What gives a setting an antique look?

[PierreBear]

Hi PSer Friends. I don't have the eyes of discernment like many of y'all. I've finally narrowed down a few preferences such as a solitaire with a plain shank with the focus on a 3 to 4 ct OEC size stone for a future upgrade. I think I'm also figuring out that I enjoy 8 prong settings. What gives a setting an antique look when it's something simple like a solitaire? I feel like there is a difference even from the top down aerial view but I'm not able to describe it. I hope Missy and Yssie don't mind me using their rings as a reference. Both so famous and beautiful and have some what similar designs but can someone help me understand the difference between the two other? Or am I just thrown off with the OEC versus RB? I appreciate the help!

Missy's Thread - more antique look
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/l-is-for-so-in-love-with-my.185018/

Yssie's Thread - appears more modern
https://www.pricescope.com/communit...ty-4-01-j-vs1-in-erika-winters-margot.231053/

 

[elizabethess]

Yes, part of it might be the OEC vs. RB. I'm not an expert but I think--for me--seeing a hint of metal from the setting around the circumference of a stone in the top-down view adds to the antique look of a setting. I can see a little metal from the basket around the stone in Missy's, for Yssie's I see just stone and prongs. (edit to add: drool-worthy both ways!)

 

[Calliecake]

Pierre Bear, It is the chunky facets that make the old cut antique diamonds so beautiful. Modern cut stones have splintery facets. Both cuts are beautiful it's just a matter of which you personally prefer.

I hope Missy posts a picture of her beautiful setting. The seeting Bea is in now is different from the setting above. It is one of my all time Pricescope favorites. The side view of her ring is incredible.

 

[PintoBean]

Milgrain - I associate milgrain with more antique, and smooth finishes with more modern.

 

[LLJsmom]

For sure, about the smooth v. Millgrain. It's hard to decide which way to go. I've struggled for a long time. Have you decided about the details?

 

[valeria101]

Just a list of styles that used to be ...

Eight, ten prongs hint of the 1900s & whereabouts: the number of prongs seems to go up with the size of the stone, keeping the prongs small; their construction used to be rather different - WWW . Something like this, perhaps with the head done in white metal - it used to be Ag - would certainly look antique to me, sans frills.

 

[Missy]

Pierre Bear, It is the chunky facets that make the old cut antique diamonds so beautiful. Modern cut stones have splintery facets. Both cuts are beautiful it's just a matter of which you personally prefer.

I hope Missy posts a picture of her beautiful setting. The seeting Bea is in now is different from the setting above. It is one of my all time Pricescope favorites. The side view of her ring is incredible.

Aww thank you sweet Callie! And thank you PierreBear for your lovely comments about Bea. Her setting is an 8 prong platinum original antique setting. Not a reproduction. And it just fits her perfectly. It was the setting I chose at the time I found Bea. Adam had both the diamond and the setting and when I saw the setting right after I found Bea (both at Adam's but separate at the time) I knew it was meant to "Bea".


Here is my favorite profile photo of her. With an original engraved antique platinum band.



and here is a profile photo with the another band I wear her with...an antique platinum suisse cut diamond band.




What features make an antique look like an antique is what everyone mentioned in the posts above. And if you happen to find a genuine antique setting that is in good shape then you can enjoy owning a true antique with all the wonderful romance (IMO) associated with that. However for me what makes an antique different than a modern setting is the diamond it holds.

The chunky monkey facets of the OEC vs the splintery facets of an MRB. No right or wrong. Just what you prefer. I think both antiques and modern settings can share smooth clean lines which is usually my preference vs a more ornate setting. However there are some gorgeous ornate antique settings on PS. There are so many gorgeous choices no matter your preference!

 

[PierreBear]

Hi Missy! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and the additional pictures. Just for my understanding, does your setting have milgrain (I didn't detect any)? Also, as Elizabethess was hinting at the metal around the circumference of the stone, can you confirm this is the case and can shed more details on this? I appreciate it and how special that you found an original antique setting. So unique, fitting for a one-of-a-kind lady like yourself!

