- Joined
- Jan 11, 2006
- Messages
- 58,579
diamondseeker2006|1475328592|4082629 said:I think you are upset about some aspects that are not valid.
diamondseeker2006|1475328317|4082627 said:I am also confused about whether the new ring is platinum or not, but platinum is sometimes rhodium plated. Not a thing wrong with that, especially if you were worried about it being gray. Those rings come to the jeweler unfinished. The jeweler sets the stones and polishes the ring. So there was nothing wrong with the setting looking gray in its unfinished state.
I have to say this to be honest, those baguettes are the perfect size for your center stone. Had you gone larger, it would have been out of proportion and not looked right. I also think wearing two wide bands with a thin solitaire setting is throwing the proportions off and making the e-ring kind of overwhelmed. I'd wear only one of the wide bands with it at a time. Or maybe just a thin 2mm diamond band between the wedding band and e-ring.
If you want more substance, I think a three stone ring with three emerald cuts would be the best choice. I do not think larger baguettes will look right. I think wearing it with a wider wedding band, the shank needs to be at least 2.5mm, too.
Poodles4me|1475302902|4082580 said:I've read through this thread 3 times and I'm still a bit confused. Is your new set platinum as you mentioned in your first post or is it white gold that was inadvertently ordered and rhodium plating added after? If the new setting is platinum I see no reason for the jeweller to plate it with rhodium and if so, what was her explanation to you for doing this?
tyty333|1475326106|4082616 said:I'm sorry it didn't turn out the way you were hoping.
Besides the water spots (terrible but quickly alleviated), the ring looks pretty to me.
Questions:
-did you go from platinum in your old setting to white gold? Platinum is way heavier than white gold so that is the lightNess you're feeling.
-white gold is almost always rhodium plated (that would be consider
The norm) so unless you specify not to have it platted then they will do it. Sorry it looks like it was sloppily done.
- setting pages usually have measurements on them so on the Stuller page you should have seen the measurements. Your jeweler should have gone over it with you.
Please don't have anything else done without letting us help you. We can make sure you ask all the right questions so you get what you want.
I'm sorry this is costing you a fortune and you're not getting what you wanted. I hope in the future we can help you get a reset that you'll love.
diamondseeker2006|1475328317|4082627 said:I am also confused about whether the new ring is platinum or not, but platinum is sometimes rhodium plated. Not a thing wrong with that, especially if you were worried about it being gray. Those rings come to the jeweler unfinished. The jeweler sets the stones and polishes the ring. So there was nothing wrong with the setting looking gray in its unfinished state.
I have to say this to be honest, those baguettes are the perfect size for your center stone. Had you gone larger, it would have been out of proportion and not looked right. I also think wearing two wide bands with a thin solitaire setting is throwing the proportions off and making the e-ring kind of overwhelmed. I'd wear only one of the wide bands with it at a time. Or maybe just a thin 2mm diamond band between the wedding band and e-ring.
If you want more substance, I think a three stone ring with three emerald cuts would be the best choice. I do not think larger baguettes will look right. I think wearing it with a wider wedding band, the shank needs to be at least 2.5mm, too.
diamondseeker2006|1475328592|4082629 said:It is nickel in white gold that people are allergic to, not rhodium. So if this ring is platinum, the rhodium should not be an issue. I am sorry you don't like the ring, but I think you are upset about some aspects that are not valid.
diamondseeker2006|1475328592|4082629 said:It is nickel in white gold that people are allergic to, not rhodium. So if this ring is platinum, the rhodium should not be an issue. I am sorry you don't like the ring, but I think you are upset about some aspects that are not valid.
Poodles4me|1475338035|4082666 said:I think you need to step back, calm down and try to look at your ring with a fresh perspective and think about what you don't like and what needs to be done to make it right. You had a similar situation with your wedding band and you found a solution.
N-jo|1475343741|4082686 said:Poodles4me|1475338035|4082666 said:I think you need to step back, calm down and try to look at your ring with a fresh perspective and think about what you don't like and what needs to be done to make it right. You had a similar situation with your wedding band and you found a solution.
did I? It's been 10 years, I'd forgotten I had originally gotten a matte finish and had it changed to different size. But they were easy to work with.
Do I come across as extra-gripey? If so, I'm sorry. I read through here and see others with issues and panic and upset. I appreciate all the input and reassurance. I apologize for being cranky about the ring I will wear daily. I don't upgrade often, in fact this was to be the ONLY updgrad. Yes, my EC is miniature by comparison to all the rocks here, but I love it and would never trade it.
I guess I will go to a different jeweler, have my diamond put back into original setting, and hope I can unload the new setting. Thanks again for responding.
PintoBean|1475389353|4082844 said:Do you ever go to Houston? Why not reach out to Brian Gavin or Whiteflash?
Just ask for a refund. If she says no, then come back here and we'll brainstorm with you.
N-jo|1475341870|4082677 said:This ring LOOKS as if it was dipped in something, there's a drip on it. It is incredibly light.
PintoBean|1475392048|4082850 said:Is this something that you would like? 4mm thick band, and of course the head would have to be appropriate for an EC
http://www.whiteflash.com/engagement-rings/solitaire/x-prong-diamond-solitaire-for-princess-776.htm
distracts|1475444305|4082991 said:N-jo|1475341870|4082677 said:This ring LOOKS as if it was dipped in something, there's a drip on it. It is incredibly light.[/qu
, I don't think a single baguette on each side is going to be the way to go, as the bands are usually around the same width as the baguette and those are skinny. I've never seen a 3mm thick ring with single baguettes on either side.
I think you went into this with very unclear ideas of what you wanted, and what you said you wanted and the settings you showed the jeweler were two different things, and I don't think you should blame her for not being a mind-reader and ferreting out your true heart's desire from the conflicting ideas you presented. Quite frankly that seems very unfair to the jeweler, who seems to have held up her end of the bargain by ordering the ring you picked out and setting your stone in it.
I think you may want to look for a setting like one of these to change it into: https://www.jamesallen.com/engagement-rings/channel-set/platinum-baguette-diamond-engagement-ring-item-50315 or http://www.bluenile.com/build-your-own-ring/truly-zac-posen-three-stone-emerald-diamond-engagement-ring_55259?elem=title&track=product but as others have said, you may have to go custom. Skinny rings are popular right now so it is harder to find thicker and more substantial ones.
Bonfire|1475436382|4082956 said:I think you absolutely must talk with your jeweler friend again about your dissatisfaction with the setting. Tell her everything you have told us. Be calm but spell it out for her. She has offered to round the shank to make it more comfortable but that doesn't address the "thinness" issue. Perhaps you can come to a satisfactory resolution for both of you. I do think you need to request an entirely different setting.