New Leon setting = smaller looking diamond??? Please HELP...

[Melanie611]

Hi all,

I recently had my diamond moved from a Mark Morrell setting to one by Leon Mege. When I received the new setting a couple days ago, my first thought was my diamond looked WAY smaller!! I know my diamond is TINY compared to the ones on his site and many on Pricescope as well (its only 1.31ct). Anyway as I compared the 2 settings, I noticed that the LM setting was quite a bit lower...the culet is only about 1mm from my finger vs. around 3mm with the MWM setting. My stone is 4.33mm in depth, so the total height is only slightly over 5mm. In addition to that, I had it set on a very thin 1.6mm shank. So probably for safety reasons, he make the shank slightly deeper (~2mm) so it sticks out on the side of my finger more (if that makes sense??), making the size look larger from the top view than my actual size 5 finger.

So my question is...how hard would it be to have it set higher by 1-2mm? It''s a cathedral basket setting with double claw prongs. Would that require making a new head or is there a way to extend the prongs with additional platinum? I know I should probably be asking Leon this, but I don''t want to bother him until I make a final decision. I don''t know if it just me adjusting to the new setting or what. I did hear that lower set diamonds were more safe and less likely to be snagged on things. Thoughts???

 

[kcoursolle]

I wouldn''t change a thing! Are you sure it just doesn''t look smaller because you have been away from it for a while? I don''t think you would easily be able to alter the leon setting to make it sit higher and I personally think they look really nice set lower.

 

[Bliss]

Well, I''m changing my setting and I know for a fact that height does make a visual difference. I''m going from a cathedral setting to a custom setting and I''m asking for it to be made at a comparable height. I was very comfy with the cathedral setting -- I''m very active and I never got it caught on anything. I just didn''t like the acme monster prongs.

But I knew that if it were set lower, it would look smaller. Still, my stone has a good height anyway so they''ll make it high...but I was like, "Don''t be afraid to boost that baby up a little!"

I wonder if you could change the head to add more height? Or do you think you could add to the "shoulders" of it to boost it up a bit?

It sounds beautiful to be sure, though!!!

 

[Ellen]

I would try living with it first for a bit, and see if you get used to it. If after a few weeks, it still bugs you, call Leon.

 

[Bliss]

Yes! I think the wise posters are right. Try living with it for a while - you might fall in love with it all over again!

 

[Melanie611]

Thanks for the advice everyone! I''m trying to adjust to it. The workmanship is incredible. But for the amount we paid, I just was expecting instant LOVE, you know? Of course when I first got my MWM, I thought it was a bit high when looking from the side. Maybe I''m too picky

, but I''m not one of those who plan to ever upgrade the stone. I told FI he can give me stacking bands instead

. But it didn''t even cross my mind that the height would make such an impact on the perception of size. And I don''t want to bother Leon since I already questioned the design of the matching band I had made (whole other crazy issue there

).

 

[2danes]

Do you have pics?
(I know this doesn''t help you in anyway... but I"m dying to see your new setting.)

Annie

 

[angeline]

Date: 6/19/2008 4:13:38 PM
Author: Melanie611
Thanks for the advice everyone! I''m trying to adjust to it. The workmanship is incredible. But for the amount we paid, I just was expecting instant LOVE, you know? Of course when I first got my MWM, I thought it was a bit high when looking from the side. Maybe I''m too picky

, but I''m not one of those who plan to ever upgrade the stone. I told FI he can give me stacking bands instead

. But it didn''t even cross my mind that the height would make such an impact on the perception of size. And I don''t want to bother Leon since I already questioned the design of the matching band I had made (whole other crazy issue there

).

I so agree that height makes a big difference to perception of size. I''m not one of those that asks for stones to be set as low as possible. I personally think they look more graceful at a medium height.

I think if you didn''t feel instant LOVE then it might not really change. When I''ve been away from my stone for a while it looks bigger not smaller. (unless I''ve been browsing the Celebrity ring thread too much!)

Good luck with what you decide. Waiting to make sure is probably good advice. I am sure it''s fixable if you decide you want it higher. Good luck!

 

[Lynn B]

This is a very interesting thread.

You know, this is something I had never considered before. I *knew* that in making these ultra thin shanks (1.6 mm''ish, etc.) that extra DEPTH would have to be added to make the ring structurally sound. But I never thought of it showing a bit more *shank* (side-to-side) from the top view down, or it impacting on the perception of center stone size.

Can you post a few photos... preferably some from the top down, plus some side views, and (if it isn''t asking too much) -- some shots of the MWM for comparison?

Thanks!

 

[Bliss]

Lynn, I agree! Very interesting. I actually do think that the height of the band matters as well. If you're just studying visual depth perception, the brain will read the distance between diamond and band & register size from there. That's based on what you typically see. Think of the temp settings with the super high prongs like an inch off the finger. Top down, it looks huge!

I know it's terribly minute and imperceptible to most people, but I believe it also should be taken into account. Crazy, I know!

PSers see the stuff everyone else doesn't. LOL.