Aww thank you sweet Callie! And thank you PierreBear for your lovely comments about Bea. Her setting is an 8 prong platinum original antique setting. Not a reproduction. And it just fits her perfectly. It was the setting I chose at the time I found Bea. Adam had both the diamond and the setting and when I saw the setting right after I found Bea (both at Adam's but separate at the time) I knew it was meant to "Bea".


Here is my favorite profile photo of her. With an original engraved antique platinum band.



and here is a profile photo with the another band I wear her with...an antique platinum suisse cut diamond band.




What features make an antique look like an antique is what everyone mentioned in the posts above. And if you happen to find a genuine antique setting that is in good shape then you can enjoy owning a true antique with all the wonderful romance (IMO) associated with that. However for me what makes an antique different than a modern setting is the diamond it holds.

The chunky monkey facets of the OEC vs the splintery facets of an MRB. No right or wrong. Just what you prefer. I think both antiques and modern settings can share smooth clean lines which is usually my preference vs a more ornate setting. However there are some gorgeous ornate antique settings on PS. There are so many gorgeous choices no matter your preference!

 

[PierreBear]

Hi LLJsmom! Yes, I've been following your threads and am excited about what you eventually decide on and agree it's quite the struggle! You have given so much wisdom on this site so I'm sure that you will pick the right path for yourself and enjoy it for many years to come.

As of right now, my favorite setting that I've been able to try on is the SingleStone setting called Arielle (see link below), which does have the metal around the circumference of the stone and the 8 prongs. I am wondering though if the diamonds on the shank is unnecessary, taking away from the main focus. My plan is to eventually make a trip to the main SingleStone to try on more of their settings. If it's still the Arielle look I'm favoring, I think I may work with CVB and have her make something within the same vein.

My current thoughts:
3 to 4 ct OEC (perhaps 9 to 10 mm), warm colors L, M, N
gold setting
8 prongs with metal around circumference like Arielle but different side profile (still low setting) and plain shank

Any guidance or tips for me on these last items:
1) To milgrain or not to milgrain?
2) Plain shank or not?

https://www.facebook.com/SingleSton...759833457489/1253522361347892/?type=3&theater

For sure, about the smooth v. Millgrain. It's hard to decide which way to go. I've struggled for a long time. Have you decided about the details?

 

[ringbling17]

For me an antique setting has more of a crown look, is more low set, has a bigger donut, scrollwork, beadwork and/ or milgraining. Also, definitely six or 8 prongs, not four prongs or split prongs unless they are fishtail prongs. Also, a more boxy head looks more antiquey to me.
The Stuller setting I just got gives me an antique feel to it.

 

[cmd2014]

I think it's all the small, intricate details that make antique pieces so beautiful. Scalloped baskets, milgrain, scrollwork, details and decorations even in places that won't show from the top.

 

[Missy]

Hi Missy! Thanks for sharing your thoughts and the additional pictures. Just for my understanding, does your setting have milgrain (I didn't detect any)? Also, as Elizabethess was hinting at the metal around the circumference of the stone, can you confirm this is the case and can shed more details on this? I appreciate it and how special that you found an original antique setting. So unique, fitting for a one-of-a-kind lady like yourself!

Hi PierreBear! There is no milgrain on my platinum setting. There is some metal showing from the top due to the fact that Bea is not perfectly round. She is 10.5 by 10.3 mm. Here is a top view I shared with you in another thread so you can see more clearly what I am describing hopefully. This is obviously a huge magnified cropped view and hopefully can show you exactly what I am saying. IRL you don't notice any metal at all. I know some of us who are OCD might not be able to live with this setting but I love it and I have OCD tendencies too but I guess my OCD tendencies are minimal based on being happy with this setting.





From a more realistic perspective...it was dim illumination in this photo but just sharing it to show you IRL how she appears from the top. All I notice is a delicate feminine and elegant setting where Bea is the star. It makes her pop in a good way IMO. Hope this helps you in your decisions. All good choices to have and cannot wait to see what you decide for your ultimate diamond and setting.

And again, thank you for all your lovely comments!

 

[PierreBear]

Thank you Missy for the additional details and photos. You are too kind to go above and beyond. I can have some OCD tendencies but if I had a ring like yours, it would just be looking at my hand too often. haha : ) Enjoy it for many more years to come and thanks again!

