What settng would make my Diamond look the biggest?

[grace10209]

I need help and can''t decide if I want to reset my ring or not. I see SO MANY BEAUTIFUL SETTINGS OUT HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So I wanted to get some ideas from you all ~ Is there any settings out there that could make my stone (s) look bigger? here is what I currently have and I wanted to find out if its worth it to have my stone reset as I have been thinkig about it

My center is 1.05, sides are .41 each - all princess.
http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-ring-platinum_5923?builder=BYOR

I can either just reset the center, OR reset all 3 into something...............just want some different ideas from you all. How can I make the most out of my stones? What setting would make my stone look really big??

I know some are better than others and I''d love to hear your ideas : )
Thank you ahead of time

 

[Autumnovember]

I personally think that solitaires look the largest...or even having a halo will give it the ''larger'' effect.

 

[Dreamer_D]

A solitaire will make the center stone look larger. Strange as it seems, I am convinced after seeing pictures.

And a halo will indeed give you the oomph! I love the ritani endless love halo for princess cuts.

 

[HappyNewLife]

I think an x-prong solitaire is a nice way to make a diamond look bigger

I too have a 3-stone and it definitely diminishes the size of the center stone-- boooo!

 

[yssie]

I think:

A medium-height prong solitaire on a medium-width plain band makes the centre look largest because the stone takes centrestage and there are NO distractions. The outline of many prongs is easier to follow, and tricks the eye into thinking the border is outside the stone's actual outline. Ever closed one eye and held your fingers an inch apart, and enclosed between them a building/person/whatever that's in the distance? Like that, an extremely low setting means that the stone appears to cover less of your finger. An extremely high set stone would look to cover more finger from face-up, but the very visible side profile brings your eye back to the reality of size. A too-thin band gets lost, and the eye tries to compensate; a too-thick band doesn't make the diamond POP.

A solitaire on a micropave band also makes the centre look smaller, for two reasons:
1. The stones have depth, and that depth must stick out from the band on the finger, making the outer circumference of the ring bigger than if there were no stones to add that extra thickness. And a stone will look visibly bigger on a size2 band than an apparent size4 band - we're talking tenths of a mm here, but remember that's the scale of the diamond itself. Which is also in part the second reason:
2. melee is WHITE WHITE WHITE, and the eye is drawn to this line of white stretching along the finger. The viewer now judges how much of the line of melee the centrestone covers rather than how much of a thinner, less visible plain band, and the resulting judgement is that the centrestone is smaller. This effect is pronounced if you pair your pave ring with two pave bands flanking, as now even more of the finger is covered and that point of comparison is further lost.

A halo gives a larger appearance from afar, but close-up is busier and can detract from the centrestone, though the finger-coverage is incredible

I do think you need to try them on, though - people seem to love halos on their fingers or dislike them, not much in between! A bezel solitare is rather the same way - bigger from afar, but since it's covering a small area of diamond the diamond itself looks smaller close-up.

Three-stones are the worst of the lot for increasing the apparent size of your centrestone - finger coverage and a hugely sparkly look, but even smaller sidestones definitely take away from your centre. This is coming from a three-stone girl

JMHO.

 

[PumpkinPie]

Date: 5/18/2010 5:43:25 PM
Author: dreamer_d
A solitaire will make the center stone look larger. Strange as it seems, I am convinced after seeing pictures.


And a halo will indeed give you the oomph! I love the ritani endless love halo for princess cuts.

I agree with dreamer

 

[heyjudes]

Date: 5/18/2010 7:57:41 PM
Author: yssie
A medium-height prong solitaire on a medium-width plain band makes the centre look largest because the stone takes centrestage and there are NO distractions. The outline of many prongs is easier to follow, and tricks the eye into thinking the border is outside the stone''s actual outline.

Yssie - what do you consider a medium width band? 2mm? or something like 2.5mm?

 

[Phoenix]

I agree with most of what has been said.

Having tried numerous settings, I have to say that a 3-stone setting gives your finger more width coverage, but it doesn''t highlight the centre stone. Halo''s are the best, but *personally* I like delicate halo''s which accentuate the centre stone, rather than overpower it.

 

[yssie]

Date: 5/19/2010 1:12:35 AM
Author: heyjudes

Date: 5/18/2010 7:57:41 PM
Author: yssie
A medium-height prong solitaire on a medium-width plain band makes the centre look largest because the stone takes centrestage and there are NO distractions. The outline of many prongs is easier to follow, and tricks the eye into thinking the border is outside the stone's actual outline.

Yssie - what do you consider a medium width band? 2mm? or something like 2.5mm?

say anything from 2-5? I'm thinking super-thin and super-thick here.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 5/18/2010 7:57:41 PM
Author: yssie
I think:

A medium-height prong solitaire on a medium-width plain band makes the centre look largest because the stone takes centrestage and there are NO distractions. The outline of many prongs is easier to follow, and tricks the eye into thinking the border is outside the stone''s actual outline. Ever closed one eye and held your fingers an inch apart, and enclosed between them a building/person/whatever that''s in the distance? Like that, an extremely low setting means that the stone appears to cover less of your finger. An extremely high set stone would look to cover more finger from face-up, but the very visible side profile brings your eye back to the reality of size. A too-thin band gets lost, and the eye tries to compensate; a too-thick band doesn''t make the diamond POP.

