Question for anyone w/ a thin ritani ring...

[sslkrissi]

Hello,
As some of you may know, b/c I have posted about it before, I am planning to get the thin ritani solitaire ring (like Kayla''s, Hamster''s, etc.) with a round H&A, probably close to 1.5 ct. I have been going through all the old posts regarding that setting and have begun to wonder whether it will be enough bling. Many people have said that it is more of a subtle sparkle than all-out bling. When I tried it on in BB&B, I absolutely loved it and thought it was perfect the way it was. I think I am beginning to question it now for the sole reason that I haevn''t seen it in forver and have been reading old posts.

Anyways, I was wondering if any of you that have this ring (or even if you don''t have it but want to voice your opinion), have ever considered getting a W-band other than the matching one, in order to have more bling? I was thinking something a little different, like the firegoddess'' last W-band. I am not sure what the style is called, but it is made up of triangle shapes instead of just a plain circle around the finger. I will try to post a picture of what I am talking about. So, what do you think? Would that look horrible? Would it take away from the setting?

Thanks

 

[sslkrissi]

OK, I can''t figure out haw to post the pictures that I have saved, but here is the ritani ring that I want: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/is-this-crooked-or-am-i-crossed-eyed.21846/=

And here is the type of W-band that I am talking about: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pear-etta-james-thread-updates.32776/=

Thanks

 

[mrssalvo]

it''s normal to second guess a setting choice, heck i do it all the time. I''d suggest trying to go and see the Ritani in person again just so you are 100% sure. they aren''t as blingy as a shared prong set but I love the Ritani endless love collection and considered it for a long time as my own upgrade. as for mixing up the wedding band, i think it''s totally a personal preference. I like matchy, matcy but I have seen some gorgeous sets here that don''t match but look great together. Get what you like, you''re going to be looking at it 24/7 and should like what you see.

 

[esguy27]

I bought my gf that same Ritani ring (although I haven''t given it to her yet). I think it sparkles a ton and that it looks great. The small band makes the center stone look even bigger and draws plenty of attention to it (that''s the point right?). It sounds like that was your original feeling as well when you saw it in person at BBB. You know the old saying, you''re first instinct is usually correct. If you''re still not sure, go back and take another look at it. Personally, I like the matching WB. To me, it looks a little off when you have a WB that does not match the ring itself. I''m a guy though, so take my opinion with a grain of salt

 

[sslkrissi]

Thanks for the advice. I am going to back and try it one again at some point. I normally opt for the matchy matchy stuff too, but when I saw firegoddess''s thin art-deco looking band that she added to her set, I thought it looked amazing. Maybe that it b/c the original set is shared prong instead of micro pave like the ritani. I''m not sure.

Btw, do any of you know how to post the picture from the link I attached which shows what I am talking about? It is the picture where she is wearing the e-ring, one regular w-band and then the art-deco one.

I also was thinking that the ritani ring might look good with one of those art-deco type of bands on each side. Maybe then it wouldn''t look so out of place. I guess I am going to have to see if I can try something on like that it person.

 

[mrssalvo]

Here''s firegoddess rings

 

[sslkrissi]

Thank you so much for posting that for me. For some reason everytime I tried to, it would say that it was the wrong size or the was something wrong with the name.

I just love her set. It is so dainty. I believe it is even thinner than the ritani that I want.

 

[esguy27]

Sometimes you need to rename the file you want to upload before it will work. Next time, just do a "save as" onto your computer and change the name from it''s current name. Basically I think the way Pricescope works is if there is already a photo attached to a thread and the file''s name is "Photo1", then nobody else can post a photo with that name. They all have to be unique.

Anyway, just try changing the file name next time and it should work.

 

[FireGoddess]

It's so nice to stumble upon people saying nice things about your rings.

When I was trying to decide with my jeweler what to do about my upgraded wedding set, I had *thought* that I wanted a really thin pave-type band. My jeweler showed me a custom design that she had just done for another customer in that same vein and I immediately nixed the idea. The diamonds were so teeny that while the ring was beautiful, it shimmered more than outright sparkled. I definitely knew at that point that I wanted to do the shared prong thing instead. I pushed for a really thin band and so I ended up with 2 pointers. It really makes the center stone pop. I do think it turned out even thinner than I thought it would because the bands are shared prong. The underside of the rings (they're only half eternity) are the thickness I thought the rings would be, but the shared prong half is even thinner because of the prong work.

