to halo or not? vintage or no....HELP!

[flash407]

I am upgrading from a 1.6 RB to an oval ~2.5-30. This is my 2nd upgrade and I suspect my DH thinks this should be it. I love Leon Mege/the vintage look but I also love the classic HW platinum look with baguettes on the side. As I''''ve been looking around, I see alot of halos and the Taccori/Mege/Kelege look. I''''m just worried about getting something that will be trendy. (Let''''s face it, my wedding was 16 yrs ago and I''''ve been out of this ring loop for a while!)

Any help is appreciated!


Jenny

 

[Lorelei]

Welcome to PS Jenny!

This thread might be best posted in Rocky Talk or Hangout as you will get more replies there. My feelings are with a larger diamond, embellishment such as a halo isn't needed - that size doesn't need it unless it is a look you are totally in love with and hopefully will remain in love with. A classic solitaire with or without sidestones might be the way to go, as this style will never date and has stood the test of time. I think it would be stunning in the HW or Tiffany style.

 

[Ellen]

I agree, at that size, you really don''t need a halo, unless you love them of course!

If it were me, I''d go with one of these:

Totally simple, classic look.

or

Something with just a bit of zing on a split shank.

or

Zing on a single shank....

Love those!

 

[DMBsGirl]

I wouldn''t worry about halos being trendy. I mean, in reality it''s a very antique look that has regained popularity. In my opinion, something with a vintage/antique look doesn''t go out of style. So, if you love a halo, then go for it! However, that size stone can totally shine on its own. As someone else said, a pave split shank would also look divine with that size oval! I''m not a fan of baguettes as they don''t sparkle much so that would probably be my last choice.

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 7/28/2007 12:41:44 PM
Author: DMBsGirl
I wouldn''t worry about halos being trendy. I mean, in reality it''s a very antique look that has regained popularity. In my opinion, something with a vintage/antique look doesn''t go out of style. So, if you love a halo, then go for it! However, that size stone can totally shine on its own. As someone else said, a pave split shank would also look divine with that size oval! I''m not a fan of baguettes as they don''t sparkle much so that would probably be my last choice.

I agree with DMBsGirl completely about halos! Although I do like baguettes, they definitely wouldn''t be my first choice for an oval center stone. I think you could go with a very thin halo and it wouldn''t look like too much. I also love the two pave styles Ellen posted from Leon''s website. No matter what you choose, you MUST give us tons of pictures of your future 3ish carat oval ring!

 

[Gypsy]

I LOVE kaleigh''s three stone Leon oval... have you seen it?

Also, would you consider an east west setting?

Here are my favorite settings for ovals:

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/ready-or-not.54834/page-2

I love ovals and half moons with colored half moons too. Yellow diamonds, cornflower blue saphires, pigeon''s blood rubies, emerald green tsavorites!

 

[Gypsy]

And My first choice would be this Leon 5 stone. This one is set with an Oval stone... but it''s an oval cushion... I actually think I''d prefer it with a real oval. I love the proportion of the half moons to the center and the accent of the baguettes on the side.

Hands down, my favorite.

 

[MMM]

i l-o-v-e halos... but with a stone that big, i say no halo.

 

[neatfreak]

As usual, I think Gypsy has taken the words out of my mouth. I LOVE every one of the settings she has posted and I think all of them would achieve that great vintage look without the potential overkill of a halo on that stone.

Let that baby shine on it''s own!!!

 

[metromom]

Hi Jenny:

I just reset my 2.02 oval. I got a halo and a micropave split shank. My post is a few under yours, just look for the one called "It''s Here, My Quest Halo Dream Ring!!!" I was a little worried the halo would make the ring almost too big and possibly cocktailish. But, it came out amazing and I am thrilled with the look. Although it really does make the center stone look significantly bigger. People don''t believe me when I tell them that it is a 2.02. They think it is much bigger. My ring size is a 5.5. That matters also. I would say if you are going 2.5 carats or above, you might want to stick with a more classic look. I am sure whatever you choose will be great. Of course I am biased, as i LOVE ovals Good luck,

 

[Stone Hunter]

I love the look of the second one Gypsy posted. Classic with a little more bling but not much.

 

[Haven]

Flash--Congrats on the upgrade!

I''m not getting a stone quite as big as yours (mine will be around 2 cts) but I also love the halo look and was seriously considering it until I saw how gorgeous a great solitaire setting looks. Of course, this is a very personal decision, but I''ve been converted from a halo gal to a solitaire gal (many thanks to the gorgeous PS solitaires on here, ahem . . . you know who you are, ladies!)

