What to do when finger size, designer taste and budget are at odds with each other?

[Allison D.]

Honestly, if the MWM flame ring is the one you''ve had your heart set on, then I wouldn''t compromise on that.

HOWEVER.......you *could* choose to set a really nice big sapphire in that setting instead of a diamond. If you get the MWM setting with diamonds in it, the center stone could be something else.

This would let you go much bigger for the budget and still give you the look you want in the setting with a little diamond bling in the setting.

Any photoshoppers out there who could photoshop the MWM flame with diamonds setting with a gorgeous round blue sapphire?

Oh, or another idea....could you talk to Mark about possibly adapting the flame setting for a sapphire cushion?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Here''s a great 1 ct. G SI1 stone at $5885 with wire/pricescope discounts:

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-584875.htm

H SI1 at $5743

http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-608086.htm

 

[lumpkin]

Gwen, I have seen some eye clean I1 diamonds on the board. They are rare, but they do exist. If you do a search you can see if it''s something you''d be interested in. You could have GOG, Whiteflash, James Allen, and Knox keep an eye out for you, and maybe even MM would be able to help source one for you. If you get an ideal cut with the inclusion in just the right place it could help you get the size you want, and it doesn''t sound like you need it next week so there would be time to find one.

I don''t know how you''d feel about that. A few years ago I wouldn''t have wanted one, but now....if I were going to buy another diamond I probably would look into it because I''m more color sensitive than I used to be and less clarity sensitive, and I would also like a bigger diamond. I have a size 8-9 depending on the ring, so I know what you mean about finger coverage. I''m a solitaire girl, too, and although I love halos, I think I''m too hard on my rings to get one for every day.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 3:54:40 PM
Author: diamondseeker2006
Here''s a great 1 ct. G SI1 stone at $5885 with wire/pricescope discounts:


http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-584875.htm


H SI1 at $5743


http://www.whiteflash.com/hearts_arrows/A-Cut-Above-H-A-cut-diamond-608086.htm

Oh DS, those are great, especially the first!! I don''t think an F will be in the picture, but a G would be amaaaaaaaaaazing!!

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 3:58:48 PM
Author: lumpkin
Gwen, I have seen some eye clean I1 diamonds on the board. They are rare, but they do exist. If you do a search you can see if it''s something you''d be interested in. You could have GOG, Whiteflash, James Allen, and Knox keep an eye out for you, and maybe even MM would be able to help source one for you. If you get an ideal cut with the inclusion in just the right place it could help you get the size you want, and it doesn''t sound like you need it next week so there would be time to find one.


I don''t know how you''d feel about that. A few years ago I wouldn''t have wanted one, but now....if I were going to buy another diamond I probably would look into it because I''m more color sensitive than I used to be and less clarity sensitive, and I would also like a bigger diamond. I have a size 8-9 depending on the ring, so I know what you mean about finger coverage. I''m a solitaire girl, too, and although I love halos, I think I''m too hard on my rings to get one for every day.

Depending on what the actual budget is, I may try to find an eye clean I1. I''m definitely not closing my mind off to the option. Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 1:51:58 PM
Author: ByGoneEraBride
You know, that made me laugh! ...the real world comment. We can get caught up here, because people here know whats what...can find great bargains, and in general, I''ve noticed (could be wrong), have a much larger budget for the stone alone.



Anyways, just remember, if you are sentimental, you won''t even notice if it looks ''stupid'' on your finger (which, that doesn''t make a whole lot of sense to me, diamonds NEVER look stupid). I''m 6'' tall, which makes a lot of things look really tiny on me. I have long lanky fingers ...which, is the same effect as chubby fingers - makes things look smaller, because my fingers are so darn long. They are normal size, not super thin. So a diamond is dwarfed on me. Its ok though, I love my diamond.


Long story short - my .52 karat looks pretty good to me, because we went for max sparkle. It also, I think, depends on the cut you choose. You get more for your money with some stones. One stone at a .7 can be a totally differents size and sparkle than another...and one .7 sparkly may be perfect for you.


I can''t agree enough with the search...and search...and search. You will find it.


