jet2ks
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,022
First of all, it's great that you're being conscious of this! It happens a lot, with either gender, that we pick out things for our SOs that are a bit too much what WE like and not enough what THEY like.Date: 2/6/2009 1:11:17 PM
Author: jet2ks
I guess I am just afraid of projecting my likes/dislikes too much.
Ditto Musey!Date: 2/6/2009 2:38:31 PM
Author: musey
First of all, it''s great that you''re being conscious of this! It happens a lot, with either gender, that we pick out things for our SOs that are a bit too much what WE like and not enough what THEY like.Date: 2/6/2009 1:11:17 PM
Author: jet2ks
I guess I am just afraid of projecting my likes/dislikes too much.
These are the things you said that jumped out at me:
''A straight solitare would not be to her taste, but neither would something with a lot of sidestones like a Pave setting''
-and-
''slightly traditional, but with a little ''funkiness'' to it''
Have you thought about a center stone in a shape other than round? Round Brilliants are certainly the ''safest'' choice for a surprise ring because they are the most commonly preferred, but since you said that a ''straight solitaire'' wouldn''t cut it, but that something traditional with a bit of funkiness to it would be good, I immediately thought of fancy shapes.
Maybe something with a non-round center and just two sidestones of some shape, or a round center with fancy-shaped sidestones (like side trillions, or half-moons?).
Does that sound like something that could possibly work? If so, we can find you some pictures for inspiration![]()
Those are fantastic!!Date: 2/6/2009 3:05:24 PM
Author: geckodani
Or.... a slightly funky setting that flows a bit better? Here are two Scholdt designs from Pearlmans:
![]()
Date: 2/6/2009 3:13:47 PM
Author: musey
Those are fantastic!!Date: 2/6/2009 3:05:24 PM
Author: geckodani
Or.... a slightly funky setting that flows a bit better? Here are two Scholdt designs from Pearlmans:
I do really like that setting and she would, too, but is probably out of budget right now. We''ll see what rebate from Uncle Sam and my annual bonus from work come in at and I might be able to work something like that with a smaller stone for now and upgrade in a few years. Definitely will keep it in mind!Date: 2/6/2009 3:06:02 PM
Author: purrfectpear
Of the two, I also prefer the second ring. Have you considered something like the Petite Champagne by Whiteflash?
It''s different but still feminine. Pic Here
After doing some initial looking, I had budgeted about 800 for the setting. If I found a really good setting, I would be willing to go with a smaller stone initially and upgrade later. The main thing was that I wanted balance between the stone and setting, no one part to just really jump out too much.Date: 2/6/2009 3:39:41 PM
Author: EBree
jet,
If you don't mind my asking, what kind of a budget are you working with? For setting only, or for setting and stone?
Date: 2/6/2009 3:46:44 PM
Author: DebShine
BTW - you said fashion jewelry with comtemporary colors, which my me think of color which is why I suggested so much color.....
K... nuff said... sounding foolish......![]()
So far, I like this one best. It is contemporary but classic too. Nice choice!Date: 2/6/2009 4:49:25 PM
Author: jet2ks
OK, I just found this one on Excel Diamonds website. It has some of that twisty/bendy thing going from the Morrell & Scholdt designs and is well within budget. What do you think?
Oooh - I like it! Funky but classic still. Very nice!Date: 2/6/2009 4:49:25 PM
Author: jet2ks
OK, I just found this one on Excel Diamonds website. It has some of that twisty/bendy thing going from the Morrell & Scholdt designs and is well within budget. What do you think?