Pondering best remount solution for most finger coverage

[MrsT]

Some of you know I'm trying to redo my diamond setting. have been looking very closely at the amazing rings and analyzing why some rings have the kind of finger coverage I'm looking to achieve.

I noted that the look I like the most is at least 54-58% coverage. So the problem with that is I'm a size 8 ring size. According to the RBC Size on Finger chart that means I would need a 3.5ct for 54% coverage. That's 9.9mm total size.

With that in mind, I can't afford a diamond that large. I can either work with my 2ct which is 8.22mm or upgrade my diamond to a larger size but I'm not sure it's worth the extra cost. The most I could swing would be a 2.75ct RB but I would need to get an "I" color and even an SI2 clarity. Maybe I could find an "H" color.

This is such a dilemma. The 2.75ct would still need a halo to create that ultimate size goal of at least 9.9mm.



If I keep my 2ct G H&A, I am thinking that a plain 3-stone isn't going to achieve my goal.
Perhaps the 3-stone halo would have the impact I'm looking for.
Another option is a halo setting but I think I'd match it with 2 eternity bands.

I've had one more idea for the 2ct and was wondering if anyone would guide me on this idea.
I was thinking of a double halo. The first halo in gold using smaller melee and the second halo slightly larger melee in white gold or platinum. Then, I would flank the front and back of the ering with gold eternity bands. Of course I could keep this design completely white gold and it might work too but changing the color helps keep the attention on the center stone. I could use yellow diamond melee around the center as another option.

Some pictures:






I know I'm doing a lot of posting but as you can see it's a tough decision and I don't want to make a mistake.

MrsT

 

[Enerchi]

WHOA! I'd go for that haloed 3 stone in your last photo --- YUM yum YUMMY
If you used your existing diamond as the centre stone - with 2 x .80 - 1cts on either side, that would be FULL FINGER ARMOUR!!!
I love your ideas - and I too have "larger than the majority of PS fingers". I'm a 7.75 (or an 8 if its hot/i'm hormonal/gravity... whatever.. )

 

[MissGotRocks]

No real advice but just a couple of thoughts: a 2 ct. stone is large in and of itself. Haloing a stone of that size provides a very large ring but it is in diameter - up and down rather than in a line across the finger - if that makes sense. I think you have to be careful of the design you would choose so it wouldn't look like a big knob on your finger rather than providing finger to finger coverage. When I think about finger coverage, I think about going across the finger in a horizontal direction rather than a vertical one. If you don't think a three stone ring will give you that coverage, what about a five stone ring?

Some of the rings you've posted are beautiful but I don't know what size the center stone is. That has a very large bearing on a haloed outcome IMO.

 

[peasypeas]

that three stone halo made my eyes pop out of my head a bit. beautiful!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think a classic three stone ring with a 2 ct center will give you plenty of finger coverage. I think haloing them would look over the top, personally.

 

[m-2-b]

I like the simple 3 stone idea w/ the following setting where the center stone sits higher and thus will appear bigger:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/open-gallery-accented-18k-white-gold-5448w18
You just have to keep the side diamond proportions smaller if you want the center diamond to pop!

I have a 1.9 ct RB that is halo'ed and it appears pretty substantial compared to my 3 ct stone!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I love both of mom2boys rings! Either a single diamond halo or a three stone with no halo would be my preference. I was just addressing halos on the 3-stone ring before.

 

[Christina...]

I had this same conversation with Mike at RDG recently. I wear a size 8 as well, and was curious as to how much diameter would be added to my center stone by adding a halo. I have a 1.2 6.86mm stone. He told me that he uses 1mm-1.33 mm melee on stones from 5mm-10mm in diameter. With the slight tilt that he would produce on the halo he felt that my 6.86 mm stone with halo would have approx a 9mm diameter. So, you should get the finger coverage that you are looking for with a single halo setting using a 2ct center...

 

[Laila619]

I think a classic three stone ring with a 2 ct center will give you plenty of finger coverage. I think haloing them would look over the top, personally.

Me too.

With a classic non-halo 3 stone, you will have a TON of coverage. Your center stone is about 8.2 mm in diameter, right? Then add two 5.5 mm stones on either side, and you'd get 8.2 + 5.5 + 5.5 mm = 19.2 mm of finger coverage across. That is plenty, believe me!! It'll cover your whole finger.

