shape
carat
color
clarity

Victor Canera flush or traditional trilogy setting

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
Hi everyone. I am getting my dream ring made by victor canera! 2.7 RB centre stone with tapered baguettes.
Nicholas has sent two photos. One with a flush setting where the wedding band will sit neatly against the ring or a traditional setting where the donut would allow the diamond to sit lower on the finger.
I won’t be wearing a wedding band on this finger so the flush setting isn’t necessary but what do you think about both settings aesthetically? 668B2141-4813-4956-9CFC-82C21755B487.png 28BBC45A-FF92-47BD-9963-E5C965324E28.png
 

lovedogs

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Messages
18,030
Congrats on the dream ring! hmmm, this is a tough choice! I like both. The 2nd one is traditional, but the first has a "swoopy" romantic quality that I really like, and it's unique. One thing to keep in mind is that it looks as though the first swoopy option is wider due to how the prongs holding the side stones kind of "flair" outwards. So with a large center stone you would want to make sure that you have enough finger real estate for a wider look compared to the more traditional version.
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
I feel like the first is wider as it’s a bigger centre stone in these particular images. I am a finger size uk N or 6 3/4. The centre stone I'm getting is 8.9mm but can’t decide between higher or lower set. I love the fluidity of the flush setting but how often am I gonna look at it from the side? So I think what I’m trying to decide between is how the ring will look whether it’s higher or lower set of that makes sense. Does anyone have pics of their flush or traditional settings?
 

tyty333

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
27,198
I also like them both! So hard to go wrong with VC!

I went to the VC website and looked at the top views. That first one seems like the baguettes are too big. They sort of stick out further than the
ring. Of course, you wont have that look going on if you choose smaller, more in-line baguettes (and your finger is not itty-bitty). I think I kind of
like the first more modern updated version of the ring (with the lower set diamond).

Like I said though, I dont think you could go wrong with either!
 

Moonie

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
301
Hmm I prefer Option #2. If you're not worried about a band, Option #1 looks like it sticks out too much instead of tapering around or "off" of your finger into a more seamless look. There's something about it that looks more "masculine" for a lack of a better word?

Could you post a photo from the top?
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
It’s hard to compare as each design has a different stone. I’m leaning toward the lower set traditional setting. DB317075-A12C-4E4D-A092-A3464CC85D21.jpeg 4D3DEEBF-887F-4B41-81A7-B5F7B5633765.jpeg DDD2A7D9-004B-4F43-95E4-50C11D7E0DF2.jpeg
 

Slickk

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
4,926
Of course either will be gorgeous!! It all depends on if you want a gap with a band or not IMO. The gap will be quite noticeable with the second one (basket). I prefer a lesser gap, so number one would be my choice. I love this setting so much!
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
So this ring will be stand alone. I plan to wear a dainty pave wedding band on my index finger. I adore index finger rings and it was all I could do not to have this one sized for it. Im upgrading from an impulse buy on 47th street a number of years ago. Terrible stone and setting so this piece will be absolute perfection compared to my current piece. My current ring sits ridiculously high in a setting that was made for a smaller stone. I don’t want to make that mistake again. I feel that a lower setting would also suit my lifestyle better perhaps (student with the intent of becoming a researcher and mother of 3).
 

LLJsmom

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
12,633
I prefer #2, because it's more natural to the design. It seems more natural for a stone to have a donut. The whole underside flows better. But its also very personal.

If you are on the computer a lot, and your ring is not perfectly tight, there will be some spinning. When it spins, you see the underside A LOT. I see the side view and underside of my ring 90% of the time, and only when I purposely hold my hand at a certain angle do I see it head on. So for me it was only after having had a ugly ring with a hideous base and prongs, did I realize that side views are what is important to me. However, I did have to look at an ugly ring for a good 2 years to come to that realization.

Even if you wear a band someday, maybe you'll like having a gap. A gap used to bother me, and now I like it.
 

Gemly

Shiny_Rock
Joined
May 29, 2020
Messages
293
I feel like the first is wider as it’s a bigger centre stone in these particular images. I am a finger size uk N or 6 3/4. The centre stone I'm getting is 8.9mm but can’t decide between higher or lower set. I love the fluidity of the flush setting but how often am I gonna look at it from the side? So I think what I’m trying to decide between is how the ring will look whether it’s higher or lower set of that makes sense. Does anyone have pics of their flush or traditional settings?

I vote for the higher setting. I just love how it makes the diamond stand out.
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
Man this is a hard choice as there really isn’t a wrong answer. I’m googling low and high profile settings but can’t seem
to find what I’m after. I chose this setting based on the first picture and it was only after being offered the choice that I’m finding myself struggling as my current stone sits ridiculously high.
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
Yes it will be ready in 4 weeks so I’ll make a decision tomorrow as to not hold things up.
 

headlight

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Messages
3,293
I vote for traditional. The other is too high unless you are pairing with a band. The traditional one is my all time fav ring. I used do have that setting many years ago and definitely miss it. Congrats.
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
Thank you everyone for your input. I’m going to go with band #2. The lower set stone I feel is more in keeping with my lifestyle and I know what people are saying about band #1 making the diamond ‘pop’ but I’m hoping with an ideal cut almost 9mm stone it will do that regardless of setting. I really hope I’m making the right choice. I will post pics once I receive the ring xx
 

MissGotRocks

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
16,270
I think you made the right choice. I too prefer number 2. You must be excited and we will be waiting for pictures when your new beauty is finished!
 