But I can say, I was all into diamonds too, really...until I had my first blue topaz in the most amazing caribbean blue. When I realized I could get 5 carats for less than 500.00...I wish we had gone that route before he spent his hard earned cash on my diamond sparkly. Colored stones just have something that diamonds do not, and vice versa! I got just as many compliments on my blue sparkly as I did on my diamond sparkly.

This is true, I probably won''t be really critical of how it looks on my finger because I wouldn''t want to change it for anything due to the sentiment and memories tied into it. And it will have maximum sparkles because I''m definitely going for a super-ideal. As for the coloured stones...I think they''re beautiful--I''m wearing one daily now--but they aren''t what I want for my engagement ring. I''m in love with diamonds because they remind me of how stars sparkle in the sky, and my engagement ring will be the most important piece of jewelry I own (other than my wedding band), so I want it to be my favourite stone.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 2:08:33 PM
Author: coatimundi
Hi Gwendolyn,

Have you considered the half bezel/bezel route--with a thicker shank? I''ve seen some half bezel settings with just under a carat rounds that have a larger and denser effect. How color sensitive are you? A well cut round(as I''m sure you know)faces up very white. Have you considered H or I color with SI1-2 clarity?


Do you prefer thin shanks? or would you go thicker?


I think the 4mm bezels/half bezels are both elegant and wearable.

Coati

eta: I just re-read and see that you are going to gauge your color sensitivity, well, I''ll definitely have my fingers crossed for you there! Koati

Hiya, C/Koati

Thanks for going to the trouble of finding that picture of the half-bezel! That''s actually my favourite bezel look, and I thought for a while about getting one like that--it''s got the smooth lines that is part of what I love about the MWM. What won me over about the Flame is the profile of it--I just think it is knockout gorgeous and (sadly for my bank account) nothing compares to it for me. But if I wasn''t so smitten with it, your half-bezel would be right up there with the settings I''d consider.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 3:28:45 PM
Author: Allison D.
Honestly, if the MWM flame ring is the one you''ve had your heart set on, then I wouldn''t compromise on that.


HOWEVER.......you *could* choose to set a really nice big sapphire in that setting instead of a diamond. If you get the MWM setting with diamonds in it, the center stone could be something else.


This would let you go much bigger for the budget and still give you the look you want in the setting with a little diamond bling in the setting.


Any photoshoppers out there who could photoshop the MWM flame with diamonds setting with a gorgeous round blue sapphire?


Oh, or another idea....could you talk to Mark about possibly adapting the flame setting for a sapphire cushion?

I know it makes logical sense to do that, I really do, I just can''t bring myself to want a sapphire for my engagement ring. NOT that there''s anything wrong with them, I think they''re gorgeous, I have one in a pendant and it''s lovely--it just doesn''t shoot off the sparkle like a diamond does.

 

[vslover]

Date: 2/10/2008 4:23:56 PM
Author: gwendolyn

Date: 2/10/2008 3:28:45 PM

Author: Allison D.

Honestly, if the MWM flame ring is the one you''ve had your heart set on, then I wouldn''t compromise on that.



HOWEVER.......you *could* choose to set a really nice big sapphire in that setting instead of a diamond. If you get the MWM setting with diamonds in it, the center stone could be something else.



This would let you go much bigger for the budget and still give you the look you want in theAny photoshoppers out there who could photoshop the MWM flame with diamonds setting with a gorgeous round blue sapphire?



Oh, or another idea....could you talk to Mark about possibly adapting the flame setting for a sapphire cushion?

I know it makes logical sense to do that, I really do, I just can''t bring myself to want a sapphire for my engagement ring. NOT that there''s anything wrong with them, I think they''re gorgeous, I have one in a pendant and it''s lovely--it just doesn''t shoot off the sparkle like a diamond does.

ALthough I think sapphires are lovely (and I really do...I have a bunch of them) I just don''t think they''re engagement-y enough for most people for engagement rings. They don''t scream "getting married" to me, but maybe that''s because I know a lot of people who wore birthstone rings, etc on their left hand before getting married...so colored stones to me are something that non-engaged or married people wear on their left hands? I don''t know. At any rate, I understand not wanting a sapphire for an engagement ring. Sapphires are lovely...but they''re not diamonds.

 

[Sparkalicious]

Gwendolyn,

Mark Morrell Flame all the way! That is what you want ... that is what you shall get!

It''s gorgeous!