 

[MissGotRocks]

I like the simple 3 stone idea w/ the following setting where the center stone sits higher and thus will appear bigger:
http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/engagement-rings/open-gallery-accented-18k-white-gold-5448w18
You just have to keep the side diamond proportions smaller if you want the center diamond to pop!

I have a 1.9 ct RB that is halo'ed and it appears pretty substantial compared to my 3 ct stone!

Doesn't the Truth setting have the center stone sitting up higher than the side stones as well?

 

[m-2-b]

MGR--The BGD Truth setting does sit up higher as well. I like the other one I linked, too, b/c am eager to see someone on PS actually use this setting for their ring!

 

[MissGotRocks]

MGR--The BGD Truth setting does sit up higher as well. I like the other one I linked, too, b/c am eager to see someone on PS actually use this setting for their ring!

I have seen the other mounting recommended a couple of times but have seen no takers. I like the mounting as well but somehow it doesn't seem as 'finished' as the Truth setting.

 

[distracts]

I like the Look of a regular three-stone and find that they give a lot of finger-coverage without looking tacky. Or else a haloed solitaire, though I find three-stones give ME more my idea of finger coverage. While the haloed three-stone certainly is blingy, I think it just comes off as trying too hard.

 

[Haven]

I think a classic three stone ring with a 2 ct center will give you plenty of finger coverage. I think haloing them would look over the top, personally.

I very much agree.

 

[2023]

Hi Mrs T,

I looked at some of your past posts to see what your current setting looked like and saw that finger coverage has been an issue for you for a long time. You prefer the thicker bands than the slim dainty halo ones and I can see how you arrived at the conclusion of what you are considering.

I agree with other posters, a simple three stone would look best from what you suggested (mutiple halos, multiple bands etc starts having an even dizzying effect) but from reading your past posts and also seing what styles you think you suited and also what you wanted...it seems you wanted a 3+ ct diamond.

How did you get to the conclusion your budget would only stretch to 2-2.75? If you buy two 1 carat sidestones how much were you planning on spending in this situation? Im wondering if it could be possible to get a larger diamond?

Just my 2cts.

From the choices you posted though, definitely the simple three stone, for suiting your finger, would look beautiful and coverage.

 

[MrsT]

Thank you all for chiming in. Very helpful comments!
Yes, as noted, I've been bothered by this for a long time. I think I've narrowed down my choices and now I need to analyze which direction is going to accomplish my goals.

I don't want to sound obnoxious, I wish this weren't the case, but when I shop for ideas the rings that look the best on my hand are always 3ct - 4ct diamonds. There is no way I can afford to upgrade that much

I was very surprised this weekend when I tried on a halo remount. It actually went on my finger for a change and I could really see the coverage. It looked very nice. However the sales person couldn't tell me what size stone goes in the center. Duh? I'm guessing it was for a 2.5 - 3ct center. While I think I want horizontal coverage perhaps putting a halo on the 2ct might do the trick.

No real advice but just a couple of thoughts: a 2 ct. stone is large in and of itself. Haloing a stone of that size provides a very large ring but it is in diameter - up and down rather than in a line across the finger - if that makes sense. I think you have to be careful of the design you would choose so it wouldn't look like a big knob on your finger rather than providing finger to finger coverage. When I think about finger coverage, I think about going across the finger in a horizontal direction rather than a vertical one. If you don't think a three stone ring will give you that coverage, what about a five stone ring?

Some of the rings you've posted are beautiful but I don't know what size the center stone is. That has a very large bearing on a haloed outcome IMO.

This is interesting point but I'm not sure I get this.

Christina added some interesting information about her halo research. Adding 1.33 mm/.01 ct. melee adds how much to my round?
My stone is 8.22 does that mean if I add 1.33mm it is now 9.55? That's the diam of a 3ct. I don't think .01mm are too large at least according to the chart below.

Would changing the shape to a rounded square (cushion shape) help a little?

Hi Mrs T,
I looked at some of your past posts to see what your current setting looked like and saw that finger coverage has been an issue for you for a long time. You prefer the thicker bands than the slim dainty halo ones and I can see how you arrived at the conclusion of what you are considering.

I agree with other posters, a simple three stone would look best from what you suggested (mutiple halos, multiple bands etc starts having an even dizzying effect) but from reading your past posts and also seing what styles you think you suited and also what you wanted...it seems you wanted a 3+ ct diamond.

How did you get to the conclusion your budget would only stretch to 2-2.75? If you buy two 1 carat sidestones how much were you planning on spending in this situation? Im wondering if it could be possible to get a larger diamond?

