Whats your opinion?

[Eagleone]

I''ve been lurking for some time here and finally decided to bite the bullet and order a stone.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/jubilee_1_04ct_f_si1.htm

My gf likes princess cuts but really she enjoys being dfiferent so I thought the jubilee would be perfect. I just wanted some opinions on this stone and possibly a setting. I really like the 3 stone setting with trillions but my gf''s finger is very petite size 3 and this setting maybe too wide for her finger. This site is great and to think just 2 months I was ready to buy a huge frozen loogie.

 

[Garry H (Cut Nut)]

A princess will have more flashes or sparkle, but they are much smaller and weaker.
if you put this and a same size princess side by side the princess will most likely have a 10% smaller surface area.
Even if the jubilee was the same width - it will probably appear about 10% larger again because of its superioir light return and brilliance.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 12/15/2004 12:49:33 AM
Author:Eagleone

I really like the 3 stone setting with trillions but my gf's finger is very petite size 3 and this setting maybe too wide for her finger.

This shouldn't be a problem: this is also my ring size and I thee stone rings are perfectly feasible. Fitting sidestones of appropriate size is better left to the maker of the ring, but with 12mm across the finger to fill in and a 6mm center, there is enough room, so to speak. Besides, the three stones are not set flat one next to the other, but angled so the sides will be longer than 3mm each (I would think between 4.5 and 5mm) - enough to tuck in a nice pair of trillions.

I could not find a relevant example off the bat, but for very large stones (or small fingers - same thing) the sides can be arranged to go slightly over the finger. Nothing funny shows on top (just diamonds lined up all the way across the finger), but the tips of the side stones are lodged in a curved edge of the shank. Not sure if this sounds clear at all, but the meaning should be: as long as the setting is custom made, there should be no restriction for how large the trillions are (up to near the length of the center, that is).

Just my 0.2, of course. Hope it helps.

 

[valeria101]

And here''s the example - there''s always a way to fit lots of diamond in a small place

See how the trillions end slightly over the ring''s diameter. The picture comes from HERE.

 

[belle]

Date: 12/15/2004 12:49:33 AM
Author:Eagleone
I''ve been lurking for some time here and finally decided to bite the bullet and order a stone.

http://www.goodoldgold.com/jubilee_1_04ct_f_si1.htm

My gf likes princess cuts but really she enjoys being dfiferent so I thought the jubilee would be perfect. I just wanted some opinions on this stone and possibly a setting. I really like the 3 stone setting with trillions but my gf''s finger is very petite size 3 and this setting maybe too wide for her finger. This site is great and to think just 2 months I was ready to buy a huge frozen loogie.

i think this would be beautiful, and your gf will be amazed!!!

good luck!!

 

[moremoremore]

THAT DEPTH THAT DEPTH THAT DEPTH...BUY IT!!!
65 depth!!!! Love it. It's going to blow a 1 ct princess away.

And I vote 2 tapered baguettes on each side. Traditional...but I don't see too many so it's still different!

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 12/15/2004 9:57:35 AM
Author: moremoremore
THAT DEPTH THAT DEPTH THAT DEPTH...BUY IT!!!
65 depth!!!! Love it. It''s going to blow a 1 ct princess away.

And I vote 2 tapered baguettes on each side. Traditional...but I don''t see too many so it''s still different!

more
i think you just wet your pants again

 

[moremoremore]

 

[chrono]

What a beauty. Very good depth, clean for a SI1 and lovely F colour. There''s no reason not to buy this beauty!