Hi PierreBear! There is no milgrain on my platinum setting. There is some metal showing from the top due to the fact that Bea is not perfectly round. She is 10.5 by 10.3 mm. Here is a top view I shared with you in another thread so you can see more clearly what I am describing hopefully. This is obviously a huge magnified cropped view and hopefully can show you exactly what I am saying. IRL you don't notice any metal at all. I know some of us who are OCD might not be able to live with this setting but I love it and I have OCD tendencies too but I guess my OCD tendencies are minimal based on being happy with this setting.





From a more realistic perspective...it was dim illumination in this photo but just sharing it to show you IRL how she appears from the top. All I notice is a delicate feminine and elegant setting where Bea is the star. It makes her pop in a good way IMO. Hope this helps you in your decisions. All good choices to have and cannot wait to see what you decide for your ultimate diamond and setting.

And again, thank you for all your lovely comments!

 

[elizabethess]

Hi PierreBear! There is no milgrain on my platinum setting. There is some metal showing from the top due to the fact that Bea is not perfectly round. She is 10.5 by 10.3 mm. Here is a top view I shared with you in another thread so you can see more clearly what I am describing hopefully. This is obviously a huge magnified cropped view and hopefully can show you exactly what I am saying. IRL you don't notice any metal at all.

You are so right @missy , I can see in the super zoomed-in version the tiniest bit of the beautiful basket, the tops of the loops (for lack of a better word) but the IRL view doesn't show any! I hope I didn't inadvertently come off as disparaging your beautiful stone or setting; I absolutely adore both, and think they're perfect just as they are.

Clearly I'm not a jewelry pro and struggle with vocabulary, but as someone who works with images for a living it was fun to be challenged with "I feel like there is a difference even from the top down aerial view but I'm not able to describe it." and get to pore over two zoomed in pics to try to discern--if one ignored the stone cut--what visual differences between those two settings PierreBear could be registering

 

[PierreBear]

I really appreciated your comment Elizabethess and thought it was rather insightful and not negative in any matter. The setting that I am currently consider does show a border around the stone so you caught something that I need to put on my "must have" list. How wonderful that you work in an industry that allows you to have that astuteness with photos. I bet you can really design a custom ring.

You are so right @missy , I can see in the super zoomed-in version the tiniest bit of the beautiful basket, the tops of the loops (for lack of a better word) but the IRL view doesn't show any! I hope I didn't inadvertently come off as disparaging your beautiful stone or setting; I absolutely adore both, and think they're perfect just as they are.

Clearly I'm not a jewelry pro and struggle with vocabulary, but as someone who works with images for a living it was fun to be challenged with "I feel like there is a difference even from the top down aerial view but I'm not able to describe it." and get to pore over two zoomed in pics to try to discern--if one ignored the stone cut--what visual differences between those two settings PierreBear could be registering

 

[elizabethess]

Thanks, PierreBear

 

[Missy]

You are so right @missy , I can see in the super zoomed-in version the tiniest bit of the beautiful basket, the tops of the loops (for lack of a better word) but the IRL view doesn't show any! I hope I didn't inadvertently come off as disparaging your beautiful stone or setting; I absolutely adore both, and think they're perfect just as they are.

Clearly I'm not a jewelry pro and struggle with vocabulary, but as someone who works with images for a living it was fun to be challenged with "I feel like there is a difference even from the top down aerial view but I'm not able to describe it." and get to pore over two zoomed in pics to try to discern--if one ignored the stone cut--what visual differences between those two settings PierreBear could be registering

Oh no, Please don't worry elizabethness. I never took it as criticism at all. You said such lovely things about Bea. Very kind. Thank you.
I'm a terrible photographer and wish I had your talent with photography!

 

[PierreBear]

One more specific question but I was wondering how the shank defines the setting from the aerial view again? What makes it more antique versus modern:
-size of shank
- flat versus round versus knife-edge
- taper versus not
- high polish versus satin finish

Please set me straight but I feel that a thin shank can make the center stone look larger but gives a more modern feel. However, I think I've seen instances where a substantial shank that's not too wide can help proportionally make the ring look more substantial. I also think that flat and non-tapered ring offers a more modern twist. Uncertain on polish as I haven't really seen satin finish in person. Appreciate ya'lls thoughts!