I love the Ritani sets and I can't comment specifically on those because I haven't ever seen one in person. I definitely think you should check it out again. I do think that having 2 art deco type bands flanking a Ritani ring could be SO gorgeous. I love the deco band and more often than not, I wear that with the ering and leave out the matchy wedding band. The diamonds in the deco band are 3 pointers.

 

[mrssalvo]

Date: 1/31/2006 5:20:34 PM
Author: esguy27
Sometimes you need to rename the file you want to upload before it will work. Next time, just do a ''save as'' onto your computer and change the name from it''s current name. Basically I think the way Pricescope works is if there is already a photo attached to a thread and the file''s name is ''Photo1'', then nobody else can post a photo with that name. They all have to be unique.


Anyway, just try changing the file name next time and it should work.

you can also just copy and paste the url address which is much easier than loading it and onto your hardrive and uploading it back on PS.

 

[sslkrissi]

Firegoddess,
I do absolutely love your ring. I think it has more sparkle than the Ritani, but I don''t think my BF wants to go the custom route, so the ritani is the daintiest non-custom ring that I have seen.

I think that Kayla once said in a post that the size of the diamonds in the ritani setting are only 0.06 ct. How does that compare to the 2 pointers that are in your ring? How much of a carat are 2 point stones?

Also, you mentioned in one of your older posts (I think) that you were trying to get a second art deco band. Did you ever get it?

Thanks

 

[FireGoddess]

Date: 1/31/2006 6:34:40 PM
Author: sslkrissi
Firegoddess,
I do absolutely love your ring. I think it has more sparkle than the Ritani, but I don''t think my BF wants to go the custom route, so the ritani is the daintiest non-custom ring that I have seen.

I think that Kayla once said in a post that the size of the diamonds in the ritani setting are only 0.06 ct. How does that compare to the 2 pointers that are in your ring? How much of a carat are 2 point stones?

Also, you mentioned in one of your older posts (I think) that you were trying to get a second art deco band. Did you ever get it?

Thanks

My jeweler totally dropped the ball on the second art deco band. I called a few times about it, it was never there, and then finally decided to forego it since the jeweler dropped the ball and stacking 4 bands on one finger might be a little tight. I woulda pressed had I not already had my platinum matchy matchy wedding band made, but I already had that so I let the second deco band go.

I think the Ritani melee is actually .006 ct and not .06 ct. There are 100 points in a carat, which can also be expressed as 1.00. My 2 pointers =.02 and =1/50 of a carat. Since the Ritani melee is even smaller, they are .006 ct. That''s a little over half of 1 point. So those stones are less than half as big as the ones in my band. I hope I didn''t just make that more confusing.

 

[Odilia]

I might be sort of a "Pricescope heretic" in that I don''t like too much bling, at least with two blingy rings together, which was my huge dilemma when engaged. (I like a good amount of bling in one single ring!) I like things to match, so plain solitaire with eternity w-band wouldn''t work, even though it would solve the "too much bling" issue. If I had seen the Ritani Endless Love (without halo) when engaged, (or Michael B lace) I would have gotten it, precisely because it seems more of a shimmer than ''too blingy''.

Alas, I did NOT see those before my wedding, but last year I tried on a Scott Kay ring with pave. In some lights it looked beautiful, sparkly, etc... But outside on a cloudy day, the pave part didn''t seem too sparkly to me. I have found the same thing with a friend''s rings that have pave; they look so sparkly in sunshine or restaurant lights, but in dull light, not so much. But then again, maybe no ring is going to sparkle too much on a rainy day!!! However, I haven''t noticed this effect as much with rings that aren''t pave. I don''t know if this helps any. I still think the pave rings are very pretty.

Incidentally, if I''d seen firegoddess''s set before my wedding, I might have gotten something like hers too!!

They look gorgeous in the pictures.

 

[sslkrissi]

Date: 1/31/2006 6:49:29 PM
Author: FireGoddess

Date: 1/31/2006 6:34:40 PM
Author: sslkrissi
Firegoddess,
I do absolutely love your ring. I think it has more sparkle than the Ritani, but I don''t think my BF wants to go the custom route, so the ritani is the daintiest non-custom ring that I have seen.

I think that Kayla once said in a post that the size of the diamonds in the ritani setting are only 0.06 ct. How does that compare to the 2 pointers that are in your ring? How much of a carat are 2 point stones?

Also, you mentioned in one of your older posts (I think) that you were trying to get a second art deco band. Did you ever get it?

