What are the perfect proportions for a three-stone ring?

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/22/2009 12:07:35 AM
Author: swedish bean

Date: 12/22/2009 12:05:35 AM
Author: swedish bean
I have one to share! Lemme find it!

Well Ms Bean, I LOVe your ring of course! When the center is large, like bigger than 2cts, I adore the proportions of your ring and MossGotRocks'' rings, where the sides are very small in proportion to the center. But with my size center diamond, I think I prefer the larger sides, more like .40 to .50! I tried some on this weekend and the whole big finger of bling was A-MAZ-ING. It is what I have been craving all this time! I would go up as far as .50s but it gets pretty pricey then... not sure I can wait that long

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/21/2009 11:18:28 PM
Author: DiaDiva
Hi DreamerD, I can take more shots from other angles tomorrow as we''re going out for a movie soon. Here''s a perspective shot for now...

Thaks! My husband and I both love that look. BLING!! I do see what you mean about the sides being so similar in size to the center. On the one hand, I love that because it is more blingy. On the other hand, .30s as you say will make the center look larger and more pronounced.

Do you think there would be much blingage or finger coverage lost going down to .30s?? I am having a hard time finding a place that carries a ring with diamonds in that proportion so I can try it on...

 

[that_someone_special]

Sorry. I was just trying to show more proportions.

Ps did you see the new 3stone on BGD?? Gorgeous!!

You have so many options it'll be hard to pick from

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/22/2009 1:39:06 AM
Author: swedish bean
Sorry. I was just trying to show more proportions.

Ps did you see the new 3stone on BGD?? Gorgeous!!

You have so many options it''ll be hard to pick from

Don''t appologize! I love your ring!

I did see that ring, it is stunning and it is THE setting I want! For real! but I may want a bit of a cathedral where the shank meets the smaller stones. That is a 1.5ct center and mine is a 1.2ct, so to keep the proportions my ring would have .25ct sides... but my DH thought it was a little too small sides. I think .33 is the minimum I would go.

 

[that_someone_special]

I just saw that setting today and thought "I WANT THAT SETTING" haha. I will be needing a new setting soon (in the next 1-2 years? after the wedding anyhow) ..

Have you thought of what metal you are doing??

 

[waxing lyrical]

My center is 1.03 ct and sides are .55 and .53 ct. If my center was 1.20 I think I''d go with .60 sides.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/22/2009 5:17:34 AM
Author: swedish bean
I just saw that setting today and thought ''I WANT THAT SETTING'' haha. I will be needing a new setting soon (in the next 1-2 years? after the wedding anyhow) ..

Have you thought of what metal you are doing??

I have thought about plat but my half eternity is wg and I don''t want to mix. I like wg, it doesn''t yellow on me very quickly and I like the way it looks when it wears, so I will prob stick with that.

Lyrical Any pics of your ring around? I waver between smaller and bigger. Te bigger sides would cost about 3x more, which is a little scary since I don''t *really* want to spend a huge amount more on my ring.

 

[txasscher]

I just added sidestones to my 1.7ct cushion. I went more on size proportions. My center stone is 7mmx7mm and the sides are 4mmx4mm (.45cts each). So even though they are about 25% of the ct wieght of the center stone they are about 50% of the size measurements. It won''t be done for a couple more weeks but I am hoping I went the right way on this.

 

[AmberGretchen]

I''d go with the 0.25 or 0.30, but I''m biased because I paired my 1.12 ct with 0.25 side stones

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/22/2009 4:25:00 PM
Author: AmberGretchen
I''d go with the 0.25 or 0.30, but I''m biased because I paired my 1.12 ct with 0.25 side stones

Do you have any pics you can post here for me?

All your pics in the archive threads are red Xs now.

 

[qtiekiki]

DD
You must be getting a lot of biased votes. I voted .25ct sidestones b/c my ering has a 1.25ct center stone with .25ct sidestones, and I love the proportion.
It''s definitely a personal preference thing. If you want a 3 stones ring look, then I would go with larger sidestones. If you want to accent the center stone, then go with smaller sidestones.

 

[gardengloves]

Date: 12/22/2009 4:22:17 PM
Author: txasscher
I just added sidestones to my 1.7ct cushion. I went more on size proportions. My center stone is 7mmx7mm and the sides are 4mmx4mm (.45cts each). So even though they are about 25% of the ct wieght of the center stone they are about 50% of the size measurements. It won''t be done for a couple more weeks but I am hoping I went the right way on this.