 

[Melanie611]

Well, here''s a picture trying to compare them. I think it''s more noticeable on the profile shot. I took the LM pics on my cell phone so they''re not all that great. The other ring were pics taken by Mark. I don''t have any hand shots of the old setting. In real life the LM sticks out slightly more on the sides than the original MWM ring.

As for the thicker shank, I not sure if Leon did that for safety reasons or just design. He made me a matching band that is the same width but only about 1mm in depth. That''s the other issue I was talking to him about. I guess I assumed when I told him "matching," he would make it the same depth. But he ended up making it thinner so it doesn''t block the head on the side view. But from the top view, it sticks out differently (see pic below) which kind of bothers me. Was I suppose to tell him specifically that I wanted it the same depth too? I thought he would take care of those little details. What do you guys think?

 

[Melanie611]

Here it is with the band. Notice the difference in depth?

 

[Maisie]

I know it probably doesn''t help much but I love your Leon!!!!!!

 

[tberube]

Date: 6/19/2008 3:20:00 PM
Author:Melanie611
Hi all,


I recently had my diamond moved from a Mark Morrell setting to one by Leon Mege. When I received the new setting a couple days ago, my first thought was my diamond looked WAY smaller!! I know my diamond is TINY compared to the ones on his site and many on Pricescope as well (its only 1.31ct). Anyway as I compared the 2 settings, I noticed that the LM setting was quite a bit lower...the culet is only about 1mm from my finger vs. around 3mm with the MWM setting. My stone is 4.33mm in depth, so the total height is only slightly over 5mm. In addition to that, I had it set on a very thin 1.6mm shank. So probably for safety reasons, he make the shank slightly deeper (~2mm) so it sticks out on the side of my finger more (if that makes sense??), making the size look larger from the top view than my actual size 5 finger.


So my question is...how hard would it be to have it set higher by 1-2mm? It''s a cathedral basket setting with double claw prongs. Would that require making a new head or is there a way to extend the prongs with additional platinum? I know I should probably be asking Leon this, but I don''t want to bother him until I make a final decision. I don''t know if it just me adjusting to the new setting or what. I did hear that lower set diamonds were more safe and less likely to be snagged on things. Thoughts???

haaha....I strongly object to that!! Your diamond is FAR from tiny!! In fact it''s a great size, IMHO.

 

[omieluv]

I am not seing what you are seing. All I see is a beautiful e-ring set with a lovely diamond. The stone does look quite large on your finger, so from the comparison shot you posted, I really cannot see a difference in size. Personally, I really like the height of the setting by Leon, but I am partial to lower settings. Of course, IRL the differences might be more obvious, but from what I can tell, your new setting is lovely!

As for the wedding band, I do see what you see! Not sure if the size difference would bother me, but if it does bother you, ask Leon for some clarification. I have never worked with him, so I am not sure how you should approach him though.

 

[erica k]

It''s hard to tell from the photos, but it ''looks'' about the same size to me. Of course, I''m not the one looking down at it all the time. Also, the thinner shank really allows your stone to pop, in spite of being lower set.

Of course, I''m biased because I prefer low-set stones over pretty much anything. And your 1.3ct is a really nice size on your hand. It looks to be the equivalent of my target 1.5ct (7.5mm) goal.

 

[ahappygirl]

I actually think it looks larger in this setting! Either way, it is gorgeous and I wouldn''t change a thing!! I know the important thing is that YOU love it but it really is stunning. Breathtaking. Smashing. And on and on...

 

[Deelight]

I think your set is beautiful and your diamond is plenty big and yummy , from the pictures it does not look any smaller to me .

I can also see what you see with the band and the e-ring the depth is different.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

First, I have to tell you that your new Leon is absolutely stunning.

Okay, so this may be a really silly idea, but I''m tossing it out there, anyway.

Do you have a jewelry store around you that carries several RB solitaire-type settings? If so, I might stop in and try on a few diamonds in other settings with stones around the same size as yours. I used to do this when I was comparing the spread of my stone against some other shapes. I was really interested in the visual difference in a stone that was set high vs. low. I actually had the opposite experience as you--my stone is set really low and while it''s not as "out there" as other settings, having it closer to my finger increased the coverage, IMHO. Aesthetically it seemed the closer to my finger the stone was, the more area the stone covered.

Maybe if you see a few settings side by side with similarly-sized diamonds, you''ll have a better idea of the visual difference? I always considered the classic Tiffany setting to sit pretty high and every time I''ve been they''ve had a couple of options in the 1.3 carat range. If you live or work near a Tiff''s, it could be a start, but really any B&M would do.

This may be completely unscientific and there are a whole lot of other factors that would affect the visual impact (difference in cut quality, carat size vs. spread, etc.), but it might give you some reference?

 

[MoonWater]

I don''t think the diamond looks smaller, but I have to say, I love the new setting much more!!

 

[ahappygirl]

Melanie - would you mind posting a shot (or MANY

) of your Leon in a Show Me the Ring thread? I have seen lots of posters wondering what a stone your size would look in one of his settings. Thanks!!

Again, it is beautiful!!