Just my 2cts.

From the choices you posted though, definitely the simple three stone, for suiting your finger, would look beautiful and coverage.

So true! I'm afraid of dainty because of my man hands. But that said, the single halo style might work with a few eternity bands. Jury still out on this idea.

But, I have looked into the simple 3-stone and costs. I can swing .80-1.00ct sides but that makes me think I should take that cost and upgrade the center stone. I'm not opposed to this idea. I started to think about selling my diamond but I don't think I'll get a fair price in the resale market. So, then I can go to WF but I honestly start to think I should sacrifice the "Ideal" cut stone for larger size. There is such a premium on these stones. I dont know if selling my diamond is going to sit right with me unless it's a very obvious, smart way to go. I know I'll have to downgrade the 2C's for carat size.
Any advice on the option of selling my diamond for a less than Ideal cut? My mom's diamond is gorgeous! I'm going to post a pic soon. No it's certainly not an Ideal or H&A. If I could get something like hers in a larger size of at least 2.75ct I'd be very happy.

Mom2boys: Thanks for posting that comparison! I love your rings and have been admiring them and using them as a guide. What size is your ring finger? Do you know what size melee halo you have?

Finally, I'm fortunate to live near NYC. Perhaps a visit to certain shops will help me clarify a few things. I would love to see that LM 3-stone halo in person to judge whether it's over the top as it could very well be!

I can't thank you all enough for taking the time to help me work out this dilemma. I've read all your posts and really appreciate all of the sensible opinions.

MrsT

 

[Christina...]

As I understand it, using 1-1.3mm melee would actually increase your diameter to approx 10.22 because the melee would be added to all sides of the center. 1mm+8.22+1=10.22. Obviously a bit more with 1.3 (1.33 was a typo, sorry I didn't realize it until you posted) but you would also have to account for a slight tilt (if you like the tilt), but I think that 10.22 is a good estimate, making it appear more like a 4ct You could also consider adding a bezel for more spread if you wanted. I love a milgrained bezel around a delicate halo. But you mentioned that prefer shanks with more substance, so a three stone would certainly have that side to side coverage....

 

[Laila619]

I think adding two 0.80 carat side stones to your current diamond will provide much more blingpact than upgrading the center diamond. I think it will be more cost effective as well. Prices are still pretty high unfortunately--in order to upgrade your diamond and have it be noticeably bigger, I'd imagine you'd have to spend a lot. When I see a three stone ring, it looks so much blingier to me than even a larger solitaire does. Plus you'll get more horizontal finger coverage. I recently reset my diamond into a three stone setting, and it has totally quieted my diamond shrinkage syndrome. No regrets at all!

 

[m-2-b]

Mrs.T--My rings are a size 6.5. The halo diameter is 1.4mm.

If larger size is what you're looking for, start a new thread and enlist the help of the PS super sleuths! I think you can find an excellent cut, near ideal 2.75 ct depending upon your budget, just w/ lower clarity and color. You may want to have some fluorescence which will also help in price. I think some other PS'ers such as Diamondseeker have traded in their H & A for triple EX RB's in the past and it's hard to tell the difference!

 

[Christina...]

Mrs.T--My rings are a size 6.5. The halo diameter is 1.4mm.

If larger size is what you're looking for, start a new thread and enlist the help of the PS super sleuths! I think you can find an excellent cut, near ideal 2.75 ct depending upon your budget, just w/ lower clarity and color. You may want to have some fluorescence which will also help in price. I think some other PS'ers such as Diamondseeker have traded in their H & A for triple EX RB's in the past and it's hard to tell the difference!

mom2boys Your rings are gorgeous!! Can I ask you which of your rings people seem most impressed by? I'm sure you get oogles of compliments everywhere you go with both of them but, does one seems to have more impact on people than the other?

 

[MissGotRocks]

Thank you all for chiming in. Very helpful comments!
Yes, as noted, I've been bothered by this for a long time. I think I've narrowed down my choices and now I need to analyze which direction is going to accomplish my goals.

I don't want to sound obnoxious, I wish this weren't the case, but when I shop for ideas the rings that look the best on my hand are always 3ct - 4ct diamonds. There is no way I can afford to upgrade that much

I was very surprised this weekend when I tried on a halo remount. It actually went on my finger for a change and I could really see the coverage. It looked very nice. However the sales person couldn't tell me what size stone goes in the center. Duh? I'm guessing it was for a 2.5 - 3ct center. While I think I want horizontal coverage perhaps putting a halo on the 2ct might do the trick.

