Prince Harry & Meghan Markle are engaged!

[whitewave]

Right now on reelz!!! DIRECTV channel 238: when Harry met Meghan: a royal romance

A documentary already!!!!

 

[LawmaLlama]

I mean obviously she’s perfect but that diamond looks blah in that photo.

yes, not much brightness and a bit of a dead center by PS standards.
Really, what was she thinking saying yes to a prince with a subpar stone?!?!?!

In all fairness, the photo has probably been copied several times and isnt the highest resolution. Id love to see a macro photo of this ring so we PSrs could really see the cut, size, ratio, and really tear apart the royal jewelers. Jk.

 

[Niel]

yes, not much brightness and a bit of a dead center by PS standards.
Really, what was she thinking saying yes to a prince with a subpar stone?!?!?!

In all fairness, the photo has probably been copied several times and isnt the highest resolution. Id love to see a macro photo of this ring so we PSrs could really see the cut, size, ratio, and really tear apart the royal jewelers. Jk.

Well lucky me I wasn’t the recipient so I don’t have to pretend i like it more than I do

 

[acv123]

new pics today! interesssssting.

 

[SimoneDi]

@acv123 thanks for sharing these! I think it is safe to say that it is a cushion indeed!

 

[kgizo]

Interesting how the prongs are done on the side stones. They don’t look symmetrical and I’m used to seeing symmetrical prongs on side stones.

 

[whitewave]

Prongs are kind of beefy... could be nicer IMO

 

[SimoneDi]

I was going to make a comment about the prongs, but didn’t want to criticize the royal ring I dislike the setting, not sure if they were trying to give an illusion for trapezoids on the side and therefore the asymmetrical prongs. It can certainly be executed much better.

 

[elizabethess]

You're right, kgizo and SimoneDi, I think that's why I kept thinking the side stones were not round, no matter how many times people said they were. It's not the stones, it's the prongs!

 

[elizabethess]

I don't know technical specs re: setting but assuming it's just as sturdy, I actually greatly like the asymmetrical prongs and the resulting illusion of taper. I know this is just my own flavor of preference, and my own 3 stone ER has 3 prongs per side stone, and six for the center. Traditional 4 prong looks blocky and square to me (unless turned to be NSEW).

 

[msop04]

I don't know technical specs re: setting but assuming it's just as sturdy, I actually greatly like the asymmetrical prongs and the resulting illusion of taper. I know this is just my own flavor of preference, and my own 3 stone ER has 3 prongs per side stone, and six for the center. Traditional 4 prong looks blocky and square to me (unless turned to be NSEW).

I agree... I rather like the placement of the side stone prongs. I think it gives it a more feminine aesthetic than the standard square placement.

 

[msop04]

I'd like to see the gallery...

 

[Slickk]

I'd like to see the gallery...

Given the general aesthetic, I assume the gallery is simple and sturdy. I don’t like it as much as I did from afar.

 

[msop04]

Given the general aesthetic, I assume the gallery is simple and sturdy. I don’t like it as much as I did from afar.

I would agree... classic.

 

[LawmaLlama]

Honestly, I consider this a fairly modest ring for a royal/celebrity. I held up the photo next to my own 3 stone ring (not that it is anywhere near comparable), and if she has a size 5 finger I'd guess those side stones are 0.5-0.75 each and the center 2.5-3.5 cts.

Not the gargantuan ring one would expect for a royal. I think it is evident of her style, perhaps simplicity and utility (not so big she cant wear it every day while doing charitable duties), but still with enough flash to stand out in her social engagements with the "upper echelon."

I believe I read somewhere that the queen's ring has a 3 ct center stone. So Meghan's would be in line with the queen's but certainly not the amazing and flashy EC that Camilla P.B. has.

 

[cflutist]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...rican-women-think-big-diamond-looks-like.html

http://www.townandcountrymag.com/st...0076/queen-elizabeth-wedding-engagement-ring/

 

[MaisOuiMadame]

@LawmaLlama Diamonds are A LOT smaller in Europe, so by our standards this is gargantuan already .

Colour and clarity are also more valued.


And the royal family tries to convey the image of being "relatable"... they distinctly so not want to fall into the "celebrity" category. Obviously all this is very much what THEY want project, but one won't see anything really flashy anytime soon. The crown jewels have a different legal status and the queen's pieces partly belong to her, but mostly cannot be sold or given away.

I really think they are adorable together. Imo they can grateful that Meghan accepted to basically give up her life to serve "the firm". True love.

 

[purplesilk]

I'm not impressedrince Harry could have done better with the setting.
@kipari : you're right,the main diamond is considered big here in Europe and it is probably D IF, because we value more color and clarity than carat...this drives crazy our dear members from the US!!!