So a funny thing happend on the way to my upgrade...

[Dee*Jay]

I have a small problem... I think I might really like the "temporary" stone I got a few weeks ago. Is that just crazy? The color and clarity are my sweet spot (H SI1) and I like the longer LGFs, which are quite hard to find as I''ve since learned.

To get enough of a visual difference to justifying trading again I''ll have to go to about 4.5 cts (Mara warned me about this!!!) and that could cost as much as ANOTHER $20K (not to mention what I''ve got into this thing already, ug!)

But here is the (almost) deciding factor: I was in a jewelry store with a friend of mine earlier this week and we were playing with settings. I tried on a Jack Kelege that the jeweler plunked a 3 ct stone it just for reference and it really blew me away! Plus, in a setting like I''m thinking of there really wouldn''t be much more impact between a 3 and 4 ct (or maybe larger) because of the whole "package."

I don''t want the exact setting that I tried on, but I''ve spend the past few days gathering photos of rings with "pieces" that I like and now I need some advice. Should I keep this stone or should I just bite the bullet and just go bigger and get it over with? Or should I work on getting a custom setting made and keep this stone? The setting really would be committing because I''m not about to spend $5-10K on it and then get a bigger stone later that wouldn''t fit.

But enough of the babble, how bout some pics?

I like the idea of a squarish halo with a round stone.

 

[Dee*Jay]

I also like the idea of somehow incorporating my current pears into the shank (although not exactly like this, but you get the idea).

 

[Dee*Jay]

Or I could go with different side stones, maybe rounds or some squarish shape.

 

[Dee*Jay]

And what about maybe making the corners of the halo a little "pointy"?

 

[MrsT]

Gorgeous settings. I tried on one today very similar to third one. I''m rethinking my whole ring now.

What are LGF''s?

Mrs.T

 

[Ellen]

I LOVE the first two ring pics. Gorgeous!

I can''t tell you what to do, only you can decide. Question is, do you look at this stone and "wish" it had/was something else? I would say, if you have any doubt at all, go for the gusto.

Otherwise, start setting shopping!

 

[Dee*Jay]

Well OK, maybe not really like that last pic now that I see it enlarged (LOL!) but you see what I'm getting at.

A few other things:

I want the halo to be relatively small. Some of these halos have stones that I think are just TOO BIG and they end up looking cocktail ringy rather than enhancing the center stone in a subtle way.

I also want the shank to taper from wider at the head to narrower as it goes down the shank. Shanks that are all one width look very engagement ringy to me and I want this to be more of a stand along ring and not have to wear it with another band.

And the milgraining has to be delicate--not some of the big bally stuff that I see - yuck!

ETA: One more thing, the diamond has to be set low so it doesn't stick up in from the setting in some weird way.

So some questions:

Do you think these pices would all "fit together" in some reasonable way or am I trying to put too much together in one ring?

Do you think this is all a bit much with a 3.37 ct stone on a size 4.75 finger?

Finally, do you think this will end up looking old ladyish?

HELP ME!

 

[Dee*Jay]

Mrs. T. - LGFs are lower girdle facets. A particular obsession of mine. Most "normal" people will never even give an LGF a second thought.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 7/27/2006 7:47:55 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
Mrs. T. - LGFs are lower girdle facets. A particular obsession of mine. Most ''normal'' people will never even give an LGF a second thought.

What are you saying, we''re not normal??

 

[MrsT]

I just found a post on them. I can''t deal with another measurement!lol
Good luck
Mrs.T

 

[Dee*Jay]

Mrs. T. - I mean "normal" even for a PSer! Even most PSers won''t give an LGF a second thought! (LOL -- It''s a good thing we all have each other!

)

 

[ladykemma]

Date: 7/27/2006 7:49:04 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 7/27/2006 7:47:55 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
Mrs. T. - LGFs are lower girdle facets. A particular obsession of mine. Most ''normal'' people will never even give an LGF a second thought.

What are you saying, we''re not normal??

my turn to laugh out loud

 

[Sundial]

A bigger solitaire isn''t the only way to get extra bling from your ring. The setting can provide extra impact too as you''ve seen from looking at these beauties. I really like the one with the pointy corners!!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think those settings are beautiful! And I certainly think a 3 ct. stone is pleeeeenty big unless someone has size 10 fingers or something! But I''ll be honest and say (since you asked) that I think a halo on a 3 ct. round stone on a size 4.75 finger might be a little much. I really prefer something like KristyDarling''s setting when it is a round that large. I love smaller diamonds in halos since they can afford to appear larger. But you can count on the fact that I''ll support your choice whatever it is, and I''m sure I''ll love it!!!

 

[Dee*Jay]

Forgot to say that I''m open to ideas so if anyone has any settings they want to suggest I''m totally game!

One of my fears is that I''m going to end up with a ring that I can''t wear every day all the time like I do with the simple setting I have now. Do you think it would be a bit much to go to Home Depot (I forget who turned me on to the fab lighting at HD, but thanks whoever that was!) in something like this? One of the things I love about my jewelry is that I don''t have to *think* about it.

