Friday Poll: Three Big Antiques

[twosanguinehearts]

Happy Friday, all! I’ve been continuing my hunt for a large antique OMC ring to wear on my wedding finger, and three options are rising to the top. They are all totally and completely different from one another - which accurately sums up my love for ALL gorgeous rings vs. being able to hone in on one ideal style. All three are within a similar budget range and would be a significant investment. I’m curious to hear what all of you would choose if these were your options!

Ring number one is an original antique cluster with a spready, just under 3 carat center stone. It sits incredibly close to the finger, and it shines and shimmers. I love the idea of a completely original antique, and this one is a delicate beauty. The cut on the stone is pretty, though a bit wonky, with the slightest bit of skin showing through in certain angles. Not enough to drive me nuts, but worth noting. The center is much smaller than what I’ve been searching for, but trying to decide if the white color and overall large appearance of the ring makes up for this.





Stone number two is a big mama, my DREAM size, shape and cut. It’s literal perfection when it comes to those things, and a rare find. She’s warm at an O, but very bright and lively. While this is warmer than I was initially hoping for, I do like the idea of setting it in a yellow gold solitaire or organic bezel to contrast the stone. The bold gold jewelry look has been grabbing my attention lately. I would have the interior basket rhodium or platinum plated so additional warmth doesn’t reflect into the stone. I love a big diamond, and I know that in order to afford one, I will need to sacrifice something (until I become a millionaire). The large OMCs I’ve owned in the past were slightly whiter, but the cuts were not for me. I’ve realized that faceting is not the place to sacrifice IMO. This stone is truly gorgeous.




Ring number three is one I have not seen in person. I know many of you took note of this one on Instagram. Those who have seen it in person say it’s one of the most gorgeous rings they’ve encountered. It’s an original Victorian three stone in a unique gypsy style setting. The center stone is around 3.72 + K color, and the sides 1.44 each, J color. I have never considered a three stone ring, but this one is mesmerizing in the videos. The photos and videos were taken indoors, and I don’t like that I can’t evaluate the cut and faceting of the stones, nor the face up color. I could buy it with a return, but would be on the hook for very significant shipping fees if I sent it back. Don’t think this one tops the list, but I love what I see enough to be intrigued.

 

[DmdRunner]

Stone #2 is just so gorgeous in my opinion of which I disclose I have no real knowledge of antique cuts. Just aesthetically it is beautiful to my eye.

 

[peppermintpatty]

Faceting is not the place to sacrifice- there is your answer! Number 2! It also has the size. I think it faces up whiter than I thought it would. A yellow gold solitaire will be beautiful! I also don’t think you will tire of it. It’s still a classic in a solitaire and you can have fun with various bands. I love it!!!

 

[maryjane04]

I vote #2. You can never go wrong with a large and in charge honker of a diamond. I heard that old cuts in bigger sizes are getting harder and harder to come by. And finding one with the perfect cut is a unicorn.

The cut on #1 is not good that I would not find it enjoyable to look at besides the white face up. I do appreciate the true antique setting.

For #3 I do like it, but I feel like it wouldn't replace a solitaire engagement style ring. Unless you're going for a chunky band (E ring plus wedder in one).

If I could have just one, it would be #2. But that's just me hahaha what do I know lol.

 

[foxinsox]

2 based on how you’ve described it. And it’s a beautiful stone too.

 

[CMN]

I voted for number 2 - clear winner to me

 

[Mreader]

Ok definitely not 1. I don’t think it’s well cut. I LOVE number two - beautiful stone. BUT when I saw you were considering 3 I literally gasped. My husband who was sitting beside me said “what’s wrong??!!” Haha. I startled him. I’ve been gaga over that ring since it’s been posted. Anyway that ring is SO special. I would get that one; then start saving up again for a stone like 2 so you can have both Hahahhaha.

ETA - didn’t you have a stone that was similar in size to number two but you sold it because it was too warm? And I think that stone was actually a higher color than number two.

ETA One more time. I think the voters need to see the third one in action because the screenshots do not do it justice at all. But I don’t want to put the link in case you were not wanting to disclose the seller. So I will let you put the link link if you decide to do so.

 

[lulu_ma]

Does #2 have color zoning?

 

[YadaYadaYada]

2 gets my vote. Apparently 3 is stunning in video and the pictures don’t do it justice so after seeing a video of that one, I might change my vote

 

[YadaYadaYada]

Okay so saw the video and that ring #3 is amazing! I think if you are in love with it as a finished piece, that may be the way to go. If you want a project then the loose stone might be better. I don’t think you can go wrong between the two.

