Setting for a 1.5-2.2c diamond to make it look big??

[sapphic]

Hi I wanted to get some opinions on what simple setting would make a diamond look biggest? There's the obvious Tiffany solitaire, but that one seems a bit too plain. Here were the 2 that I have seen online on WF:

The Vatche Royal Crown
Fine Line by Le

What do you all think of these 2 settings and how big they may make the diamond look? I considered the Vatche X-Prong, but that one seems to actually make the diamond look smaller. What I do like is the "tapered" look, where the band gets thinner the closer to the diamond, accentuating the diamond more.

Are there other suggestions for simple designs (no additional stones) that would accentuate the diamond?

Thanks!

Here's the Royal Crown, followed by the Fine Line:

 

[sapphic]

Fine Line by Le:

 

[belle]

i like the fine line

 

[MissAva]

I know the Tiffany is obvious but that is becuase it is soo pretty. Did you see the No brand one WF has on their web page, I love the prongs and the knife edge.

 

[sapphic]

Does any one own the Fine Line here that can speak to it?

Here was 1 Tiffany that looked a bit different and heftier:

 

[sapphic]

This is the simple Tiffany one that I was thinking of, which I see in all the stores as a "starter ring".

 

[rosy]

Date: 7/20/2005 9:42:59 PM
Author: sapphic
This is the simple Tiffany one that I was thinking of, which I see in all the stores as a ''starter ring''.

The simple Tiffany makes the ring look larger because it is a peg head, which is removable from the ring itself. Plus it''s six prongs that are very thick & that adds bulk to the diamond. Of course it''s not a particularly attractive setting but it does make the diamond look bigger. I know cuz my best friend has a diamond the exact weight & dimensions as mine, her''s looks bigger because of this setting. Mines looks smaller because it is the lower set, thinner pronged authentic Tiffany ring. I think the Fine Line by Le might be a better option than the vatche, I''m not sure if a wedding band will sit flush against the vatche.

 

[valeria101]

... what setting would make 2 cts look big... hard Q!

How about a piece of tape to hold it on the finger ?

That IS a large stone !

Oh well, or I would do a Tiffany knife edge, like the one at NiceIce (LINK to ring page), 'cause the basket encases the stonein a more substantial object, and then the band is relatively thin (knife edge makes it look even thinner, while keeping strength).

Definitely six prong (or eight, but that is hard to find these days). Someone did find one though - below is one 1.8cts G Si2 diamond in vintage eight prong basket:




IMO, the 'crown' of prongs of the ring above not only plays up the symmetry and shape of the stone (round brilliants have eight-fold symmetry after all) but also add to the diameter of the stone. SO yes, all those tiny prongs do make the stone look larger. Since there are many prongs each can be small and dainty and the ring will still hold the stone safely. Large prongs dwarf the diamond, small ones remain discrete but do create the illusion that the stone ends on the outer border of the prongs' line.

I am not sure this tells the story well, I'll try a picture in the next post

Just one more random vote, of course.

 

[valeria101]

this is what I was trying to show above... Without the rings at hand to show, the best I can do is a drawing.

 

[Maxine]

"That IS a large stone......."



Ana, these were my thoughts exactly.......it IS a large stone.....I think it''s important to choose a setting which looks good with and balanced with the stone....the stone is what it is....find a setting that compements it, and it will look great...!!!!!!

The best way to do that, IMO, is to place the actual stone against certain settings, and see how you like the resulting "look"......or look around at preset stones and try them on....which ones appeal to you???

 

[laney]

I know that you were looking for a simple setting.. but does that mean no other embelishments.

I found that my 1.5 looked really big in my tacori setting. The reason I think is that I have two very small sidestones right next to my center stone.. The edge of the small side stones sit UNDER the edge of the Center stone.

This kind of draws the eye out -and doesn''t let it "focus" on the edge of the stone. There by makeing the center stone look bigger.

If you want a simple setting... maybe consider a Center stone.. with two very small side stones on a plain band. ME, well I like pave.. so... But a simple setting with two very small stones next to it will look quite nice.

Picture to show small stone... big stone...small stone... oOo ...

 

[valeria101]

Date: 7/21/2005 10:38:22 AM
Author: laney

If you want a simple setting... maybe consider a Center stone.. with two very small side stones on a plain band. ME, well I like pave.. so...

Just in case, Laney's lines reminded me of this:

The small diamonds on the sides should not make this custom ring way overdone or allot more expensive than some plain designer solitaires with no stones at all. Actualy, the daintier the shank the better. The two accent diamonds next to the center stone could be slightly larger to add inetest (as per Laney's description). I do not know the siye of the ring and stone in the picture, but someone from Whiteflash (the picture comes from the 'Whiteflash Gallery') could answer that. If you like the idea, it is always worth trying a question.

 

[Maxine]

That last one is actually similar to my ring.....when I tried the stone on it, it just "worked" for me visually!!! I think it''s because as you look at the side stones, your mind goes bling, bling, bling, bling BLING......!!!!!

This is not a good pic....but the stone is 1.21, and you''re looking at a much bigger one.....(sidestones are .05 each....l)

 

[sapphic]

Found this thread with pics of a
"GIA 1.11ct J SI2. Her ring size is 4.5 Tiffany Knife Edge."

It actually makes the 1.1 stone look quite big:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/engagement-ring-pictures-finally.20785/

 

[Mara]

I LOVE the Fine Line by Le setting...in fact way back when I actually considered it for all of 5 minutes when I thought maybe I wanted to save $$ and get a bigger stone or something instead of a fancier setting, I thought it was perfect.

I actually think it only looks good with larger stones. So something like a 1.5-1.7 would be nice in it. If you surf the WF site they have a ''thumbnail'' of it with a 2c stone in it, and then if you click on the thumbnail it goes to a smaller stone ring...I actually emailed WF a while back asking ''what size is the thumbnail stone'' since that thumbnail image makes it look HUGE.

 

[Mara]

here''s the thumbnail with the ~2c stone. YUM!