No real advice but just a couple of thoughts: a 2 ct. stone is large in and of itself. Haloing a stone of that size provides a very large ring but it is in diameter - up and down rather than in a line across the finger - if that makes sense. I think you have to be careful of the design you would choose so it wouldn't look like a big knob on your finger rather than providing finger to finger coverage. When I think about finger coverage, I think about going across the finger in a horizontal direction rather than a vertical one. If you don't think a three stone ring will give you that coverage, what about a five stone ring?

Some of the rings you've posted are beautiful but I don't know what size the center stone is. That has a very large bearing on a haloed outcome IMO.

This is interesting point but I'm not sure I get this.Christina added some interesting information about her halo research. Adding 1.33 mm/.01 ct. melee adds how much to my round?
My stone is 8.22 does that mean if I add 1.33mm it is now 9.55? That's the diam of a 3ct. I don't think .01mm are too large at least according to the chart below.

Would changing the shape to a rounded square (cushion shape) help a little?

Hi Mrs T,
I looked at some of your past posts to see what your current setting looked like and saw that finger coverage has been an issue for you for a long time. You prefer the thicker bands than the slim dainty halo ones and I can see how you arrived at the conclusion of what you are considering.

I agree with other posters, a simple three stone would look best from what you suggested (mutiple halos, multiple bands etc starts having an even dizzying effect) but from reading your past posts and also seing what styles you think you suited and also what you wanted...it seems you wanted a 3+ ct diamond.

How did you get to the conclusion your budget would only stretch to 2-2.75? If you buy two 1 carat sidestones how much were you planning on spending in this situation? Im wondering if it could be possible to get a larger diamond?

Just my 2cts.

From the choices you posted though, definitely the simple three stone, for suiting your finger, would look beautiful and coverage.

So true! I'm afraid of dainty because of my man hands. But that said, the single halo style might work with a few eternity bands. Jury still out on this idea.

But, I have looked into the simple 3-stone and costs. I can swing .80-1.00ct sides but that makes me think I should take that cost and upgrade the center stone. I'm not opposed to this idea. I started to think about selling my diamond but I don't think I'll get a fair price in the resale market. So, then I can go to WF but I honestly start to think I should sacrifice the "Ideal" cut stone for larger size. There is such a premium on these stones. I dont know if selling my diamond is going to sit right with me unless it's a very obvious, smart way to go. I know I'll have to downgrade the 2C's for carat size.
Any advice on the option of selling my diamond for a less than Ideal cut? My mom's diamond is gorgeous! I'm going to post a pic soon. No it's certainly not an Ideal or H&A. If I could get something like hers in a larger size of at least 2.75ct I'd be very happy.

Mom2boys: Thanks for posting that comparison! I love your rings and have been admiring them and using them as a guide. What size is your ring finger? Do you know what size melee halo you have?

Finally, I'm fortunate to live near NYC. Perhaps a visit to certain shops will help me clarify a few things. I would love to see that LM 3-stone halo in person to judge whether it's over the top as it could very well be!

I can't thank you all enough for taking the time to help me work out this dilemma. I've read all your posts and really appreciate all of the sensible opinions.

MrsT

What I was trying to say is that a halo increases the stone size in diameter but a three stone ring increases the finger coverage horizontally - from finger to finger. Depends on if you want to increase the size up to your knuckle or increase the size from finger to finger.

 

[Enerchi]

Still in the 3 stone camp!

I think keeping your existing 2+ ct is both sentimentally sweet and financially smart - you won't get the same $$ value for it that you'll end up spending in order to get a larger diamond. However, the cost of 2 new side stones, will be much more affordable. Purchasing 2 x .80s (up to 1cts), are still more cost effective. And the coverage - if you are at approx 6mm x 2 (12mm) + your existing stone of 8.22 === you are already looking at 20+mm of coverage. I'd imagine that would be pretty much all across the top of your ring finger - I'm a 7.75 and using a cloth tape measure, that's pretty sweet on my finger!

Any how, like I say, I'm a big fan of the 3 stones. Even now, when I look and fantasize about what I need next ( ) I'm always drawn to the 3 stones because of my larger fingers. Maybe in my next life, I'll be a size 5 ring - ah, to dream!!