Hi Dreamer,

This seems like a great way of looking at it- focus on size proportion. I am guessing that should be somewhere from .50-.60 for side stones, But I''d go for a bit less than half the mm of your center stone for a balanced proportional look. Long time down the road, if you ever decide to change your ring, you''d have a great set of diamonds for studs! So its a good investment. I was doing last minute shopping today in mid town Manhattan, and there was a woman with the most incredible diamond stud earrings. You know how these things shine in store lights, but hers were exceptional. It wasn''t that they were so big, just extremely tasteful and perfect - guessing around .60 , but it was so obvious how well cut they were, they captured every bit of light.

Your side stone project is a good one.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/22/2009 7:47:45 PM
Author: gardengloves

Date: 12/22/2009 4:22:17 PM
Author: txasscher
I just added sidestones to my 1.7ct cushion. I went more on size proportions. My center stone is 7mmx7mm and the sides are 4mmx4mm (.45cts each). So even though they are about 25% of the ct wieght of the center stone they are about 50% of the size measurements. It won''t be done for a couple more weeks but I am hoping I went the right way on this.

Hi Dreamer,

This seems like a great way of looking at it- focus on size proportion. I am guessing that should be somewhere from .50-.60 for side stones, But I''d go for a bit less than half the mm of your center stone for a balanced proportional look. Long time down the road, if you ever decide to change your ring, you''d have a great set of diamonds for studs! So its a good investment. I was doing last minute shopping today in mid town Manhattan, and there was a woman with the most incredible diamond stud earrings. You know how these things shine in store lights, but hers were exceptional. It wasn''t that they were so big, just extremely tasteful and perfect - guessing around .60 , but it was so obvious how well cut they were, they captured every bit of light.

Your side stone project is a good one.

Yes, this is my thought exactly! I think that going half the diameter would be too small. It would be .16cts

A good look for sure, but not exactly what I am looking for.

QT haha... yes biased voting for sure!

 

[DiaDiva]

Date: 12/22/2009 1:33:08 AM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 12/21/2009 11:18:28 PM

Author: DiaDiva

Hi DreamerD, I can take more shots from other angles tomorrow as we''re going out for a movie soon. Here''s a perspective shot for now...

Thaks! My husband and I both love that look. BLING!! I do see what you mean about the sides being so similar in size to the center. On the one hand, I love that because it is more blingy. On the other hand, .30s as you say will make the center look larger and more pronounced.

Do you think there would be much blingage or finger coverage lost going down to .30s?? I am having a hard time finding a place that carries a ring with diamonds in that proportion so I can try it on...

Date: 12/22/2009 1:33:08 AM
Here''s a perspective shot for now...Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 12/21/2009 11:18:28 PM

Author: DiaDiva

Hi DreamerD, I can take more shots from other angles tomorrow as we''re going out for a movie soon.

 

[DiaDiva]

Date: 12/22/2009 1:33:08 AM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 12/21/2009 11:18:28 PM

Author: DiaDiva

Hi DreamerD, I can take more shots from other angles tomorrow as we're going out for a movie soon. Here's a perspective shot for now...

Thaks! My husband and I both love that look. BLING!! I do see what you mean about the sides being so similar in size to the center. On the one hand, I love that because it is more blingy. On the other hand, .30s as you say will make the center look larger and more pronounced.

Do you think there would be much blingage or finger coverage lost going down to .30s?? I am having a hard time finding a place that carries a ring with diamonds in that proportion so I can try it on...

Dreamer,
What is your ring size? I'm a 5.5 so as to give you some perspective. I think 0.3 will still give you sufficient coverage if we are around the same ring size. I'll try to take more pictures...we're still unpacking and the living room looks like a storage facility.

 

[Bella_mezzo]

Dreamer, I vote .3-.4 each for the sides. I think the center stone stands out, but it''s still super blingy (and they''ll make very nice earrings someday

)

 

[swimmer]

Dreamer, I love that you are looking into 3stones! Sort of a blingy homage to your original e-ring. Go blingy!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/22/2009 8:26:55 PM
Author: DiaDiva

Date: 12/22/2009 1:33:08 AM
Author: dreamer_dachsie

Date: 12/21/2009 11:18:28 PM

Author: DiaDiva

Hi DreamerD, I can take more shots from other angles tomorrow as we''re going out for a movie soon. Here''s a perspective shot for now...