As for the trendy issue, I also worried that I''d tire of the halo after a few years and that it would look dated, much like some settings from the 90s look dated (to me) today. However, as long as you love it now, and you can''t really predict the future, I''d say go with your instinct on this one and don''t worry about trends. And DMB is totally right--halos look vintage, and vintage just gets more "authentic" over time anyway, right?

The first LM solitaire that Ellen linked to is absolutely breathtaking, but of course, they''re all breathtaking, if you ask me.

Take some time and I''d definitely go to a good jeweler and try on some different settings in person--after MUCH deliberation and many sessions of playing dress up at the jeweler, I am going to end up with a very different ering than the one I had originally envisioned in my mind. Things look very different in person, on your hand, and in real life-sized proportions rather than the giant images we see on our computer screens.

Good luck with your decision--remember, this is a GREAT problem to have!

 

[Ellen]

I too thought immediately of Kaleigh''s ring, I think hers is perfection. But I think it is because her center stone is slightly smaller, it can handle the sides with grace. On a stone pushing, or at 3 cts., I think sides would not look as good, it should stand alone in all its beauty.

Sometimes less is more. That''s just my .02.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 7/29/2007 4:39:27 PM
Author: Haven
Flash--Congrats on the upgrade!


Take some time and I'd definitely go to a good jeweler and try on some different settings in person--after MUCH deliberation and many sessions of playing dress up at the jeweler, I am going to end up with a very different ering than the one I had originally envisioned in my mind. Things look very different in person, on your hand, and in real life-sized proportions rather than the giant images we see on our computer screens.

Excellent advice! And so true.

 

[flash407]

Update...I spent the day yesterday going to different jewelers to see what I like, along with my DH. We tried on several gorgeous rings and it is still overwhelming. I think that I''m going to end up with a ring similar to the Leon rings (ala Ashley Judd). We''re in the process of finding the perfect stone (stones are expected to be delivered Tues) and then it should be done in a few weeks. Wish me luck and I''ll post whenever I have it!

Thanks!

Jenny

That being said, if you find any fabulous photos, I''ld love to see them!

 

[Ellen]

I don''t know what Ashley Judd''s ring looks like, but can''t wait to see your ring finished.

Good luck, have fun and please post pics!!

 

[jaz464]

Flash407, do you know who will be creating your setting? Also, are you pairing it with a w-band?

 

[flash407]

The setting I''m leaning towards is similar to the Ashley setting by Leon Mege. It looks a lot like the second picture Gypsy posted with diamonds on either side of the shank. A friend of mine owns a great jewelry store here in Houston. He''ll be making the setting.

My DH wonders if I should wear an additional wedding band with it? I''m toying with that as well. Metromom, what did you do?

have to say I''m loving this forum....very very helpful!

Thanks again,

Jenny

 

[flash407]

So excited! Found a gorgeous cushion cut stone and now the setting is being made. Stone specs: 2.7ct G SI1 dimensions 9.5x7.5 It''s got a great spread and rectangular in shape.

The setting I''m getting is similar to this
http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=278

I should have it at the end of the month. Keep your fingers crossed!

 

[flash407]

here''s a photo of the setting

 

[Ellen]

Date: 8/4/2007 10:09:02 AM
Author: flash407
So excited! Found a gorgeous cushion cut stone and now the setting is being made. Stone specs: 2.7ct G SI1 dimensions 9.5x7.5 It''s got a great spread and rectangular in shape.

The setting I''m getting is similar to this
http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=278

I should have it at the end of the month. Keep your fingers crossed!

Oh, that''s going to be gorgeous!!

*crossing fingers and waiting for many, many pics*

 

[flash407]

here''s another view

dmarielevin....i hope you don''t mind me using photos that you posted! I absolutely love your ring!

 

[risingsun]

That setting looks perfect, without being OTT. Excellent choice

 

[Hest88]

Date: 8/4/2007 10:50:09 AM
Author: risingsun
That setting looks perfect, without being OTT. Excellent choice

I agree. It''s truly classic, and really shows off the stone.

 

[sera]

Date: 8/4/2007 10:17:54 AM
Author: flash407
here''s another view

dmarielevin....i hope you don''t mind me using photos that you posted! I absolutely love your ring!

I just read this post and was going to post that very ring as one of my suggestions... so... needless to say, I LOVE IT! I really want to see some hand pics as I am considering a similar style. I can''t wait to see it; it will be stunning!!!

 

[DMBsGirl]

wow, that is going to look stunning! Can''t wait to see it!