Jann Paul EC 3-Stone Journey

[momofive]

AS for the setting. If I go with a girdle rail, should I do it on just the center diamond or all 3? I need all those setting experts to please respond!!

 

[emmy12]

A very fast mockup for consideration.

 

[momofive]

A very fast mockup for consideration.

Thank you. Are you saying to put the pave where you have black??

 

[momofive]

Thank you. Are you saying to put the pave where you have black??

If yes, I'm leaning towards all 3. I think it might look unfinished if not.

 

[momofive]

I really need opinions!

 

[momofive]

I did a mock up in photoshop with some diamond images I found online. Unfortunately they look a little blue, but you'll get the idea. What do you think?

 

[PastryGirl]

Hi all
Avery at JP sent me renderings of 3 different size ECs with .5 side stones. So I could see the proportions. I want the sides to complement and not overwhelm the center stone. I’m leaning towards the 3.3 or 3.5ct I would love to hear your thoughts. She is also going to mock up how it will look on my actual hand. I wouldn’t go any larger than 3.5 for the center but could go smaller with the side stones.
Both sets of mock-ups are the same. One is just with reflection.

I like the 3.3

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

I would not add pave. Just another annoying stone to lose, I would opt for milgrain if you really just want some detail.

 

[momofive]

I like the 3.3

Can you please tell me why you like it?

I would not add pave. Just another annoying stone to lose, I would opt for milgrain if you really just want some detail

It’s not that I’m liking to add. I just want to know if the stone is too exposed.
Everyone here is way more experienced with these things than me. Do you think it needs it for safety?

 

[HGar]

I’m no help as I prefer clean lines so I like the bar just left alone, highly polished. But I’m still in love with your ring I don’t think you can go wrong any which way.

 

[emmy12]

Thank you. Are you saying to put the pave where you have black??

The black was because I didn't have a grey option to draw with

 

[momofive]

I’m no help as I prefer clean lines so I like the bar just left alone, highly polished. But I’m still in love with your ring I don’t think you can go wrong any which way.

Thank you. As they have to grow the diamond I have plenty of time to decide on the setting but I’m a planner and do t like to do thinks under pressure. I don’t want to rush. I like to do research.

The black was because I didn't have a grey option to draw with

I figured that out after I opened the image again on my computer. Thanks!

 

[PastryGirl]

Can you please tell me why you like it?

The proportions look better to my eye. I prefer fatter emerald cuts over more elongated ones. I omitted the 3.0 (it was the lowest carat weight ) and compared the 3.3 and 3.5 only.

 

[Inked]

I like the 3.5. I dont feel like its a significant enough change to be where it's suddenly "too big" so I would then go for the slightly bigger. They kinda look the same to me. LOL Of course it's personal preference but i LOOOOVE the pave

 

[momofive]

I like the 3.5. I dont feel like its a significant enough change to be where it's suddenly "too big" so I would then go for the slightly bigger. They kinda look the same to me. LOL Of course it's personal preference but i LOOOOVE the pave

Thank you. I have time to decide on the setting so I think I’ll ask her to mock it up properly with and without the pave.

 

[momofive]

JP just sent me the hand shots with the rendering superimposed. Let me know what you think. She said we can slightly increase the sides of the 3.5 if that is the one I decide to go with. I'd appreciate your thoughts. She will also get me the dimensions
of each center stone. Please excuse the chafed fingers. Had an allergic reaction to a gel manicure. Never happened before.

 

[momofive]

Also. She showed me a setting with the diamond gallery raid and it seemed too much for me. I am going to go with classic polished tails.

 

[CalliopeCladdagh]

I prefer the overall proportions of the 3.3 on your hand. For some reason the 3.5 almost looks... masculine? to me. But honestly you can't go wrong either way.

 

[momofive]

I prefer the overall proportions of the 3.3 on your hand. For some reason the 3.5 almost looks... masculine? to me. But honestly you can't go wrong either way.

Thank you for your opinion. So far, the 3.3 is winning the consensus. It's such a slight difference, but I do see the 3.5 as being wider and I originally was looking for a 1.40 ratio when I was looking at EGD. JP only makes 1.35 ratio in order to match their 111 faceted cut. So the diamond is a bit wider than long. I can see what you and the others are saying.

 

[HGar]

I’m with Calliope, I’m loving the 3.3ct on your hands.

 

[momofive]

I’m with Calliope, I’m loving the 3.3ct on your hands.

So here is my question. The LxW ration is negligible in a comparison between the 3.3 & 3.5. Because of the way they cut the facets their emeralds are all 1.35’s. The 3.3 is 7.40x9.98x4.84 which is 1.3486.. And the 3.5 is 7.55x10.20x4.92 which is 1.3509. I’m trying to figure out how a 0.22mm difference in the width of the stone would make a big difference. I’’m also wondering, looking at the photos, if the 3.5 is more zoomed in and if that is making it look that way.

