Please help me figure out a setting for a light brown OMC

[mockturtle]

Hello

I am trying to decide on a setting for a light brown OMC. I’d love your advice.
Here’s the stone, the one in the middle together with different color stones to give some idea of the color. The stone is about 6.2 x 5.5ish.


I’m a simple girl, and I’d like something very simple for an everyday ring.
I’ve been in love with @LLJsmom’s bezel ring . I hope she doesn’t mind me posting the image of her ring. (If you do, please tell me and I won’t do it again!)


I’d love something like that with may be the stone set EW in platinum. One thing I worry about is that the color of the stone is not strong enough, so once set, it may look rather dingy than light brown color. I thought about adding very small but white side stones to provide contrast. I’ve been looking for images but I’ve only found three stones with more substantial side stones. If you’ve seen any bezel ring with tiny side stones, would you post some images?

Do you have any suggestion on what you think would be nice?

Thank you!!

 

[AV_]

I'd restore all three - setting the first with small diamonds on the dots, having the last engraved freshly, perhaps having the basket of the Light brown done over in very red gold (would love an enamelled band for theses light diamond colours - but almost nobody does it). The current setting appears to be a 1930s type I find very elegant.

Thinking out loud

 

[foxinsox]

I agree with @AV_ about playing the colour up though I would go a pale rose gold bezel or basket/gallery to bring out some pink tones in the brown. Bezelling would accentuate that lovely shape. It’s a beautiful stone. Some small bezelled side stones would look great too maybe like this


Or like this

 

[mockturtle]

Thank you for your comments, @AV_ and @foxinsox !
@AV_ , do you think this is a setting from the 1930’s?
I just assumed that it’s a mass produced setting from the 80’s. Here’s what it looks like from the side. It’s 18k.


I did think about having engraving refinished for the last ring, but still haven’t decided if I want a fresh look or old worn out look I think I’ll leave the top one alone since I’d be worried about melee falling out.

I thought I’d avoid pink/red gold because I prefer a contrasted look to a more blending in look, but having a pink gold for the gallery and leave the top part white is a great idea! I never thought about that! Thank you, @foxinsox ! Do you think it’ll look strange if only the gallery is pink gold and the rest is white?

Do you think the stone needs whiter side stones to emphasize the color? Or can the stone look fine by itself?

 

[foxinsox]

I think it would look really pretty and adds an interesting twist if the face up is white gold and the gallery is pink! I don’t think it needs side stones, I just love that look with a bezel centre stone personally
Can’t wait to see how it comes out.
Also I’m not @AV_ but I do think that’s an older style setting than 80s..

 

[mockturtle]

Thanks, @foxinsox !
Now I’m going to look for images of bezel settings with interesting galleries.

Oh, one more thing, for anyone who cares to comment, the orientation, EW or NS??

 

[foxinsox]

Thanks, @foxinsox !
Now I’m going to look for images of bezel settings with interesting galleries.

Oh, one more thing, for anyone who cares to comment, the orientation, EW or NS??

I’m usually super traditional and like NS but if I flip my phone sideways I like EW for this stone. I think you need to post some more pictures though and also maybe think about whether you want it to look more like a 3-stone/solitaire or like a band/lower profile which is how the EW orientation of a rectangular stone usually looks to me

 

[AV_]

The head holding the diamond seems to be force-fit with the band and older. The 1930's solitaires I had in mind have low profile bands connecting with the base of the diamond-holding basket like this: WWW

If you ever find time for taking more pictures of the rings, a close-up of the basket would be nice to see. This one seems to be made from heavier/thicker sheet (?) than I'd expect for a diamond this size. Perhaps the entire ring is custom work meant to resemble an older design but with different means (e.g. casting shapes meant to be fabricated of sheet or wire - as just about everyone does today too...) I am not sure I can always ID such subtleties, sure enough!

 

[mockturtle]

More images (I’m sorry about them being blurry )



I think I like EW too though I’m feeling a bit guilty about destroying the setting if it’s older than I thought....

 

[foxinsox]

More images (I’m sorry about them being blurry )



I think I like EW too though I’m feeling a bit guilty about destroying the setting if it’s older than I thought....

You can ask the jeweller to be careful taking it out of its setting and reuse it for another stone?
Also I was kinda hoping for more pictures to help with the EW or NS decision

 

[mockturtle]

@foxinsox , here are more pictures,
I’m really not good with taking pictures


NS or EW?
I’m thinking either with small white side stones in all white metal simple bezel or just a solitaire with maybe rose gold gallery if I can figure out a nice way to connect the shoulders.
Some images of sapphire rings with small side stones. They’re not crisp and sharp as the rings in your images, but give some idea of NS vs EW...

 

[foxinsox]

I mostly wanted the pics to ogle it some more so thank you! That profile is something else huh with the teeny wee table and super high crown definitely think EW and those settings you’ve posted look ideal. Ooh I’m excited for you to get it reset now

 

[Lykame]

Normally I prefer North to South orientation but that stone looks like it will be stunning East to West.

I really like that second bezel ring you posted with the East to West orientation and the two dinky diamonds, but your stone is very deep and I think it will be a shame to cover that all up with metal when that's part of its beauty too...

 

[ringo865]

I love it as is. It’s 18k! Perhaps if the crown could be detached and rotated so the stone is set EW then reinserted? That would keep the essence of the vintage vibe but give it a fresher look? And yah, way earlier than 1980s.

