New Antique Platinum OEC Ring

[LGK]

So I have now ended up with a *pair* of Old European Cut diamonds. The first one I got is a 1.22 ct N/SI1, which I posted a while ago, in a temp setting. I shopped, and shopped and SHOPPED AND SHOPPED for a final setting. Basically anything Van Craeynest was what I really wanted, and also what the DH liked, but the prices, starting at well over what I paid for just the diamond, pained me far too much- I mean, I could probably have talked the DH into it, but I just. couldn''t. do. it. Eventually, I was thinking of "settling" for a Beverly K repro at a mere $1700. Which the more I thought about it, the more it galled me to spend that much on a setting I just didn''t love.

So we finally went back to an antique ring I''d considered whilst shopping for diamonds originally. Yes it was on EEK EBAY, but the seller was OK with me spending some time deciding on whether I''d keep it or not, and the setting was *perfect*. The setting is an antique platinum die struck one, with that lovely perfect micro-millegrain that only the original antique ones and Van Craeynest have (that I''ve seen), and the engraving is gorgeous like the best antique pieces have. I love the design. I don''t think I could get JUST the setting reproduced for the price I paid for it WITH a 1.08 ct diamond. It''s a P/Q color I think, and is loupe clean, so I''m guessing VS something clarity (excepting a tiny chip on the girdle).

Here''s the interesting bit. The diamond in the setting isn''t off color towards yellow, it''s pinkish grey, and it changes in different light, from a mostly white but slightly steely color in overcast daylight, to deep grey in spot halogen lighting, to mostly pink in just about every other condition. I''ve never seen anything quite like it and I''ve seen many, MANY off color diamonds in my line of work (an antique mall with lots of estate jewelry). It has very little brown, no orange, and no yellow at all. I''d intended to swap the stones, and sell the one that''s in the platinum setting, but I''m really intrigued with the color. Plus, it has strong blue fluorescence, which I''ve always wanted. However, the original 1.22 carat OEC is a teeeeeny bit firier (and bigger! but same diameter), which it took me about a half hour to determine while fiddling with them in the bathroom where the light is best. Tough decision! They''re both beautiful stones, with great fire. The 1.22 is significantly deeper.

I''m still leaning towards swapping the stones, and then selling the pink/grey one at our antique mall, but I dunno... it''s awfully unique looking, and maybe I should just keep it myself since it might not be everyone''s cup-o-tea. I also showed it to several of our dealers who sell antique jewelry who were in the mall today, and one of them asked me what I paid for it- when I told her, her jaw literally dropped open, and she actually sputtered for a second- I thought for a second "Oh god, she thinks I paid way too much!", but it was quite the opposite, as it turns out. You can''t fake a reaction like that! (She, incidentally, voted for the new pink/grey stone.) Anybody got any input? Some pics following, which sorta show the color- it doesn''t photograph real well, unfortunately, it goes more grey than it is in real life.

 

[LGK]

Next.

 

[LGK]

Another.

 

[LGK]

And, the most I could get the cat to model with the ring- a gigantic hairy paw.

 

[Ellen]

I''d put whichever one you love best in the setting, but I definitely would not get rid of this one, if it''s not first choice! Keep it until something clicks as to what to do with it.

 

[kellyfish]

I love the sapphire accents!!

 

[isis~goddess]

im jealous. so keep it!!!

 

[reader]

I LOVE that pink-grey one...with or without the mount....here is hoping I see it at an antique store near me!
Could we see a pic of the other stone?

 

[orbaya]

I love it! If it''s your "perfect" setting, then you need to keep it!!

Will either size stone fit comfortably in that setting?

 

[Catmom]

OH MY GOODNESS, what an AWESOME setting. I love it!! I also love the stone that''s in it. If the other one is better than this one then I can''t even imagine what the ring would be like. Either way you do it I would definitely keep this diamond!!

 

[cushioncutnut]

It is just lovely! I worry that you may regret selling it. The setting it is in is just beautiful... I would consider putting the other stone is this setting and taking this stone and putting it in rose gold to enhance the pinkish grey tone.

 

[mercoledi]

What an awful problem to have! It looks like a lovely stone, tons of personality. If you do decide to swap them, I second whomever recommended rose gold.

Gorgeous!

 

[LGK]

Thank you all so much for the feedback, I really appreciate it... I LOVE the rose gold idea- brilliant! (That flower-form rose & white gold Beverly K halo setting would be perfect, if a bit pricey... but it would be super hard to part with, haha!) I will definitely try to find a rose gold setting for the pink/grey stone, if I decide to sell that one. Whichever way I go, the above setting stays with me... it''s just a matter of deciding which stone I like most.