A solitaire on a micropave band also makes the centre look smaller, for two reasons:
1. The stones have depth, and that depth must stick out from the band on the finger, making the outer circumference of the ring bigger than if there were no stones to add that extra thickness. And a stone will look visibly bigger on a size2 band than an apparent size4 band - we''re talking tenths of a mm here, but remember that''s the scale of the diamond itself. Which is also in part the second reason:
2. melee is WHITE WHITE WHITE, and the eye is drawn to this line of white stretching along the finger. The viewer now judges how much of the line of melee the centrestone covers rather than how much of a thinner, less visible plain band, and the resulting judgement is that the centrestone is smaller. This effect is pronounced if you pair your pave ring with two pave bands flanking, as now even more of the finger is covered and that point of comparison is further lost.

A halo gives a larger appearance from afar, but close-up is busier and can detract from the centrestone, though the finger-coverage is incredible

I do think you need to try them on, though - people seem to love halos on their fingers or dislike them, not much in between! A bezel solitare is rather the same way - bigger from afar, but since it''s covering a small area of diamond the diamond itself looks smaller close-up.

Three-stones are the worst of the lot for increasing the apparent size of your centrestone - finger coverage and a hugely sparkly look, but even smaller sidestones definitely take away from your centre. This is coming from a three-stone girl

JMHO.

Yssie My friend you have given this a looot of thought! Lol!

But I totally agree with you on all points. You should publish a paper on these findings

 

[february2003bride]

I think I've had every setting style under the sun

and from my experience, the medium to low set plain solitaire matched with a plain band or thin pave bands made a diamond looks it's largest. Followed by a halo style. When I had my princess three stone, the sidestones complimented my center diamond and gave great finger coverage, but didn't make my center stone look bigger per say. I finally have my permanent, never going to reset ever again, setting, and it's a pave four prong halo with two matching pave bands. Yssie is correct in that from a couple of feet away, it looks HUGE. But up close, it looks like the size that it is (.80) and a beautiful halo around it. Fantastic finger coverage as well

There's no way I could have diamond shrinkage syndrome with this set!

ETA: There is a thread that I believe dreamer started that showed the before and after - solitaire to halo- that shows how big a diamond can look in a halo setting. I'll try to find it.

ETA: Found it: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/solitaire-to-halo-before-and-afters.130309/

 

[Cehrabehra]

F2003B - I''m confused! Do you have two separate sets? You just posted a new set to replace the scott kay and you got a new band... but you still have the halo set in your avatar and are saying here it''s your forever setting? I''m confused lol

 

[Circe]

I''d recommend a bezel, personally: they do an amazing job of highlighting/exaggerating the stone. They''re more subtle than halos, and probably a little easier on the budget.

I''d agree that a single stone has more oomph then a 3-stone, somehow ... maybe you could use your sides for studs?

 

[february2003bride]

Date: 5/19/2010 10:17:00 AM
Author: Cehrabehra
F2003B - I'm confused! Do you have two separate sets? You just posted a new set to replace the scott kay and you got a new band... but you still have the halo set in your avatar and are saying here it's your forever setting? I'm confused lol

I'm sorry for the confusion

I did have a new Scott Kay setting last week but I should have gone with the one I really wanted- a halo with matching band. The SK one was a good deal so I went with that, and regretted it. So on Monday I exchanged the SK one for the wedding set I really loved- the halo with matching band. DH suggested adding the second pave matching band, and that's why I have a new set. There's no doubt in my mind that it's a my forever setting. I may add a new amethyst or blue sapphire & diamond stacking band at some point, but the setting itself won't change.

Thankfully my DH was very understanding! I did message the admin to delete my SK thread as it seems confusing to have that thread still up... I doubt I'll be starting a thread on my new set though. Maybe when DH gifts me with the diamond & colored stone band since it will probably be from BGD or WF.

 

[RaiKai]

I think a solitaire - particularly one with a thinner or knife edge shank - can really make a stone pop more, with it set medium-high. I think pave or shared prong or 3-stone settings, detracts the eye from the main stone - though this is fine when you want that kind of bling!

A delicate halo around the main stone, and a plain shank, would look wonderful too. I am not a halo person myself, though I have tried them on and they look nice on my hand, and I do think they can be beautiful. I do recommend trying them on before going that route for sure though.

And reset the side stones into new earrings!

 

[Lady_Disdain]

Date: 5/19/2010 10:52:39 AM
Author: february2003bride

I''m sorry for the confusion

I did have a new Scott Kay setting last week but I should have gone with the one I really wanted- a halo with matching band. The SK one was a good deal so I went with that, and regretted it. So on Monday I exchanged the SK one for the wedding set I really loved- the halo with matching band. DH suggested adding the second pave matching band, and that''s why I have a new set. There''s no doubt in my mind that it''s a my forever setting.

Freudian slip?

 

[february2003bride]

lol, no it''s a typo, nothing more.