I am recognizing in myself that I am not good at noticing small mm differences in gemstones and pearls, whereas some of you on here can tell just by looking at something (or at least get very close).

Don’t get me wrong. I’m leaning towards the 3.3 as well, I’m just trying to rationalize it in my head. I would think if the lxw ratio is the same, the rings should have the same visual “feel” on my hand and the only noticeable difference would be the proportion of the side stones as they are both 0.5.

Maybe there is a math geek on here who could explain what is going on.

 

[momofive]

So, my daughter also liked the 3.3 without any prejudice. But I would still like my math/proportion questions answered if possible.

 

[momofive]

Good morning! So here is an actual photo of an actual 3.2ct center diamond with 0.5ct sides. JP got this in for another client and she sent along a photo to give me a better idea IRL. Avery’s fingers are definitely younger and thinner than mine. Thoughts? I think I’m leaning towards the 3.3ct. Based on most recommendations here and also from my daughter and sister, but I still don’t wee much difference. Ugh! I think it’s so beautiful and now I’m going to have to wait FOREVER!! LOL

 

[momofive]

For anyone who wants to compare JP Emerald 2.0 to an industry Ideal cut, here are links to the ASETS.

Top down swing
Figure 8 swing
Side swing

 

[Diamond Girl 21]

For anyone who wants to compare JP Emerald 2.0 to an industry Ideal cut, here are links to the ASETS.

Top down swing
Figure 8 swing
Side swing

The JP emerald cut looks amazing!

 

[momofive]

So. I've decided to go with the 3.3ct. center EC and the 0.5 sides. That was the consensus here and also with my family. Now all I have to do it wait. I'll come back and share when I get the ring.

Thank you all for your input.

 

[momofive]

Yikes! I really need help. So JP sent me the wax ring today. I'm not happy with the finger coverage. The images, including the hand images, made the ring look so much larger. I know the diamonds themselves, will be radiant, which will affect the appearance of size, but is this normal?

I am also considering going with larger side stones so it looks like a 3 stone, instead of a center with 2 smaller side stones.

Or, maybe I should ask if I can go up to 4ct - 4.5ct. and adjust the side stones as needed.

I am attaching several views and also a side by side with my current 2ct. radiant with halo.

I have to admit, even in these photos the ring looks larger than it looks IRL.

 

[awessum-possum]

I discovered this corner of the internet a few months ago and only recently started formulating my own opinions on jewelry and aesthetics while looking into an engagement ring for my GF (read: I don't know squat so please take this with a grain of salt ):

IMO, more finger coverage will look nicer on your hand. I think each stone's length-to-width ratio is spot on though! So, I'd personally increase the size on all three diamonds, if budget permits. By how much? You'll first need to decide whether you want a three stone or a center stone with two side stones. Totally different looks and I'm sure JP wouldn't mind rendering both. I'd say you current design lands somewhere in the middle which I personally like; that is, I personally like the current ratio between the size of the center stone and side stones. So, I'd scale them up linearly from their current size. And lastly, I think the side stones are angled just a tad bit too steeply (3-6 degrees?). This is most apparent to me in Picture 4. A slightly more shallower angle should also help a bit with finger coverage.

 

[momofive]

I discovered this corner of the internet a few months ago and only recently started formulating my own opinions on jewelry and aesthetics while looking into an engagement ring for my GF (read: I don't know squat so please take this with a grain of salt ):

IMO, more finger coverage will look nicer on your hand. I think each stone's length-to-width ratio is spot on though! So, I'd personally increase the size on all three diamonds, if budget permits. By how much? You'll first need to decide whether you want a three stone or a center stone with two side stones. Totally different looks and I'm sure JP wouldn't mind rendering both. I'd say you current design lands somewhere in the middle which I personally like; that is, I personally like the current ratio between the size of the center stone and side stones. So, I'd scale them up linearly from their current size. And lastly, I think the side stones are angled just a tad bit too steeply (3-6 degrees?). This is most apparent to me in Picture 4. A slightly more shallower angle should also help a bit with finger coverage.

Thank you for your thoughts and observations. I definitely feel I need to do something.

 

[emmy12]

Yikes! I really need help. So JP sent me the wax ring today. I'm not happy with the finger coverage. The images, including the hand images, made the ring look so much larger. I know the diamonds themselves, will be radiant, which will affect the appearance of size, but is this normal?

I am also considering going with larger side stones so it looks like a 3 stone, instead of a center with 2 smaller side stones.

Or, maybe I should ask if I can go up to 4ct - 4.5ct. and adjust the side stones as needed.

I am attaching several views and also a side by side with my current 2ct. radiant with halo.

I have to admit, even in these photos the ring looks larger than it looks IRL.

What's the outer dimension of your current radiant + halo? I'd bet you'll need to start from the same WxH for the new center stone to not feel like you've lost size.