Orbaya, yes, the stones are exactly the same diameter so they''re interchangeable- 6.7/6.8ish, so the 1.22 is a bit deepish and the 1.08 is a wee bit shallow. (Doesn''t nailhead or anything though, and it''s table is smaller so it is quite firey still.)

After studying the two stones for FAR too long last night in the bathroom (hey, it has good light!) I think the 1.22- the other stone, which is more colorless but is a pale ivory at N color- is sparklier by a small but noticeable amount. That odd color is so neat though... What a pleasant dilemma- the DH was teasing me about the dithering I was doing all night, about how it was SUCH an awful, painful choice to be forced to make! He liked the pinkish stone the most, though he was mostly thinking about it''s fluorescence I think- that really intrigued him when I showed it to him under blacklight.

Reader, this is a link to the thread with pics of my other ring (and also the stone loose): https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/finally-set-my-1-22-ct-oec.78278/. I wish I could keep both, but the DH would be a wee bit peeved... that was how I talked him into the whole deal, was to promise to try to resell one of the stones at our mall... I guess if it doesn''t sell, though, I end up keeping it; wouldn''t that be funny, me trying NOT to sell the ring to people looking at it! ("Oh, that''s just all wrong on you- try this OTHER ring!") Though, in reality it wasn''t any more expensive than getting a nice new platinum setting by itself!

My oddball of a husband says the profile view looks like an weird critter looking at me (the spirals are the eyes, then the two triangle piercings are nostrils, at least on his planet). I think he''s silly.

 

[Fly Girl]

Wow. What a dilemma. Considering what people pay for pink diamonds nowadays, a pinky antique cut is quite a find. I"d try to find a way to keep it.

Good luck with your decision.

Beautiful diamonds and rings, by the way.

 

[surfgirl]

I''d be loathe to remove the stone that''s in there simply because it might tweak the setting...Why not live with that stone in it for a few months and then decide? You might decide you want to keep it as is. The less futzing with an old setting/stone, the better, IMO!

Lovely...enjoy it. Is this your ering or an anniversary or upgrade ring?

 

[LGK]

That''s a good point about the setting Surfgirl, I need to take it to my bench man to get a melee fixed & it sized down anyway (the seller sent me four extra antique melee, what a sweet lady). I can ask him what he thinks at that point, and maybe that''ll help my decision... My original wedding set, an antique Deco one with a .20-ish carat stone, is gone, missing. Didn''t fit (see: it''s size 2.5 & I definitely am not anymore) and I put it Somewhere Safe.

The 1.22 ct stone was a combo Xmas/Bday gift this Jan from the DH, to replace it. Then when neither of us really loved many setting options besides Van Craeynest, he said to go ahead and get this ring for the setting because the whole thing WITH diamond was cheaper than any VC setting, and a genuine antique (which, since we own an antique mall and both collect TONS of antiques, was especially something we both liked). I like it at least as much as the VC settings I was drooling over; we planned to compare stones, decide which performed better, sell the extra stone at our mall, and keep this setting.

I compared them in the sunlight (shocking! sunlight in Seattle today, just for a tiny bit) and the 1.22 is definitely sparklier; the pinky 1.08 reflects/refracts light mostly off the outer facets rather than the center, resulting in more pinfire type performance, more like a typical RB cut. The 1.22 flashes light from the deep center of the stone, making more chunky flashes, and more of them. I''m sure it''s a deep vs. a slightly shallow stone issue. Still, the 1.08 is definitely quite firey and I think without another stone right next to it to compare, it would seem like the fire ball it definitely is...

They also look like the exact same color grade (N) in the sun- the fluorescence in the pinkish 1.08 probably, and it also seemed to flash more blue/violet fire, but no oily/milkiness. The color in the sun matches the antique platinum almost perfectly, it''s a cool steely look, with a hint of pink.

Perhaps the boy will understand if I don''t immediately resell one... I hope so anyway, I''m not done dithering over it yet, that''s for sure. When I''d bought the ring, I was expecting it to be your basic off-yellow color, and thus virtually identical to my 1.22, which would have made a straightforward which-is-sparklier choice.

Thanks so much for your kind comments everyone

You guys definitely came up with some stuff I didn''t on my own.

I love having such a dilemma to ponder!

Whichever I keep, I''ll love it... definitely can''t be both, though- the boy has reitterated that several times, I think he is sensing attachment to both stones now- perceptive man!