 

[grace10209]

Hi All
Thank you for the feedback. I think what I will do is go to a jeweler and try on a bunch of the Ritani ones. Halo, Bezel, Halo just center princess, and then halo 3 stone princess -
maybe i'll use all 3 or maybe i'll just use the one. I guess i need to try some on and see what look i like best.
Now.......................... how can i convince DH to let me get a reset. He has seen me looking at sets and gets so offended. Saying he spend all his money on my ring and it has not even been a yr and im looking to replace it already.
Is he right? am i terrible? why does he care? so many of you upgrade and get resets.....how did you get your DH's to go for it. or did the not care?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 5/19/2010 7:19:19 PM
Author: grace10209
Hi All
Thank you for the feedback. I think what I will do is go to a jeweler and try on a bunch of the Ritani ones. Halo, Bezel, Halo just center princess, and then halo 3 stone princess -
maybe i''ll use all 3 or maybe i''ll just use the one. I guess i need to try some on and see what look i like best.
Now.......................... how can i convince DH to let me get a reset. He has seen me looking at sets and gets so offended. Saying he spend all his money on my ring and it has not even been a yr and im looking to replace it already.
Is he right? am i terrible? why does he care? so many of you upgrade and get resets.....how did you get your DH''s to go for it. or did the not care?

there are many threads on this topic my friend

Start a separate thread in hangout and you will gets lots of opinions on the matter! As for me, my diamond that I have been upgrading is not my original e-ring, and so there is no sentiment attached for DH. And he just likes me to be happy so he does not care what I do. But if your fhusband cares... well perhaps pick a different hobby or buy another diamond to play around with

 

[yssie]

Date: 5/19/2010 7:19:19 PM
Author: grace10209
Hi All
Thank you for the feedback. I think what I will do is go to a jeweler and try on a bunch of the Ritani ones. Halo, Bezel, Halo just center princess, and then halo 3 stone princess -
maybe i''ll use all 3 or maybe i''ll just use the one. I guess i need to try some on and see what look i like best.
Now.......................... how can i convince DH to let me get a reset. He has seen me looking at sets and gets so offended. Saying he spend all his money on my ring and it has not even been a yr and im looking to replace it already.
Is he right? am i terrible? why does he care? so many of you upgrade and get resets.....how did you get your DH''s to go for it. or did the not care?

Oh, believe me, if this is a terrible thing to do there are a lot of terrible people on this forum - me, for one. There''s nothing wrong with wanting something different, and there''s nothing wrong with getting what you want as long as you''re financially able and both parties are willing. That second is usually the more complicated - I think some men are just inherently okay with it and some are more sentimental. Ditto dreamer, check out the multitude of threads on this very topic.. I will say that not many of these women "got their DHs/FIs to go for it", though - if one person is forcing the other it''s not going to end well. He knows what you want, perhaps you could talk to him about a reset a few years down the line, when it''s not such a new topic? A reset as a wedding gift?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Date: 5/20/2010 12:18:36 AM
Author: yssie

Date: 5/19/2010 7:19:19 PM
Author: grace10209
Hi All
Thank you for the feedback. I think what I will do is go to a jeweler and try on a bunch of the Ritani ones. Halo, Bezel, Halo just center princess, and then halo 3 stone princess -
maybe i''ll use all 3 or maybe i''ll just use the one. I guess i need to try some on and see what look i like best.
Now.......................... how can i convince DH to let me get a reset. He has seen me looking at sets and gets so offended. Saying he spend all his money on my ring and it has not even been a yr and im looking to replace it already.
Is he right? am i terrible? why does he care? so many of you upgrade and get resets.....how did you get your DH''s to go for it. or did the not care?

Oh, believe me, if this is a terrible thing to do there are a lot of terrible people on this forum - me, for one. There''s nothing wrong with wanting something different, and there''s nothing wrong with getting what you want as long as you''re financially able and both parties are willing. That second is usually the more complicated - I think some men are just inherently okay with it and some are more sentimental. Ditto dreamer, check out the multitude of threads on this very topic.. I will say that not many of these women ''got their DHs/FIs to go for it'', though - if one person is forcing the other it''s not going to end well. He knows what you want, perhaps you could talk to him about a reset a few years down the line, when it''s not such a new topic? A reset as a wedding gift?

Yes, now that you mention it, I don''t know of a single case that pops to mind where an initially hesitant DH was suddenly converted.

 

[cemrn]

Yes I believe many DHs have a hard time with resets/upgrades. My husband was all for an upgrade as long as my original stone was used in the ring in some way. That really only left me the option of a 3 stone ring So long story short I ended up with .8ct 1.7ct .8ct ring. Ideally the 1.7 solitaire would have looked huge with the .8s as a killer pair of earrings. BUT I needed to make my husband comfortable with the change. Although the 1.7 may not be the star as it would in a solitaire, I have a super sparkler of a ring with amazing finger coverage. I am happy, he is happy. You need to find what works for you both. Just my 2 cents

 

[iota15]

You're not terrible. However, what works for one relationship may not work for another.

Talk to your DH, express how you feel. Listen to his concerns and really try to understand where he's coming from. You can both figure out a solution or compromise from there - just like any other issues in a marriage.