 

[Demelza]

Based on the pics, I think your diamond looks the same (size-wise) as it did in the MM setting. That said, I much prefer the Leon. I think it looks beautiful! Perhaps give it a few more days and see how you feel -- if you still feel the diamond is too low, discuss your options with Leon. I would think long and hard, though, before having him tinker around with the setting. You never know what can go wrong when you start trying to modify things.

I do see what you mean about the wedding band not matching the depth of the ering. I absolutely think it's reasonable to have expected an exact match in width AND depth. If he was wanting to make some change in the design of the wedding ring, I think he should have talked to you about it beforehand. If it bothers you, I would definitely bring it up with him. Good luck!

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 6/20/2008 12:21:24 PM
Author: Demelza
Based on the pics, I think your diamond looks the same (size-wise) as it did in the MM setting. That said, I much prefer the Leon. I think it looks beautiful! Perhaps give it a few more days and see how you feel -- if you still feel the diamond is too low, discuss your options with Leon. I would think long and hard, though, before having him tinker around with the setting. You never know what can go wrong when you start trying to modify things.


I do see what you mean about the wedding band not matching the depth of the ering. I absolutely think it''s reasonable to have expected an exact match in width AND depth. If he was wanting to make some change in the design of the wedding ring, I think he should have talked to you about it beforehand. If it bothers you, I would definitely bring it up with him. Good luck!

ditto Demelza. I''m glad you posted this though b/c I am planning on getting a pave band to go with my e-ring and although it''s made by the same designer, it''s not a set so i''m wondering if the depth will be the same...I''ll have to double check that when it comes time to order. I totally would have expected the band to match your e-ring though in both width and depth and don''t think you''re being unreasonable at all. i would definitely ask Leon about it.

your e-ring is gorgeous...

 

[sna77]

My FI and her sister have diamonds that are abou the same size-- 2.5ct sister vs. 2.4ct FI... Anyhow, I dont have the measurements on the sisters ring, but assume the specs are similar, both Ideal cut, same color, etc... Sister''s setting is mounted really high and FI''s setting is mounted really low... Sister''s setting definitely looks bigger IMO... I always notice it, and it drives me nuts... haha

 

[angel777]

I really love your set, but it is not matching from the second picture you took.
I would definitely talk to Leon, if he can change the wedding band, or perhaps the engagement ring to match the wedding band.
Size wise the diamond looks the same in old MM and new Leon.

Matching to me, means matching. Everything width, # of diamonds, etc.
It should be love at first sight, and I dont think you should settle.

 

[BriBee]

Maybe the pictures aren't really portraying what you're talking about, but I have to agree with some other posts that I think it looks larger in the LM setting. However, you're the one seeing it in person, so you need to be happy with it. I do see what you're talking about with the matching band though. In any case however, your set is absolutely gorgeous!!! But I hope you're able to resolve this so that you can be 100% happy with it.

 

[Bliss]

WOW, the Leon is a masterpiece! What delicate work...just gorgeous!

Your diamond is plenty big!

It looks gorgeous!

That having been said, do you think the original e-ring setting also made the diamond look a bit bigger because it was tapered in? That also created a visual effect. But height also plays a factor, I feel.

Gosh, the Leon really showcases your stone. I love the setting! They are both gorgeous!!!!

 

[Melanie611]

Thanks for all the compliments, everyone. I didn't mean to imply from my posts that I don't like the rings at all. There are certain aspects I love...especially how thin it is. And I don't mind the depth too much. It gives me some added security that it won't get bent out of shape. My worst nightmare would be me bending it and a bunch of tiny little diamonds scattering everywhere

I think it might actually be the fact it is so thin that it seems almost insubstantial on my finger. Maybe with the 2 bands I plan to wear, it'll look better.

As for the matching wedding band, I did speak to Leon about it. He said that he considered matching only the width, that he intentionally designed the wedding band thinner so that it doesn't cover the head of the ering from the side. But I think it looks mismatched from the top view. He told me to try it out for a few days and contact him. But I definitely want it the same depth. He'd have to make a whole new band though. But I really don't want to spend anymore $$$ that we already have. Do you think it would be fair to be charged for another band??? Was I supposed to tell him from the beginning that I wanted it the same depth? I thought being the artist he is, he wouldn't need me specifying all these little details for him. I just told him to make a "matching" band of the same width as the ering. I thought ordering them together would ensure a perfect match. Is that unreasonable of me?

 

[peppermintpatty]

Your new ring is gorgeous! I think your diamond looks bigger in the LM ring! I can see by your pictures that it sits lower in the LM, but I think it looks beautiful!

I do see what you mean about the wedding band. I just wonder since Leon doesn''t really like engagement rings worn with wedding bands, if he felt he had to do that to protect the head of your engagement ring. I personally do feel that would bother me, so if I were in your shoes I would talk to Leon about it.

Good luck- just remember, there is always a solution! Did I mention that your ring is beautiful and I love it?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh, and it is definitely big!!!!!!!

 

[Melanie611]

Oh, I didn''t mean to say my stone was tiny. I happen to think it''s perfect for my 5"1'' size. But is way smaller than the 4+ ct rings on the Art of Platinum site. And even many of the gorgeous rings on this site. Of course PS is kind of skewed as from as carat size goes.