Poll edited...wedding band choice

[kcoursolle]

Hi all, I think I finally narrowed down my choices for a wedding band. My ring size is a 4.5 and I will probably be going through WF. The stones themselves will be ACA melee (rounds) around I/SI. I will post the setting style below along with a couple of pictures to give you an idea of size. The ring will be a stand alone ring.



Would you rather have...
1) A 7-stone ring with 20 pointers
2) A 5-stone ring with 30 pointers

 

[kcoursolle]

Here is a picture of the setting style. It will be U-shaped, but with diamonds only going part way around the ring.

 

[kcoursolle]

To give you an idea of size, this is a picture of Kaleigh''s ring with 18 pointers on a size 5 hand. I think 20 pointers on a size 4.5 hand will probably look similar.

 

[kcoursolle]

Here is a picture of DeeJay''s ring with 35 pointers on a size 4.5 hand, so 30 pointers will be a tad smaller.

 

[monarch64]

.30, 5 stone! Larger stones all the way, he hee!

 

[Sundial]

For a stand alone ring I really prefer the five .30 point stones. In fact I think you should consider going up to .40 each!

I tried on one that size at my jewelers and I absolutely adored it!

 

[kcoursolle]

So far I''m not too surprised by the responses

.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Ooooh - 40 pointers!!! (The only thing that stopped me at 35 pts with the eternity band was that at some point the stones become too deep to fit between your fingers!

) If you''re not going the whole way around and this won''t be a problem, then go big!!!

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 10/29/2006 8:20:20 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
Ooooh - 40 pointers!!! (The only thing that stopped me at 35 pts with the eternity band was that at some point the stones become too deep to fit between your fingers!

) If you''re not going the whole way around and this won''t be a problem, then go big!!!

I''m going to count this as a vote for the 30 pointers, LOL! I once saw an eternity band with 50 pointers all around and I tried it on and it was beautiful , but I think it would have been really difficult to wear.

I wish 40 pointers were in the budget, but not for this project. Although...wf does have a great upgrade policy, so I could upgrade and have the diamonds go all around or go bigger.

 

[Dee*Jay]

I think that 30 pointers will be plenty substantial! Honestly, that will really be about the same look as mine but it just won't go the whole way around. And at some point it doesn't matter what you DON'T see traveling around the back of your finger, what matters is the beautiful 1.5 cts (5 X 30 pts) of bling on top!

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 10/29/2006 8:44:17 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
I think that 30 pointers will be plenty substantial! Honestly, that will really be about the same look as mine but it just won't go the whole way around. And at some point it doesn't matter what you DON'T see traveling around the back of your finger, what matters is the beautiful 1.5 cts (5 X 30 pts) of bling on top!

I definitely agree with you. This is what ultimately made me decide not to get a full eternity ring. For the same price I would have been able to get 10 pointers all around, and it just wasn't enough bling for the money. I love the appearance of the full eternity, but it's just not worth the sacrifice in carat weight or $...at least at this point, but maybe down the road I might change to full eternity.

What is a little special is that we will be together for 5 years when we get married. Maybe I could upgrade to a full eternity when we've been married for as many stones as I need to go around (one for each year).

 

[upgrading mama]

I think you should get the 5 stone, .30. This will be some bling, girl!!!

I know I have said it before, but I think a full eternity is a waste. All those beautiful diamonds on the underside...can''t size...scratchy (for lack of better descriptor)...
enjoy the beautiful u-shape 5 stone, it will be gggggreat!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yeah, for a 4.5 finger, you don''t need more than 5 stones! I''d go .25-.30 each for a stand-alone ring.

 

[Kaleigh]

I vote for the 5 stone band with .30 pointers, yummo!!

 

[bling*diva*]

~~I love the idea of a 5 stone .30 pointer band!! Good luck with your choice!!!

 

[kcoursolle]

Unanimous?

Wow! Even for the pricescope size whore crowd, I was expecting at least one person to say that .30''s were too big or that a seven stone would cover my finger better, or something along those lines.

 

[Stone Hunter]

Date: 10/29/2006 10:51:29 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Yeah, for a 4.5 finger, you don''t need more than 5 stones! I''d go .25-.30 each for a stand-alone ring.