Thaks! My husband and I both love that look. BLING!! I do see what you mean about the sides being so similar in size to the center. On the one hand, I love that because it is more blingy. On the other hand, .30s as you say will make the center look larger and more pronounced.

Do you think there would be much blingage or finger coverage lost going down to .30s?? I am having a hard time finding a place that carries a ring with diamonds in that proportion so I can try it on...

Dreamer,
What is your ring size? I''m a 5.5 so as to give you some perspective. I think 0.3 will still give you sufficient coverage if we are around the same ring size. I''ll try to take more pictures...we''re still unpacking and the living room looks like a storage facility.

I am a size six, so yes, your ring is a really good comparison. I have been doing some research in SMTR eye candy... prepare for a photo onslaught!

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/22/2009 9:16:59 PM
Author: swimmer
Dreamer, I love that you are looking into 3stones! Sort of a blingy homage to your original e-ring. Go blingy!
Yes! Actually, my original e-ring was a sapphire solitaire, the sapph and diamonds EC was my first reset attempt, and so this is sort of the third generation here!

I really missed the finger coverage of my three stone. Funny thing is that I have been contemplating a 3 stone for a long time, but never actually tried any on

Once I went out and did it I was completely sold. It was *exactly* what I have been craving all thes years! LOL!

 

[Bella_mezzo]

Dreamer, I loved your original sapphire e-ring, really loved your second three stone (the swoopy one

and have followed your subsequent diamond journeys. You have excellent taste and an amazing attention to detail so I''m sure you''ll make a great decision. Can''t wait for the photo onslaught (and I want to see pics of your new Brian Gavin stone

)

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/23/2009 9:59:46 PM
Author: Bella_mezzo
Dreamer, I loved your original sapphire e-ring, really loved your second three stone (the swoopy one

and have followed your subsequent diamond journeys. You have excellent taste and an amazing attention to detail so I''m sure you''ll make a great decision. Can''t wait for the photo onslaught (and I want to see pics of your new Brian Gavin stone

)

Thanks Bella! LOL, when you put it that way it makes me think I am a diamond kook with all my settings etc. In the end I have only one diamond, traded in the sides on the three stone for a nice little RB which I then sold to my BIL -- who has yet to pop the Q to his gf of 9 years!

I want to throttle him! Anyways, I think of those early diamond experiences as misteps along the way

The new BGD shipped tonight, I should have it by Christmas unless customs decides to be meanies, which has happened in the past. Photo onslaugt shall commence soon!

 

[Bella_mezzo]

As someone who was a GF of almost 9 years

he should get on it.

Can I just say, I''ve always wanted to use that icon

 

[gardengloves]

Dreamer,

Standing ready for photo onslaught. Aye Aye...

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/23/2009 10:19:13 PM
Author: Bella_mezzo
As someone who was a GF of almost 9 years

he should get on it.

Can I just say, I''ve always wanted to use that icon

haha... the only saving grace is that they were childhood sweethearts, so they are only 25/27 now. Still, he has had the ring for 2 months! I am hoping for a holiday proposal but am not holding my breath on it at all.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 12/23/2009 10:22:46 PM
Author: gardengloves
Dreamer,

Standing ready for photo onslaught. Aye Aye...

haha

 

[Dreamer_D]

For the edumacation of future PSers trying to find the answer to this same question, I will post some of the pics from the SMTR eye candy folder that I have found. All of these have approx. 1.2ct center diamonds but have side stones of various proportions. Yes, I have gone through the whole SMTR thread... almost.

****

First up, I don''t remember the poster

but this is with .30 sides.

 

[Dreamer_D]

This is allycat0303's sister's ring with a 1ct center and .30 sides. It is about what a 1.2ct would look like with .33ct sides.

 

[Dreamer_D]

This is Belle''s 1.25ct diamond with .25ct sides.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Another of Belle''s ring. This is the WF w-prong three-stone, set very low which I love.

 

[Bella_mezzo]

Ooooooooooohhhhhhhhh.... .33 is perfect

I

alleycat0303''s sister''s ring. Those are perfect proportions IMHO for a three stone. Lots of bling, tons of finger coverage, but center stone is still the main attraction KWIM...