Which proportions do you like best for my three stone?

[Dreamer_D]

Below are two images that have been photoshopped to represent the correct proportions of my 1.67ct diamond with two different sized side stones. Which overall look do you like better and why? I wear a size 6... I think

Many thanks to bright ice for posting the original image which I have shamelessly borrowed and manipulated Keep in mind everyone that both of these options are awesome, I am just trying to decide which one is best for me and your thoughts are helpful.

 

[slg47]

hmm...I think it depends on what type of setting you are going for. One of those really cool bezel settings you posted had smaller side stones and I thought that worked really well. This is tough-I don't really think you can go wrong with either! The larger side stones give more finger coverage and is more 'blingy' but with the smaller side stones the center stone stands out more. Of course your beautiful center stone would stand out in any setting...

 

[diamondbuggy]

I think option B. The smaller side stones makes the centre stone stand out more and actually look bigger. But option A is also gorgeous. Tough one.

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

I voted for Option A. It just looks more proportional and balanced to my eye

 

[Cehrabehra]

I like the smaller ones better - you worked so hard to get the pop of your big diamond, I would hate to compete with that. In the 3 stone it doesn't stand on its own as much with the bigger stones, the smaller ones look more adorning. If you want a real 3 stone look then get the bigger ones, but remember that they will all blend in a bit together... if you want an adorned center stone go for smaller.

 

[arjunajane]

I like the smaller ones better - you worked so hard to get the pop of your big diamond, I would hate to compete with that. In the 3 stone it doesn't stand on its own as much with the bigger stones, the smaller ones look more adorning. If you want a real 3 stone look then get the bigger ones, but remember that they will all blend in a bit together... if you want an adorned center stone go for smaller.

This is good advice. Dreamer, do you know yet what 'type' of 3 stone you are after, as per Sara's post? At a first glance, the proportions of the 0.40's look nicer to my eye-but I would also want to know what kinda design you are going for..

 

[lknvrb4]

I voted for the smaller stones. I like three stone rings that make the center stone pop instead of mushing it all together.

 

[steph72276]

.30 sides. I love the look of smaller stones so the center is the star.

 

[stone-cold11]

Not sure what you mean by blingy. Finger coverage, you can change it by changing the overlap and/or radius of curvature where you mount the side stones, to cover more or less. So down to which proportion you like better.

 

[pancake]

Definitely the 0.3ct sides - makes the centre pop!

 

[bright ice]

I like the look of the .30s. They both look great but the .30s do make the center stand out more.

 

[rosetta]

I much prefer the smaller sidestones! I'm getting a BGD 3 stone ring hopefully soon, and I have way smaller sidestones. I find that larger sidestones make the ring look more like a thick diamond band. Nothing wrong with that, all depends on the look you want really.

 

[kama_s]

I was fully rooting for the .40, BUT I'm doing a complete 180 after seeing that picture you put up in the other thread of the 1.7 with 0.3 sides. Sooooo, in light of the new material presented ( ), my vote goes for the 0.30!

I think it really highlights your center stone well, while still maintaining a delicate look. Although, keep in mind the difference in diameter between the two is so small...you might not even see much of a difference IRL.

 

[D&T]

love the second proportion, as the first thing I noticed is your center stone and it popped! but if you just want an overall Blingy look then the first choice. I like three stones that seem to accent the center rather than the overall bling, but thats my personal preference. Not sure what yours is though?

 

[blueiris]

I like the .30 stones with your center stone, for the same reasons others have already said. It makes your center stone stand out more.

 

[Cachette]

I also prefer the .30's. The bigger ones make the ring too bulky IMO. I have ACA studs at a tad over .30 and they are a great size with lots of brightness and fire.

Good luck!

Cachette

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

i like the look of the 3 stone with the .40 sides. It looks more in proportion and more like a 3 stone to me, but is that the look you are going for? 3 stones in proportion or a ring that has 2 smaller side stones that makes the center stone pop?

 

[sweetpea&babycorn]

i voted for the 0.30 sidestones. even such a small difference of 0.1 cts seems to make your center stone look bigger. i love 3-stones and i have an itty bitty one myself and if there's one thing i could change about it, i would've gotten smaller side stones to make the center diamond look bigger.