If it helps you any ... I too have fingers "of substance", shall I say, (I call the little part at the top my little squishy muffin tops). Can''t change it ... might as well have fun with it, right?

I completely relate to your scenario and had some of the very same concerns. While in the PS world, .70 seems to be smaller, it really isn''t in the real world. You can get a fabulous diamond in that range that will offset the beauty of that Flame setting perfectly. I am going to be getting a 1.28 ct diamond myself and have been hemming and hawing about going bigger, however, last night I tried on the .52 ct diamond simple solitaire ring I got for my mom for Christmas and was surprised at how substantial it actually looked on my finger

... It really was. So much so, I was thinking, what is my problem? Why do I have this need to go bigger when this size actually looks lovely? Diagnosis: PS addiction.

I know that this post is kind of long and rambling, however, my point is, and remember this is not coming from someone with a size 2 finger -- your finger size, designer taste & budget are fully in alignment and just fine the way they are ...

Your fab MM Flame setting with your bada$$ .70 colorless, ideal cut diamond will not rock your budget but will rock your world! It will be gorgeous and you will have the ring of your dreams. Don''t compromise, Miss Gwen ... you know that that won''t make you happy!

Good luck ... wishing you the best!

 

[Diamond*Dana]

I will keep my fingers crossed for you that you are not color sensitive. The MWM Flame is a gorgeous setting, and I would definitely stick to that if that is your dream ring. I can understand not wanting to upgrade for sentimental reasons. I have worn the same e-ring since my DH proposed in 1995, and my wedding ring is the same as well. I did get an anniversary ring for our tenth this past May, and there are times that I will wear it on my left hand (though I feel almost guilty, like I am cheating on my wedding set, lol), but I could never trade in my original pear. I really doubt that my DH would mind, but he is not sentimental like me.
Good luck to you!

 

[bee*]

Date: 2/10/2008 12:19:40 PM
Author: gwendolyn
Thanks, ladies. Bee-star, I saw the thread with the white sapphire and thought it looked absolutely gorgeous too and considered going for one, but (and this will possibly sound dumb if said anywhere other than PS) I''ve been shopping for my engagement ring essentially since I was 16, when I first fell in love with diamonds. I love other stones, sapphires both blue and white included, but diamonds were what got me into jewelry, and my engagement ring is THE diamond ring that I''ve been window-shopping for half my life (well, just about). I think it would feel like a let-down of sorts to go with another stone because I''ve had my heart set on a diamond solitaire for so long. I''ve tried to get over that feeling because I know other stones are more economical, but it just doesn''t feel right.


I think I''d rather have a smaller diamond than a bigger something else--I''m just afraid a smaller stone is going to look stupid on my fingers.

Plus side is that, if we live in the UK, rocks are on average a lot smaller here than in the US, so maybe I wouldn''t notice it too much if we stay here in England.

I completely understand-I''m the exact same. Much as I adore sapphires, I personally, wouldn''t want one for my e-ring. I just wanted a diamond. I really think that a .70 will look great in that setting. It definitely won''t look stupid on your fingers-as others have said, it''s just from being on PS that we all expect larger stones

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 4:59:00 PM
Author: Sparkalicious
Gwendolyn,


Mark Morrell Flame all the way! That is what you want ... that is what you shall get!

It''s gorgeous!


If it helps you any ... I too have fingers ''of substance'', shall I say, (I call the little part at the top my little squishy muffin tops). Can''t change it ... might as well have fun with it, right?

I completely relate to your scenario and had some of the very same concerns. While in the PS world, .70 seems to be smaller, it really isn''t in the real world. You can get a fabulous diamond in that range that will offset the beauty of that Flame setting perfectly. I am going to be getting a 1.28 ct diamond myself and have been hemming and hawing about going bigger, however, last night I tried on the .52 ctdiamond simple solitaire ring I got for my mom for Christmas and was surprised at how substantial it actually looked on my finger

... It really was. So much so, I was thinking, what is my problem? Why do I have this need to go bigger when this size actually looks lovely? Diagnosis: PS addiction.


I know that this post is kind of long and rambling, however, my point is, and remember this is not coming from someone with a size 2 finger -- your finger size, designer taste & budget are fully in alignment and just fine the way they are ...