 

[oldcutclubmember]

I’m so torn between 2 and 3 but ultimately picked 2 on the poll. The faceting on 2 appears to be so so pretty. The lovely flowery petals immediately drew my attention. But @Mreader makes a good point about the color. Was the OMC you returned an N? Was it the color that bothered you the most about it?

3 is absolutely gorgeous as a genuine antique ring and I am in awe of that setting. But I also can’t tell the cut qualities of the stone and I think you will get DSS pretty fast with it. I went back to look at the pics and videos from the vendor. I also question the clarity of the stones and the fact that approx clarity is not mentioned in the details by the vendor makes me wonder why. Have you reached out to see what the estimated clarity is? Can you fly over to see it in person (may end up actually being cheaper than shipping it back and forth).

 

[missy]

I would choose #2 if and this is a big if, the warmth doesn't bother you. In fact if you embrace the warmth that would be my choice. Otherwise, in my experience it might gnaw away at you and bother you more with time.

If not I would keep looking as I have found if it doesn't scratch that proverbial itch now it never will. Keep looking til you find "the one" if this isn't it

 

[twosanguinehearts]

Ok definitely not 1. I don’t think it’s well cut. I LOVE number two - beautiful stone. BUT when I saw you were considering 3 I literally gasped. My husband who was sitting beside me said “what’s wrong??!!” Haha. I startled him. I’ve been gaga over that ring since it’s been posted. Anyway that ring is SO special. I would get that one; then start saving up again for a stone like 2 so you can have both Hahahhaha.

ETA - didn’t you have a stone that was similar in size to number two but you sold it because it was too warm? And I think that stone was actually a higher color than number two.

ETA One more time. I think the voters need to see the third one in action because the screenshots do not do it justice at all. But I don’t want to put the link in case you were not wanting to disclose the seller. So I will let you put the link link if you decide to do so.

Thank you for the feedback! Yes, I did previously have a large, warm, old mine. Back then I was convinced that I needed to go with a white metal setting, which I don’t think honored the color in the same way. The cut of that stone was also not as incredible as this one. I’m happy to post the video for the third. I am unsure enough about it since seeing it in person is not an option prior to purchase.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[twosanguinehearts]

Does #2 have color zoning?

No, it’s likely reflecting something. The color is even throughout with no extra concentration in the middle or around the edges.

 

[Mreader]

@twosanguinehearts understandable. It sounds as if the 3rd isn't that much of a consideration . For me, I would want both and the third looks like one of those "you're never going to see a ring like that again" whereas a soli is something that can be done and though stones in that size are certainly rare, they aren't impossible to find.

ETA - the ring in your avatar - is that a stone you currently own?

 

[twosanguinehearts]

Number 2:

 

[twosanguinehearts]

@twosanguinehearts understandable. It sounds as if the 3rd isn't that much of a consideration . For me, I would want both and the third looks like one of those "you're never going to see a ring like that again" whereas a soli is something that can be done and though stones in that size are certainly rare, they aren't impossible to find.

ETA - the ring in your avatar - is that a stone you currently own?

I totally agree! I LOVE Victorian rings, and while a three stone was never my goal, the setting on this one makes it feel so chic! I really wish I could see it without dropping $$$$$ on shipping which seems to be the only option.

I sold the stone in my avatar. It was whiter, but the center was not crisp at all and it drove me nuts! I’d probably go with a similar setting for a new stone if I go in the solitaire direction.

 

[VRBeauty]

I’m torn between 2 and 3, but leaning towards 2 because it’s just such a beautiful stone.

1 would drive me batty because it sits so low. I suppose I could, maybe, get used to that but… why? It seems less elegant and interesting than a setting that has some elevation.

One thing I like about 2 is that it’s open to so many setting options. Because the stone is so beautiful (and large!) on its own, it it doesn’t need to be dressed up and could be set in anything.

I’ve also drooled over 3, but seeing it next to 2, it seems kind of fussy.

 

[Bonfire]

#2! That stone is gorgeous! Lovely faceting , as long as you don’t find it too warm. Nothing like a big honking solitaire, yum! <3

 

[RMOO]

In my opinion, you answered your own question with this description of #2:

my DREAM size, shape and cut. It’s literal perfection when it comes to those things, and a rare find.

and

This stone is truly gorgeous.

#1 is too low for my taste.

While #3 is pretty, I agree with @VRBeauty that it is fussy. And to my eye the diamonds appear grey, but I'm no expert so take that with a grain of salt.

I would take that 6 carat honker any day of the week!!