 

[Cehrabehra]

I like the shank of #2 and the halo of #4

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 7/27/2006 8:17:49 PM
Author: Dee*Jay
Forgot to say that I''m open to ideas so if anyone has any settings they want to suggest I''m totally game!

One of my fears is that I''m going to end up with a ring that I can''t wear every day all the time like I do with the simple setting I have now. Do you think it would be a bit much to go to Home Depot (I forget who turned me on to the fab lighting at HD, but thanks whoever that was!) in something like this? One of the things I love about my jewelry is that I don''t have to *think* about it.

I am in exactly the same situation. I saw a setting the other day that was gorgeous, but it was pretty blingy. I am pretty casual all the time, which is why I''ve been leaning toward a SC Tiffany solitaire and a diamond band. I very much agree that I don''t want to have to think about whether my rings are too much to go to certain places.

 

[Dee*Jay]

How interesting that people like the halo on #4! When I saw it blown up so big I as like "yuck!" but it got the same gentle pointiness (if that makes any sense) of the Jack Kelege that I really liked yesterday. Hmmmm....

I just realized that the first pic is a Beverly K. I couldn't find any Chicago distributers on their website so I called Beverly K directly. They were so friendly and helpful! Interestingly enough they told me that Dimend Scaasi could order any Beverly K item. I think I realy somewhere that there were some bands on DS's site that looked like BK. I have been to DS's showroom before but maybe I'll stroll over there again tomorrow and see what they've got.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Date: 7/27/2006 8:32:26 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 7/27/2006 8:17:49 PM

Author: Dee*Jay

Forgot to say that I'm open to ideas so if anyone has any settings they want to suggest I'm totally game!


One of my fears is that I'm going to end up with a ring that I can't wear every day all the time like I do with the simple setting I have now. Do you think it would be a bit much to go to Home Depot (I forget who turned me on to the fab lighting at HD, but thanks whoever that was!) in something like this? One of the things I love about my jewelry is that I don't have to *think* about it.

I am in exactly the same situation. I saw a setting the other day that was gorgeous, but it was pretty blingy. I am pretty casual all the time, which is why I've been leaning toward a SC Tiffany solitaire and a diamond band. I very much agree that I don't want to have to think about whether my rings are too much to go to certain places.

DS, I was thinking today that if I get something on this level I will then also only have my eternity and (almost 5 cts total, again to much to wear to Home Depot) and my original wedding ring which is the most delicate (virtually nondescript) thing you've ever seen--definitely not substantial enough to wear on its own. So I would need to then buy something "in between" to wear on a casual basis. Does it never end?!?!?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yeah, somebody figured out that the rings in their English collection were really Beverly K. They are beautiful.

 

[Dee*Jay]

That's right DS! I couldn't remember the details. (Senility at 35 is a terrible thing... LOL!)

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 7/27/2006 8:39:27 PM
Author: Dee*Jay

Date: 7/27/2006 8:32:26 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006

Date: 7/27/2006 8:17:49 PM

Author: Dee*Jay

Forgot to say that I''m open to ideas so if anyone has any settings they want to suggest I''m totally game!


One of my fears is that I''m going to end up with a ring that I can''t wear every day all the time like I do with the simple setting I have now. Do you think it would be a bit much to go to Home Depot (I forget who turned me on to the fab lighting at HD, but thanks whoever that was!) in something like this? One of the things I love about my jewelry is that I don''t have to *think* about it.

I am in exactly the same situation. I saw a setting the other day that was gorgeous, but it was pretty blingy. I am pretty casual all the time, which is why I''ve been leaning toward a SC Tiffany solitaire and a diamond band. I very much agree that I don''t want to have to think about whether my rings are too much to go to certain places.

DS, I was thinking today that if I get something on this level I will then also only have my eternity and (almost 5 cts total, again to much to wear to Home Depot) and my original wedding ring which is the most delicate (virtually nondescript) thing you''ve ever seen--definitely not substantial enough to wear on its own. So I would need to then buy something ''in between'' to wear on a casual basis. Does it never end?!?!?

Lol! I think not! I just told Belle on my setting thread that I needed multiple sets, too!!

 

[3hearts]

"bite the bullet and just go bigger and get it over with?"

I vote to get the bigger size stone because for me, changing the setting would only give me the illusion of a larger stone, but my heart will always think about that bigger stone. yes, I''ve become a size whore

my 2.5 has already shrank

and I don''t think this maddness will end until I get the size I really want

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Date: 7/28/2006 12:22:41 AM
Author: 3hearts
''bite the bullet and just go bigger and get it over with?''

I vote to get the bigger size stone because for me, changing the setting would only give me the illusion of a larger stone, but my heart will always think about that bigger stone. yes, I''ve become a size whore

my 2.5 has already shrank

and I don''t think this maddness will end until I get the size I really want

But she has just upgraded to the 3 ct., right Dee Jay?