Can you make out the stamp (other than 18k) inside the shank?

 

[AprilBaby]

The bezel EW with the side stones! Bezel the center in rose gold.

 

[mockturtle]

Thanks, @foxinsox !
I really looove high crowned old cuts. They don’t always look perfect from straight up, but makes up for it (for me) for the profile
I think EW looks good too!

@Lykame , I thought about that too and thought maybe double clawed four prongs first, but was not sure if that style look nice with the shape of this stone. I’m going to take it out of the setting and see what it looks like. Thanks for your comment!

 

[stracci2000]

@mockturtle, I think the head is original (1920s, 30s)and the shank is newer.
Newer, as in 1950s-60s.
I would leave it as is. As @Lykame said, maybe rethink covering up that yummy high crown with a bezel.
But of course, you must do what feels right for you.
Giving some love to an antique stone is all good in my book!
Also, I adore all 3 rings in your original post, so gorgeous!

 

[mockturtle]

Hmmmmm, now I’m thinking maybe I should just leave it as is.
I love vintage and antique jewelry, and I feel like I should leave something that has survived for so long as it is. I see similar settings often, and I thought those were much more recent resets.

@ringo865 the markings are pretty worn down, and I can see 18, then C, and it looks like two Ts kinda smushed together, then something I can’t make out (top part of an R?), then possibly PT. There’s no assay office symbol or anything. The letters are simply stamped and not embossed.

Thank you for your comments, @ringo865 and @AprilBaby !
And thank you for the info and the compliment, @stracci2000

 

[Lykame]

Hmmmmm, now I’m thinking maybe I should just leave it as is.
I love vintage and antique jewelry, and I feel like I should leave something that has survived for so long as it is. I see similar settings often, and I thought those were much more recent resets.

@ringo865 the markings are pretty worn down, and I can see 18, then C, and it looks like two Ts kinda smushed together, then something I can’t make out (top part of an R?), then possibly PT. There’s no assay office symbol or anything. The letters are simply stamped and not embossed.

Thank you for your comments, @ringo865 and @AprilBaby !
And thank you for the info and the compliment, @stracci2000

Any chance you can post a picture of the stamps??? The C is possibly a dating stamp - depending on the font you might be able to date it (depending on where it was stamped/which country etc).

 

[mockturtle]

@Lykame , these are the best I could do with my iPhone camera.


I thought 18CT for 18K in US. I also thought the head was white gold because the ring is not that heavy, but it maybe that the shoulders are hollow...

 

[Lykame]

@Lykame , these are the best I could do with my iPhone camera.


I thought 18CT for 18K in US. I also thought the head was white gold because the ring is not that heavy, but it maybe that the shoulders are hollow...

Oh gosh that's difficult, can't really make out most of that - if I don't think about it too much I see 18 C & Pt - so perhaps actually the head is platinum?

 

[mockturtle]

@Lykame “&” makes much more sense than “R”!!

 

[Rad_Fan]

A few more options...

https://www.langantiques.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=brown+diamonds

 

[elliefire99]

Ah! What a wonderful, chunky, high-crowned beauty.

I have a personal preference for rose and yellow gold for brownish diamonds, BUT I definitely also think it would be great to preserve the original setting.

If it IS an original head with a newer shank, as Stracci suggests, you have a little room to play The fact that the hallmark resembles "18CT & PT" supports this hypothesis --18k shank and original plat head. But I don't think I have ever seen "CT" used for gold karat, even here in the US

I definitely feel the vote for turning the head E-W for funsies. Or you could still add little bezeled side-stones without sacrificing the original head.

As an example, stonewell is currently selling ring with a pronged OMC with bezeled sapphire side stones that I LOVE and would buy in a second if funds permitted...

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/holiday-jewelry-clearout.245163/

 

[mockturtle]

Thanks, @elliefire99
That stonewell’s ring is gorgeous! She has so many beautiful things for sale.
I’m still torn between resetting or keeping as is. A small voice inside my head is saying the setting is not unique or anything, and it needs resizing anyway....

 

[AV_]

Today, I came accross an interesting ring, made of a pair of sapphire 'leaves' set on the sides of a relatively small diamond - the 'center' was more connecting the 'sides' than anything. I must have stared! Then again, thrully interesting jewelry is not exactly thick on the ground.

2c

 

[MakingTheGrade]

Thanks, @elliefire99
That stonewell’s ring is gorgeous! She has so many beautiful things for sale.
I’m still torn between resetting or keeping as is. A small voice inside my head is saying the setting is not unique or anything, and it needs resizing anyway....

I love unique settings. And EW orientations. So I’m biased towards a reset.

 

[evergreen]

One of Stonewell's LT listings is for bezel set OEC stacking rings, one of which is a brown diamond set in rose gold! I think it's a gorgeous example of how rose can bring out the warmth of a brown/champagne stone. (Wasn't sure if it was ok to grab a photo from her listing or link here ). Just an example of a stone+setting+gold combination that (imo) really brings out the best in an antique stone while being modern and easy to wear.

Reset! It's a lovely and unusual diamond and it deserves to be in a setting that highlights it (and that you love!). If you do bezel, carefully choose someone who's used to bezeling wonky antique stones. Sometimes they struggle with the lack of symmetry and the stone gets loose...