Got my Jubilee - it is fantastic! Need setting guidance, please!

[IslandStone]

Ok, so I followed the advice of the PS village and had Jonathan send the stone to me so that I could judge for myself whether or not the stone itself, including the strong blue fluorescence, appealed to me (search for my previous thread for details). To refresh, the stone I am considering is a beautiful 1.09/D/VVS1 Jubilee with strong blue fluorescence.

After spending the weekend with the stone and observing it under as many lighting conditions as possible, I love the diamond. The fluorescence is hardly noticeable, even in direct sun light, and when that slight lavender or blue-ish color does show in the diamond, I actually like it. Like many of you would, I appreciate the stone’s fluorescence. Most of all, the diamond sparkles and flashes like a true champ, even more so than I expected.

I do wish that the spread were a bit larger (6.08x6.07) – would have preferred that to be 10-15% larger. However, I don’t think the lack of size, as compared to an RB of similar weight, is a significant issue, particularly because of how well the stone performs. I think the sparkle and fire is what will catch people’s attention, not that the stone isn’t gigantic.

So, assuming I don’t change my mind in the near future (not a given, considering how many tmes I’ve gone back and forth to this point!), I’m interested in setting this diamond in a simple, classic but stylish, solitaire setting. I have spoken to Leon Mege about a simple solitaire setting, set low, claw prongs (of course!), tapered shank, etc. Abstractly, I think that would look lovely.

My question, however, are these:

1) Given the qualities of the Jubilee and the size of this stone (1.09c – 6.08x6.07), do you guys have any recommendations on the best way to show it off in the setting? Most importantly, I want the stone to be set such that it performs to the best of its ability.

2) The wearer is tall (5’9”) and slender with a ring size of 5.5. Is there a general rule of thumb (or ring finger) as to how a thin or thick band affects how large/small the stone looks? Besides maximizing performance, I don’t want the setting to make the stone look small. In fact, it would be great if the setting made the stone appear larger.

As always, thanks for your help.

 

[belle]

so glad to hear you are happy with the stone. i knew you would be!!
leon does amazing work. i think after you speak with him a few times, you will be able to collaberate something truly wonderful. best of luck. i can''t wait to see what you come up with!!

 

[valeria101]

I am very convinced that no one else but the wearer can decide what looks best on their hands... There are lots of "rules" but none appear more than a matter of taste.

Can you let the lady decide on the setting ?

IMO, small, thin rings get lost on the hand, even if a wire-like thin shank makes a diamond set in prongs look relatively larger in a photo with no other object around to show real size. On hand the trick doesn't seem to hold quite as well. BUT... engagement rings are at least sometimes worn next to a wedding band - and the stack will look substantial anyway.


Here's one story:
I wish I had a photo of a certain coworker's hand: she has the longest fingers (ring size 6-7, but so long they seem extremely slender) with one 10mm wide wedding band and a very dainty (think 2mm band and probably 1 carat or so square diamond) diamond ring stached on top or worn on the middle finger. At first I thought the ring was part of the w-band design ! The wide band looks as if designed on purpose for her hand. The small ring gets lost completely... But that is Sharon. And 10mm ladies' wedding bands are not common at all.