
Click to expand...
@Emeraldsaremyfavorite - I do agree with this. I think you could find an amazing band for the baguette setting that isn’t just a row of baguettes. I’d also say you should tackle the band decision later; get to know your ring first and take your time trying on a lot of band styles. It’ll look very classy with a plain silver band in the meantime.
 
I love the double tapered baguettes, but I would do another cut for the band... something that sparkles more, but very delicate... like small rounds.
 
Hello again, @Emeraldsaremyfavorite! This is so funny because this was my exact dilemma and I have THE EXACT SAME PHOTOS SAVED (Thank you, Google Images!)!!! I was loving the look of the thick baguettes and I showed that photo to my jeweler, who told me that she was pretty sure they were double baguettes on each side! It's a nice look in the photos, but I opted not to go with it because IRL, the rings I've seen with multiple baguettes really don't do it for me. And when I saw my stone with single thick-ish baguettes, it just didn't compare to the look we got with trapezoids.
I'm going to vote for the trapezoid look for you. I'm still loving your original concept ring (the "Eva") either with new trapezoids or cutting down your old ones.
But if you decide not to do that ring, something else you could consider if you love the look of thick tapered side stones might be to put a more tapered set of traps next to your EC. That's ultimately what I decided to do to achieve more finger coverage and side bling, yet keep the smaller trapezoid to EC proportion. My new traps are 6mm x 4mm and the length of my EC is 12.86. My finger size is 4.75 to go over my knuckle, but my actual finger size is much smaller so we will put beads inside at the bottom of the shank.
Whatever you choose will be beautiful, but I understand your indecision at this point! Take your time and do what you feel is right for you in your heart~!!! :)
 
Nothing more classic than an EC with side baguettes, but single tapered baguette on each side and plain polished shank. That ring with the double baguettes has a HUGE center stone.

Also, I do like little traps, but again, do the plain shank. I think it's overkill to do all that pave when you have a killer main stone with sides.

Are you meaning baguette wedding band? That would be lovely with either one. But no baguette band on the e-ring.
 
Last edited:
The above pic with smaller traps with small bullets... like?? I think it’s from Kuwait Diamonds website
 
Last edited:
Yes and Yes to the 5 stone or small traps with small bullets...definitely like.
 
I don't like the 5 stone very much. I think it takes away from the center stone to have that much on the sides. There is a member here who made that setting for her round and changed shortly after to a solitaire for that reason. I think there's far less risk with the other two options.
 
diamondseeker2006 said:
I don't like the 5 stone very much. I think it takes away from the center stone to have that much on the sides. There is a member here who made that setting for her round and changed shortly after to a solitaire for that reason. I think there's far less risk with the other two options.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the thoughts!! My struggle with the initial design is the pave, and getting to be a little too much. I was trying to streamline it with all geometric shapes. But at the same time wanted to add a different spin on my last design which was a three stone with two traps .I should be receiving my CADS if that design too.
 
I don't see if you've listed the dimensions of the stone. Speaking as a person with a 3.75 size finger, I think the five stone would fit (and look amazing)!
 
pokerface said:
I don't see if you've listed the dimensions of the stone. Speaking as a person with a 3.75 size finger, I think the five stone would fit (and look amazing)!
Click to expand...
EC is 10.47 x 8.04. My traps can be cut to any size and so can the bullets. I have a ring size 4. Thank you!
 
I vote for traps. The second pic you posted minus pave or 5 stone minus bullets look like the right proportions to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top