 

[KristyDarling]

Hello DeeJay! Based on this and other posts, it seems like bottom line, you''re going for maximum size impact. Whether it''s with a halo or a larger stone is SO personal, but I think it totally depends on the kind of look you''re going for. You mentioned wanting to avoid the cocktail ring look....but if you got a teeny, dainty little halo AND also have the wide shank near the stone (that tapers down), to me that seems kind of cocktailish. (though beautiful too). But I guess it would all depend on the design.

If you can comfortably cough up the extra 20K, I say go for a larger stone, otherwise you''ll wonder why you didn''t when you could''ve (and diamond prices are only getting higher). So then -- how would you set a 4.5carat round? If you don''t want it to look too engagement ring-y but yet you also don''t want it to look cocktail-ish, then you''ll have a challenge ahead of you. With a stone that big, it''s inherently got a look of its own and you''ll have to work around that to find a setting that meets all your requirements.

My 3-stone ring doesn''t look engagement ring-y to me at all (I don''t even wear it with a wedding band), and it''s not cocktaily either. Perhaps you could find some gorgeous pears or rounds for your current beautiful stone and that might satisfy your craving for a more dramatic look? And if you like pave, I could totally see some very delicate micropave encrusted all over the ring....wow, that would be something!!

 

[dazedland]

I really love how it looks with the ''pointy'' corners on the halo, but I am looking at my ring as I type and if I spell something wrong that is why But I think I would rather have a rounded corners halo. My ring cuts my finger all the time, ''tis not the way it looks, but the way my ring finger looks AND if you like the temp stone, keep it, you can always change later.

 

[mrssalvo]

lots to think about. I agree that you''ll have to decide if you really love your stone or want to move up in size again if that''s the ultimate goal. I think mara said in an upgrade thread that she actually was really happy with her current stone and it was so nice to not have the feeling of wanting bigger and waiting for the next upgrade(for the time being anyway.lol) So, are you at that place, if you keep it, are you really happy with it and will you feel satisified? if you are, move on to the setting hunt. If you still feel like you might want bigger, then keep moving in that direction. I do agree that you have a huge stone already and it surely will make an impact. Your hands are small and a 4.5 might even be...gasp..too big?? it''s up to you and what you like and are comfortable with. I''ll like whatever you decide

 

[diamond diva]

Go for the bigger stone!!
You know in your heart that''s what you really want!
The rest is all just "filler""

Diamond Diva

 

[Dee*Jay]

Oh no! All this conflicting advice!!!

It boils down to a couple of things for me: Even if I did go bigger I think I am still interested in setting it in the same way because I want a stand-alone non-engagement ring looking ring. (Think Art Nouveau's gorgeous reset as an example.) So, even if I went to 4, 4.5, 5, 6 (

) would I really gain that much more impact in a setting like this rather than if it was a solitaire or even had side stones? And, if I go too big this thing will cover the entire width of my finger and at some point it *does* get too big (can't belive I'm even saying that... ).

Another thing is that I really like this diamond. It grew on me pretty quickly. In the beginning I was reluctant to get it because of the numbers but it really spoke to me. Plus, I just had a thread where John Q., Gary and Storm all said it's a good stone--can it get any better than that?!? (Of course they are working off the numbers only and I don't have an Idealscope image or helium scan, but hey, I'll take what I can get!)

And honestly, if I don't like the new setting... we'll I will just pop it out and buy a new bigger stone. I have no qualms about doing that, and then I would just put a colored gemstone in the setting. Or maybe a canary diamond. (Hmmm.... I'm getting some ideas... ). I am in the very fortunate postion that I could afford to spend the extra $20K (or whatever) to get a bigger stone but I'm just not sure I need it at this point.

Finally, I'm going to look at some more settings of this ilk and make sure I'm 100% certain. I'm pretty much there but I want to be sure before I embark on this setting adventure. I have to go to a charity raffle at lunchtime today but maybe I can sneak out a little early and go to Dimend Scaasi and see if they have this Beverly K setting that I like. For some reason I'm thinking I actually saw it (or something VERY) similar there a few months ago and I would like to visi it again. Not to mention Beverly K is less expensive (in a realtive sense) than the custom option I was talking to the other jeweler about. (I.e., $4-5K rather than $7-10K.) And with that savings I could buy another diamond band that is something in between my tiny delicate original wedding ring and my big eternity band, and then I would always have something to wear for any occasion.

The wheels are turning!!!

 

[KristyDarling]

OK, after reading your last post this is what I'd do if I were you. Since you really like the temp stone and you also have the flexibility to upgrade it at any point, I'd just stick with the temp stone (for now!) and put it in a setting you really love. You can always upgrade it later and heck, don't we diamond lovers ALWAYS need to have a future project on the back burner?

So, keep it, set it, keep your eyes open for a larger stone for later, and once you find it, pop out the temp and replace it with a canary yellow diamond, and start dreaming/planning about how you want to set the new honker stone! Man, just re-reading that makes my mouth water. That is my idea of super-fun!!! If you keep your current stone, you'll have the double pleasure of 1) owning a gorgeous huge stone in the setting of your choice, and 2) knowing that at any point you can get an even bigger stone and actually act on it!

You'll be prolonging the pleasure instead of going straight to the "big gun." Can I be you???