 

[motownmama]

My gut just says the first looks more proportionate/balanced to my eye.

 

[lucyandroger]

I really like both options. I think to determine the right option for you, you'd have to think about whether you want the "3-stone look" or the "center stone with sidestones look."

I have a 1.3 center stone with .35 sidestones and I love that ratio. To me, that ratio walks the line between the 2 looks. I wanted to look engaged when I got my ring and to be able to pair it with a wedding band. BUT, I also wanted to be able to wear the ring on its own when my fingers swell and still look married. That's how I chose my ratio and I'm very happy with it!

ETA - I've uploaded a horrible work photo for you in case it's helpful. But when I look at the photo, it definitely has the 3-stone look to it. I don't know...but I love it either way.

 

[FancyDiamond]

A very tough choice, indeed.
At first glance, I went with option B, the smaller 0.30ct stones. Then, something bothered me. The ring looks a bit "ordinary", and the 3 stones combined do not have the full finger coverage that I prefer. Option A, on the other hand, impresses me with its "Wow" factor, although the center stone does not stand out as much. Finally, I pick Option B for the "Wow" factor, finger coverage, and lots more bling.

I have 15-pts ACA for my tennis bracelets and 40 pts ACA for my 5-stone ring, but nothing in between, so I do not know how sparkling 30pts are. However, one thing for certain. My 40 pts ACAs sparkle madly and so much more than the 15-pt siblings, and they have lots more fire. The difference is quite significant. Therefore, my vote is for the bigger 40-pt sidestones in option A.

 

[piratefan]

I posted in your other thread, so I voted B! Look that look, GL with your decision...it will be stunning no matter which you choose

 

[Laila619]

Definitely the smaller ones.

 

[rosetta]

i've had some more thoughts dreamer.

There's no question that the second one makes the center stone stand out more.

However, the first one will probably look blingy-er from far away.

the smaller side stones may also make the ring look more like a fat east-west set marquise from further away: what do you feel about this?

 

[vespergirl]

I would go even smaller - maybe .25 ct each. AggieTexan (I think) has a 2 ct center stone with sidestones that are .25 each, and it's my favorite 3-stone proportions, because I think it makes the center stone really pop. However, if you like the look of having larger sidestones, that's a really pretty look too.

MissGotRocks has a gorgeous 3-stone, and I think hers is a 2 ct with .35 sidestones (I could be wrong on this) but she gets great finger coverage and center stone is still center stage.

 

[Dreamer_D]

Thank you all so much!

I don't actually know what look I want -- more three-stone or accent stone. I sort of worry that using smaller sides will not make the ring as blingy (stone, that means sparkly and, well, big diamonds to me ) and then I might regret them! And then I worry that bigger sides will make the cetner stone look smaller and I will regret them!

Yes, the ct. weight difference here is small, but the mm difference is almost .5 and that means a noticable visual difference.

I think for setting it will be a simply basket setting, most likely. With the sides tucked under a higher set center.

I have tried on rings in the past with similar proportions to the pictured ones and liked them both.

For those of you suggesting even smaller sides, I think it looks best with an over 2ct center.

 

[MissGotRocks]

I would go even smaller - maybe .25 ct each. AggieTexan (I think) has a 2 ct center stone with sidestones that are .25 each, and it's my favorite 3-stone proportions, because I think it makes the center stone really pop. However, if you like the look of having larger sidestones, that's a really pretty look too.

MissGotRocks has a gorgeous 3-stone, and I think hers is a 2 ct with .35 sidestones (I could be wrong on this) but she gets great finger coverage and center stone is still center stage.

I too like the smaller sidestones as I wanted them as accents only. My center is a 2.22 and sidestones are .33 each.

I much prefer the .30 sidestones with your stone but it truly is a matter of personal preference.

 

[Grlsbestfrnd]

I'm with the majority. I say go with the smaller side stones and let your beautiful center stone shine!

 

[Porridge]

B for me - I adore the delicate look that smaller sidestones give!

 

[petrock<3]

I voted for the .3 as well. I like the way you are going to have the sidestones tucked under the edge.

This is going to be one beautiful ring!!