 

[mrs-b]

Definitely #2 - and this from a well known 3 stone ring lover!

Its cut is everything, and I love that elongated OMC shape - nothing to get bored with here!

As for the color, it's only a porblem if you try to force it to be something it isn't. Work *with* it - lots of high kt apricot gold - and it will be jaw dropping! Frankly, I wouldn't rhodium plate the basket; it's never going to be white, so work *with* its warmth and try to bring out its pure gold flashes!

Lush.

 

[sweetpea&babycorn]

While I'm sure you are agonizing and analyzing which one to choose, I think this is such a fun dilemma to be facing!

That being said, I would go with #2 HANDS DOWN. It's a gorgeous stone and does not exude any kind of "yellowness" to me. To me it looks like a very romantic warm vanilla, like how you would see if under candlelight as the cutter of the stone did. I also feel like there's SO much you can do with it. I've seen PSers made a wrap to turn their solitaire into a 3 stone, and I think someone would make something similar for a halo.

 

[twosanguinehearts]

Definitely #2 - and this from a well known 3 stone ring lover!

Its cut is everything, and I love that elongated OMC shape - nothing to get bored with here!

As for the color, it's only a porblem if you try to force it to be something it isn't. Work *with* it - lots of high kt apricot gold - and it will be jaw dropping! Frankly, I wouldn't rhodium plate the basket; it's never going to be white, so work *with* its warmth and try to bring out its pure gold flashes!

Lush.

I love this take, and I think you are so right about working with what the stone is. When I previously had my large N color stone, I thought yellow gold would be too trendy, or something I would grow tired of. But then I saw the Jewels by Grace “Daddy Shark” ring, for those familiar, I was blown away by how the yellow gold setting brought an even lower color diamond straight to life. Since then, I have tried on other yellow gold settings with lower colored OMCs, and it’s just a whole different ball game. If I do go with this big girl, I just need to figure out what the best setting would be to incorporate some of that delicious contrast while also not adding massive size to the already massive stone. Something similar to these would be top contenders at the moment.

 

[MamaBear]

Definitely, #2. That stone is drop dead gorgeous!!!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Part of why I enjoy old cut diamonds is the rarity and the fact that they will become more rare over time. and I like for the value of my rings to be mostly, or almost entirely, held in the central diamond. For these reasons I would personally choose the second option. It is the most valuable and rare option! Like others have said, I would lean into the color and encourage its warmth. I love the warmth of very tinted diamonds. And old ones just melt me.

@springsparkle has a gorgeous OP colored OEC in a yellow gold bezel that leans into the color. She posted this video a while ago showing her OP next to an H color MRB. My eye is absolutely drawn to the rich buttery color of the OP! I would like to own a diamond in this color range some day and I would set it to play up and enhance the color as much as possible.

I’ve been meaning to share this video comparing an O/P color OEC to an H color RB!

https://imgur.com/a/32RPras

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

#3 for me
I would break all my own internal size rules to have that ring, and ah, maybe some others. It even has the folate aspects to the mount that I love. It may be the most beautiful ring I've ever seen.
Nom'I'm sayin'?

But for you?
Your fit is #2.
It is what you're asking for, it has the cut and the crystal. It has the 'caratage'. It's beautifully proportioned. I really don't even know why we're talking about it. It's already done. It's yours. This stone, in a liquid gold bezel? YES.

 

[twosanguinehearts]

Part of why I enjoy old cut diamonds is the rarity and the fact that they will become more rare over time. and I like for the value of my rings to be mostly, or almost entirely, held in the central diamond. For these reasons I would personally choose the second option. It is the most valuable and rare option! Like others have said, I would lean into the color and encourage its warmth. I love the warmth of very tinted diamonds. And old ones just melt me.

@springsparkle has a gorgeous OP colored OEC in a yellow gold bezel that leans into the color. She posted this video a while ago showing her OP next to an H color MRB. My eye is absolutely drawn to the rich buttery color of the OP! I would like to own a diamond in this color range some day and I would set it to play up and enhance the color as much as possible.

OMG that is beyond stunning!! Thank you so much for this reference, I don't think I saw it before!

 

[PastryGirl]

I voted without looking at the pics, and now that I have seen them I take back my support for #3, I am #2 all the way!

 

[AprilBaby]

Number two by a mile!

 

[lulu_ma]

I love, love #3. But I think it's a secondary or tertiary ring.

Now that I know that there is no color zoning, I vote for #2 wholeheartedly. The cut looks fab. My only concern is if it will be too warm for you. I have a HRD M so probably a GIA OP. I love it most of the time.