I don''t think my fingers would feel comfortable with the stones going too far around the band. So with small fingers I''d stick to the 5 stone.

Do you ever plan to put a solitare with it? That may help you decide on the size of the 5 stone. For a stand alone ring I''d go with the .25 to .30 like DS said. That way you have something substantial on your hand.

 

[KristyDarling]

At first I was gonna say option 1, since I would be concerned about finger coverage (my 7-stone 10-pointers ring drives me NUTS because it spins and doesn''t give me great coverage), but if you''re considering 5 30-pointers for your small finger, coverage will not be an issue!

Go for bling!!!

 

[Ellen]

Stand alone, less is more! 5 stone.

 

[FireGoddess]

I vote 5 stone!

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 10/30/2006 12:18:31 PM
Author: Stone Hunter

Date: 10/29/2006 10:51:29 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Yeah, for a 4.5 finger, you don''t need more than 5 stones! I''d go .25-.30 each for a stand-alone ring.

I don''t think my fingers would feel comfortable with the stones going too far around the band. So with small fingers I''d stick to the 5 stone.

Do you ever plan to put a solitare with it? That may help you decide on the size of the 5 stone. For a stand alone ring I''d go with the .25 to .30 like DS said. That way you have something substantial on your hand.

Right now, I will definitely wear them on opposite hands since my e-ring has a split shank. Overall, I guess I like to have rings on separate hands because it looks more symmetrical and you can appreciate each ring on its own. Maybe someday if I upgraded to a much larger stone I could wear it with the 5-stone band, it would give me an Angie Harmon look.

 

[KristyDarling]

BTW, I must say that I LOVE the u-prong setting. I did a lot of research into it and tried on a bunch of u-prong bands, and decided that the eternity bands are just too uncomfortable to wear. For some reason, the diamonds in u-prong bands seem to sit higher than those in shared-prong settings, causing them to poke out and bug my adjacent fingers. I think your decision not to go all the way around is very wise!

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 10/30/2006 2:36:06 PM
Author: KristyDarling
BTW, I must say that I LOVE the u-prong setting. I did a lot of research into it and tried on a bunch of u-prong bands, and decided that the eternity bands are just too uncomfortable to wear. For some reason, the diamonds in u-prong bands seem to sit higher than those in shared-prong settings, causing them to poke out and bug my adjacent fingers. I think your decision not to go all the way around is very wise!

You don''t happen to have a picture of any of your "research" by chance?

 

[KristyDarling]

Ohhh, I wish I had taken pics, but basically I visited like 6-7 B&Ms and tried on various u-prong eternity bands and decided that although the profile is gorgeous, it doesn''t feel all that comfortable (when the diamonds go all the way around, that is). Plus, there seemed to be more metal prongwork showing with the u-prongs than with the shared prong settings, where the prong tips can look more delicate. I also learned that shared prong settings allow more flexibility for the stones to be set lower for maximum comfort. (just one jeweler''s word though, so don''t quote me on that)

 

[anacgarcia]

I''ll take the big one, hehehe, 30,35 or 40 pointers

I wish I could have one!!!! but i don''t think it''ll look good with my e-ring and I really want to use my e-ring and band together

 

[Larissa]

Bloody hell, I''m always the decenting opinion.

I think 7 stone (I just perfer it over 5, and it''ll cover the top of your finger better) with .20 points each.

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 10/31/2006 6:56:49 AM
Author: Larissa
Bloody hell, I''m always the decenting opinion.

I think 7 stone (I just perfer it over 5, and it''ll cover the top of your finger better) with .20 points each.

LOL, thanks for your comment! I was surprised there weren''t a few more who said 7-stone.

 

[darling]

I can''t wait to see it. I was thinking for me five stone, 1.25 carat total on a 5.5 size finger. Bigger maybe better as long as it''s not too wide for the finger. Please post pictures.

 

[kcoursolle]

Date: 10/31/2006 1:55:28 PM
Author: darling
I can''t wait to see it. I was thinking for me five stone, 1.25 carat total on a 5.5 size finger. Bigger maybe better as long as it''s not too wide for the finger. Please post pictures.

It will be a while before I have it made, but I will definitely post pictures. I was leaning towards the 5-stone option before, and thanks to all the opinions it''s really made me feel better about my decision. I''m going for the bling LOL!