Matthews1127

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 7, 2017
Messages
5,207
Thank you everyone for your input. I’m going to go with band #2. The lower set stone I feel is more in keeping with my lifestyle and I know what people are saying about band #1 making the diamond ‘pop’ but I’m hoping with an ideal cut almost 9mm stone it will do that regardless of setting. I really hope I’m making the right choice. I will post pics once I receive the ring xx

Just to solidify your decision, I vote #2.
Congrats!
It will be beautiful! ♥️
 

Fabulous50

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
606
I prefer #2, because it's more natural to the design. It seems more natural for a stone to have a donut. The whole underside flows better. But its also very personal.

If you are on the computer a lot, and your ring is not perfectly tight, there will be some spinning. When it spins, you see the underside A LOT. I see the side view and underside of my ring 90% of the time, and only when I purposely hold my hand at a certain angle do I see it head on. So for me it was only after having had a ugly ring with a hideous base and prongs, did I realize that side views are what is important to me. However, I did have to look at an ugly ring for a good 2 years to come to that realization.

Even if you wear a band someday, maybe you'll like having a gap. A gap used to bother me, and now I like it.

I'm so glad you said that, @LLJsmom - I like the gap too and I never really formulated that thought before! Then you can freely mix and match bands with your ring. OP, take a look at the "Stack of the Day" thread, you will see what I mean, many PS'rs change their stacks and it looks so good, interesting and fun. You might not want to mix things up now, but you may in the future! https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/stack-of-the-day-thread.228681/
 
L

lydial

Guest
Oooh lovely! I am also a 3 stone MRB - baguette girl. I also like the lines of your option # 2 better. My ring is being re-set into a 6 prong with a hint of an Edwardian/early Tiffany shank because I upsized from a 2.7 to a 3ct and I was always wacking the girdle in the 4 prong (see avatar). I am a primary care doctor and always wacked the stone when I was not looking (usually while washing hands and talking to people). This is the largest center stone I have upgraded to and I expect it to be my last setting and center stone.... it will be the 4th setting for my baguettes:) Will have it in 2-3 weeks. Yay to us both!
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
These posts fill me with joy. Thank you for your support. I am from Ireland so this is a totally blind buy for me and couldn’t recommend Nicholas at Victor Canera more. Im also enjoying having a wee nosy at everyone’s bling.
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
Oooh lovely! I am also a 3 stone MRB - baguette girl. I also like the lines of your option # 2 better. My ring is being re-set into a 6 prong with a hint of an Edwardian/early Tiffany shank because I upsized from a 2.7 to a 3ct and I was always wacking the girdle in the 4 prong (see avatar). I am a primary care doctor and always wacked the stone when I was not looking (usually while washing hands and talking to people). This is the largest center stone I have upgraded to and I expect it to be my last setting and center stone.... it will be the 4th setting for my baguettes:) Will have it in 2-3 weeks. Yay to us both!

Who done your setting in your profile pic. It is wonderful. You have double prongs.... is that to do with function or aesthetics? Both VC settings I was sent have different prongs so may need to clarify exactly what I’d like.
 
L

lydial

Guest
Who done your setting in your profile pic. It is wonderful. You have double prongs.... is that to do with function or aesthetics? Both VC settings I was sent have different prongs so may need to clarify exactly what I’d like.

Hi, I custom ordered this setting when I bought my CBI diamond from High Performance Diamonds; it is the 3rd similar setting I have had since I was engaged (I have had 3 center stones starting at 1.28 ct, then 1.58 ct, then 2.66 ct - going for my 4th and maybe last? 3.06 ct, maybe? I do think so....) I am quite happy with this setting and I like the double prongs - they are aesthetically quite pleasing, and I like the proportions overall. It is extremely traditional and basic and after 3 nearly identical settings I wanted something with just a little more "oomph". And I wanted a 6 prong due to all of the banging around the girdle was exposed to (more so for this 2.66 ct than the smaller stones), and the CBI/HPD option was not exactly what I wanted for a 6 prong - 3 stone. And so.... I went with Caysie of CVB inspired designs. All US vendors, I love VC's work! Yours should be amazing!
 

JMac1980

Rough_Rock
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
16
Hi, I custom ordered this setting when I bought my CBI diamond from High Performance Diamonds; it is the 3rd similar setting I have had since I was engaged (I have had 3 center stones starting at 1.28 ct, then 1.58 ct, then 2.66 ct - going for my 4th and maybe last? 3.06 ct, maybe? I do think so....) I am quite happy with this setting and I like the double prongs - they are aesthetically quite pleasing, and I like the proportions overall. It is extremely traditional and basic and after 3 nearly identical settings I wanted something with just a little more "oomph". And I wanted a 6 prong due to all of the banging around the girdle was exposed to (more so for this 2.66 ct than the smaller stones), and the CBI/HPD option was not exactly what I wanted for a 6 prong - 3 stone. And so.... I went with Caysie of CVB inspired designs. All US vendors, I love VC's work! Yours should be amazing!

Yours really is beautiful. It’s made me so certain of the baguette setting. I was worried that VC is known for his pave and was I mad spending that amount on a baguette setting but this will be my forever ring so I feel like I’m going with the best that I know of according to the reviews here. After so many email exchanges and back and forth with diamonds etc and the worry about the money and not trying anything of VC’s on ...I am now so impatient to see it
 
L

lydial

Guest
Yours really is beautiful. It’s made me so certain of the baguette setting. I was worried that VC is known for his pave and was I mad spending that amount on a baguette setting but this will be my forever ring so I feel like I’m going with the best that I know of according to the reviews here. After so many email exchanges and back and forth with diamonds etc and the worry about the money and not trying anything of VC’s on ...I am now so impatient to see it

Better to spend a bit on "1" setting than "4"...! You are getting a nice big diamond so you should be very very happy with it.
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top