Your fab MM Flame setting with your bada$$ .70 colorless, ideal cut diamond will not rock your budget but will rock your world! It will be gorgeous and you will have the ring of your dreams. Don''t compromise, Miss Gwen ... you know that that won''t make you happy!


Good luck ... wishing you the best!

Sparkalicious, you absolutely made my day with this post! Through answering all the replies, I felt more certain in my wants, and that I''m not really comfortable compromising on certain things and that having a diamond, even a smaller-ish-y one is what I''d prefer over a gemstone, even though I could have a totally ginormous one. I know I don''t need a PS blessing to get what I want (and I''m plenty stubborn enough to go out and get what I want anyway, alas and alack

), but it''s nice to hear that you don''t think a 0.7 will look out of place on my finger. So, thank you very much for replying, and I look forward to sharing my ring with you when I (eventually, quite a ways down the line) get it!!

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 5:13:18 PM
Author: Diamond*Dana
I will keep my fingers crossed for you that you are not color sensitive. The MWM Flame is a gorgeous setting, and I would definitely stick to that if that is your dream ring. I can understand not wanting to upgrade for sentimental reasons. I have worn the same e-ring since my DH proposed in 1995, and my wedding ring is the same as well. I did get an anniversary ring for our tenth this past May, and there are times that I will wear it on my left hand (though I feel almost guilty, like I am cheating on my wedding set, lol), but I could never trade in my original pear. I really doubt that my DH would mind, but he is not sentimental like me.

Good luck to you!

Hahah, it''s funny that you mention that it feels like cheating on your wedding set to wear your anniversary ring, because I think I have felt similarly! My boyfriend got me a very inexpensive diamond anniversary band which I wore for almost a year, until he got me a new ring for Christmas this year. I''d gotten so used to the anniversary band from him that when I took it off to wear the new ring, it felt so strange--I felt guilty! Silly, I guess, since rings don''t have feelings. Or...DO they? *dumdumdummmm*

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/10/2008 5:50:01 PM
Author: bee*
I completely understand-I''m the exact same. Much as I adore sapphires, I personally, wouldn''t want one for my e-ring. I just wanted a diamond. I really think that a .70 will look great in that setting. It definitely won''t look stupid on your fingers-as others have said, it''s just from being on PS that we all expect larger stones

Thanks for the encouragement, oh lovely bee-star!

If/when I do get my ring, maybe I''ll find someone with tiny fingers to do the handshots so everyone will still say, "Oh wow, it''s beautiful, AND HUGE!!"

 

[Sparkalicious]

Date: 2/10/2008 5:50:58 PM
Author: gwendolyn
Sparkalicious, you absolutely made my day with this post! Through answering all the replies, I felt more certain in my wants, and that I''m not really comfortable compromising on certain things and that having a diamond, even a smaller-ish-y one is what I''d prefer over a gemstone, even though I could have a totally ginormous one. I know I don''t need a PS blessing to get what I want (and I''m plenty stubborn enough to go out and get what I want anyway, alas and alack

), but it''s nice to hear that you don''t think a 0.7 will look out of place on my finger. So, thank you very much for replying, and I look forward to sharing my ring with you when I (eventually, quite a ways down the line) get it!!

Good for you and I''m glad that I could help out in some way! I know that it might be a while, however, it''ll be worth the wait ... I''ll be waiting patiently.

... kinda.

 

[bee*]

Date: 2/10/2008 6:01:05 PM
Author: gwendolyn

Date: 2/10/2008 5:50:01 PM

Author: bee*

I completely understand-I''m the exact same. Much as I adore sapphires, I personally, wouldn''t want one for my e-ring. I just wanted a diamond. I really think that a .70 will look great in that setting. It definitely won''t look stupid on your fingers-as others have said, it''s just from being on PS that we all expect larger stones

Thanks for the encouragement, oh lovely bee-star!

If/when I do get my ring, maybe I''ll find someone with tiny fingers to do the handshots so everyone will still say, ''Oh wow, it''s beautiful, AND HUGE!!''

You won''t need to do that at all-it will look fab on your hand! Whenever they bring in finger lipo, we can go together

 

[gwendolyn]

Heehee!! Ahhh, how I love you guys.