 

[UberClaire]

I don't think you'd want to swap out your round brilliant for a cushion if you're looking for finger coverage as cushions face up smaller for their carat weight. If you are open to switching shapes, maybe something like an oval would be good. In my opinion, they face up HUGE.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Selling your current stone and buying a 2.75 is going to cost a lot more than having someone like Victor Canera make you a halo (which is probably around $5k). You'll end up with a ring with a diameter of probably close to 11mm if your current stone is 8.2mm. Look at mom2boys 1.9 in a halo...it looks as large or larger than her center stone 3 ct. diamond.

You will lose money to sell your current stone plus have to pay current prices on the new stone. I just don't recommend it unless you can find a 3 ct. stone second hand. I just wouldn't drop color and clarity to I SI2. I did find a good buy on my GIA XXX current stone, but I haven't sold my top quality H&A stone, either. I would rather keep it than sell at a steep discount because it is just too nice to do that. If I keep it, I will turn the new stone into a 3 stone ring and just wear the slightly larger one for the solitaire.

I really think your two best choices are:

Victor Canera halo (least expensive option to get a 10.5-11mm look) around $5,000

3 stone ring with .80 each sides ($8000+ for 2 G SI1 ACA or Expert Selection)

 

[Christina...]

Selling your current stone and buying a 2.75 is going to cost a lot more than having someone like Victor Canera make you a halo (which is probably around $5k). You'll end up with a ring with a diameter of probably close to 11mm if your current stone is 8.2mm. Look at mom2boys 1.9 in a halo...it looks as large or larger than her center stone 3 ct. diamond.

You will lose money to sell your current stone plus have to pay current prices on the new stone. I just don't recommend it unless you can find a 3 ct. stone second hand. I just wouldn't drop color and clarity to I SI2. I did find a good buy on my GIA XXX current stone, but I haven't sold my top quality H&A stone, either. I would rather keep it than sell at a steep discount because it is just too nice to do that. If I keep it, I will turn the new stone into a 3 stone ring and just wear the slightly larger one for the solitaire.

I really think your two best choices are:

Victor Canera halo (least expensive option to get a 10.5-11mm look) around $5,000

3 stone ring with .80 each sides ($8000+ for 2 G SI1 ACA or Expert Selection)

Yep, I 100% agree with DS. I think that you really just need to decide of you are looking to maximize the impact of your center stone by creating the illusion of a super large solitaire, or if your looking to maximize finger coverage. I think that a 3 stone will give you a more blingy affect, but a halo will give the illusion of a super massive center stone. It just depends on what you're looking to accomplish. It sounds to me like you wish that the budget allowed for a 3-3.5 ct stone, and if that is the case then I think a halo would be your best option. But you also said that you prefer a more substantial shank, then a three stone will definitely appear more substantial in that regard.

 

[m-2-b]

Christina--To answer your question, the 3 stone always steals the show!

 

[Laila619]

Christina--To answer your question, the 3 stone always steals the show!

Woo hoo! Yay for three stones. I'm a newly converted fan and I'll never go back!

 

[distracts]

I am wondering why everyone seems to think a halo means there won't be a wide band? I think it could look really awesome to put your current 2 ct in a slim halo with a 4mm wide engraved shank. With a band like that, it would be very different than the cookie-cutter halos we often see, and the stone/halo would still dominate the band, sticking out by 3+ mm on each side.

 

[PintoBean]

I highly suggest the BGD Kristin halo. Having seen it in person, it is like one big massive blinding bling. If memory serves me correct, the halo has 2.5 pointers. My mom has it with a 1.8 ct center. She also has a 2.1 ct with no halo, and the 1.8 + kristin halo has MUCH more finger coverage, to the extent that my mom has DSS when she wears the 2.1 ct.

http://www.briangavindiamonds.com/e...istin-split-shank-halo-18k-white-gold-5358w18

 

[2023]

Hi Mrs T,

With your current setting, the side baguettes, what lead you to this setting? Was there a reason you didn't go with RBs as sides stones back then?

As for changing shape, I believe that ovals and pears maybe appear a bit bigger than a RB, however cushions face up smaller than RBs (as a pp said). Also as anotherr pp poster said, if you did want to explore the options of upgrading your diamond to a bigger size etc to start a new thread up about that, and find out more from WF what your options are.

I think a three stone will definitely be much brighter than the current baguettes you have and will also provide the width you seem comfortable with. It will be elegant and simple and blingy. It would be great if you go to NYC and to try some different styles on as you do have a lot of ideas