Thanks

My jeweler totally dropped the ball on the second art deco band. I called a few times about it, it was never there, and then finally decided to forego it since the jeweler dropped the ball and stacking 4 bands on one finger might be a little tight. I woulda pressed had I not already had my platinum matchy matchy wedding band made, but I already had that so I let the second deco band go.

I think the Ritani melee is actually .006 ct and not .06 ct. There are 100 points in a carat, which can also be expressed as 1.00. My 2 pointers =.02 and =1/50 of a carat. Since the Ritani melee is even smaller, they are .006 ct. That''s a little over half of 1 point. So those stones are less than half as big as the ones in my band. I hope I didn''t just make that more confusing.

Wow, I can''t believe that the stones in the Ritani are that small. Whenever I see pictures of your ring, I think that it is just perfect. I can''t picture the stones in the ritani being just over 1/4 of the size of your stones. I stink at math, so excuse me if I am being a little dense. But, if the width of the ritani is about 1.7mm, how can the stones be that much smaller than yours?

I really appreciate your help on this. If you don''t mind me asking, where did you have your ring made? I know from reading the posts that you had a problem with having it made the first time and finally ended up with this one that I love. When you sent back the first one, did you know the width of the band that you wanted? Did you know that you wanted shared prong instead of pave? Last question, I swear.... when you look closely to your stones, they seem to come over the band on both sides (meaning there is not any metal showing on the outer sides of your band, at least from what I can see), what is that called? I think that makes a big difference in making it sparklier vs. shimmery?

Thanks so much

 

[sslkrissi]

Oops, Firegoddess... Just noticed that you already answered the shared prong question in your earlier post. Sorry about the repeat question.

 

[FireGoddess]

Date: 1/31/2006 9:48:13 PM
Author: sslkrissi

Wow, I can''t believe that the stones in the Ritani are that small. Whenever I see pictures of your ring, I think that it is just perfect. I can''t picture the stones in the ritani being just over 1/4 of the size of your stones. I stink at math, so excuse me if I am being a little dense. But, if the width of the ritani is about 1.7mm, how can the stones be that much smaller than yours?

I''m going off recollection here but I believe the Ritani is bead set into the band rather than shared prong. The band also has metal edges so while the band is similar in width, more of the Ritani ring is metal than diamond as compared to mine. I couldn''t quickly find a good picture but here is one from the Ritani website. In this ring there is metal on either side of the diamonds in the band, which accounts for the thickness versus mine where it''s prong set and there''s no metal on either side of the diamonds when you look face down at the band.

Date: 1/31/2006 9:48:13 PM
Author: sslkrissi
I really appreciate your help on this. If you don''t mind me asking, where did you have your ring made? I know from reading the posts that you had a problem with having it made the first time and finally ended up with this one that I love. When you sent back the first one, did you know the width of the band that you wanted? Did you know that you wanted shared prong instead of pave? Last question, I swear.... when you look closely to your stones, they seem to come over the band on both sides (meaning there is not any metal showing on the outer sides of your band, at least from what I can see), what is that called? I think that makes a big difference in making it sparklier vs. shimmery?

Thanks so much

I can pm you the name of my jeweler if you want it, but it is a local person in Northern California. I did not post the name because I cannot wholeheartedly recommend them - as you know I had some trouble getting the ring made (see this thread which details some of the trouble I had with this ring, not even including the cocktail version that came out first). I did know the width of the band that I wanted, before and after sending the first one back. As for the last question, the stones do seem to come over the sides of the band - no metal shows from the face up view, except for the itty bitty prongs. The reason this doesn''t cause a problem with my wedding set is because they were made half -eternity, so the bottom of the ring is a little wider than the top of the ring - and the diamonds in the ering and wband never touch.

 

[sslkrissi]

Firegoddess,I really appreciate your help with this. I guess there is no need to PM me with the name of the vendor b/c I don''t live any where near California. But thanks anyways!

PS- how thick is your art-deco/shaped band? Do those types of bands have a particular name? Its kinda hard to describe them.

Thanks

 

[FireGoddess]

At the widest part of the art deco band it measures approximately 2 mm, maybe a hair over that.

They have a bunch of them at wannabuyawatch.com (link here) but they aren''t called anything particular other than a descriptive name for the eternity band. They also have some at Fay Cullen (link here) and most of them are called art deco eternity bands. So....not sure if there is a specific name for them other than that.