 

[milton333]

So, I know you''ve got a setting you like, and about the ring size, but I''m just going to throw out a gorgeous ring that you might possibly consider:

http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=380

The actual ring is for sale, it''s a .65 F, VS in a Leon Mege pave setting, for $5,000 with the diamond and all. It says the ring can be "easily resized." It''s not the look of the solitaire setting, at all, but it''s blingtastic, and it''s possible that it could be resized for you. Anyway, FWIW.

 

[tberube]

Hmmm. I totally understand this dilemma. I''m glad to see that lots of people have chimed in with help and advice, but since I don''t have the chance to read through all of it, I may repeat someone when I say try for a halo. It was my solution. Or even a bezel - anything to make that sparkler seem to cover more of your finger. It makes a huge difference and it really DOES fool your eye into seeing the diamond as bigger than it is.

Good luck searching! This should be a fun process for you, so try your best to enjoy the search and don''t let those d*mn fools tell you anything about the size of your fingers.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/11/2008 4:04:37 PM
Author: milton333
So, I know you''ve got a setting you like, and about the ring size, but I''m just going to throw out a gorgeous ring that you might possibly consider:


http://www.artofplatinum.com/4images/details.php?image_id=380


The actual ring is for sale, it''s a .65 F, VS in a Leon Mege pave setting, for $5,000 with the diamond and all. It says the ring can be ''easily resized.'' It''s not the look of the solitaire setting, at all, but it''s blingtastic, and it''s possible that it could be resized for you. Anyway, FWIW.

Thanks so much for passing that on to me, milton333! That was very thoughtful.

It''s a beautiful ring, and I love Leon Mege''s work about as much as I love Mark Morrell''s, but as much as I love rings like this on other people, the thought of actually owning a pave ring scares the beejeezus out of me! And that one has 112 stones!! I know there''s insurance in case things happen, but I think I would worry my head off if I owned a ring like that. The 6 tiny diamonds in the head of the MWM Flame I can handle, but all-over pave with 112 stones?!

Just can''t do it, I''m afraid.

But it was still a great idea!! Maybe someone else on PS will snatch it up--it is a very beautiful ring.

 

[gwendolyn]

Date: 2/11/2008 4:16:15 PM
Author: tberube
Hmmm. I totally understand this dilemma. I''m glad to see that lots of people have chimed in with help and advice, but since I don''t have the chance to read through all of it, I may repeat someone when I say try for a halo. It was my solution. Or even a bezel - anything to make that sparkler seem to cover more of your finger. It makes a huge difference and it really DOES fool your eye into seeing the diamond as bigger than it is.


Good luck searching! This should be a fun process for you, so try your best to enjoy the search and don''t let those d*mn fools tell you anything about the size of your fingers.

Hey, tberube, thanks for chiming in! Yup, both the bezel, half-bezel and halo ideas were suggested before, and although I know logically that this should be the way to go because of the awesome finger coverage (I''ve seen the pics of the same stone in the plain solitaire and then in the halo! I know what I''m missing out on!), I''m afraid I''ve already lost my heart to the MWM Flame. If we can''t end up affording it, then I might think about a half-bezel because I like the smooth lines, but....I love the Flame so much that I think I''d cut down on the stone size just to have the setting (which is exactly the opposite of what I told J! I said we could put almost all the money towards the rock because the setting wasn''t that important--DOH).

Basically what I learned in this thread is that my mind is already 99% made up about every detail of my ring, except how low in colour I can go. Oh, and my exact budget.

 

[cutes814]

hi gwen! if you love the flame setting, you should definitely get it.

as for your center stone, you should set your budget and then we can all help you search for a stone! how fun!

since you live in england and the norm for erings are much smaller there, your 0.8ct-1.0ct will look huge compared to all the others out there.

i understand your fear of the diamond looking small on your finger, but i don''t think 0.8ct or 1ct is small at all! even on your size 9! i''m a size 6, let''s say i put on a 0.4ct solitaire, it doesn''t look tiny (i know cuz i tried on my aunt''s ring when we were creating it thru WF).

now if you were comparing it with the rings on ps, then it might "feel" small since it gets crazy big here.

but like everyone says, ps is not a standard for the "real world". we''re all diamond junkies here so we''re an exception.

since you''re planning to get a super-ideal diamond, all you''ll be able to see are mad sparkles!!!

so let''s get the budget set and we can start hunting!!!