Which Setting Do You Prefer?

[FancyDiamond]

Please help me decide. Your vote will be much, much appreciated.

 

[tyty333]

Can you tell us how high they are in mm from the top of finger to the top of the stone?

 

[rosetta]

I prefer the lower setting. No surprise as my own stone is set as low as possible!

 

[wakingdreams53]

The right is a photoshopped image of how you think you'd prefer your ring to be?
Because the metals don't match up perfectly, it looks poorly made, but if its just a photoshop job, then I vote right. It has a more "finished" look.

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

I prefer the left setting, I like stones to be set as low as possible.

 

[emeralddreams]

I actually prefer the stones to be set low, but for some reason I like the higher setting better.

 

[FancyDiamond]

Can you tell us how high they are in mm from the top of finger to the top of the stone?

Great question.
Have no idea.
Let's make an educated guess. Stone height is about 6.3 mm. Using the stone height and taking measurements of the images on my drawing paper, I get 8mm for current setting and no more than 9.5 mm for the modification as shown in the photo. For comparison, the depth of my RB center stone in my 3-stone ting is 5.3mm.

I'll check out degree of comfort and spinning problem when I try out the ring. I am also aware that the setting may look different in real life than in photo. For now, I just want to know if the appearance is better by raising the diamond a little (no more than 2mm). I want to explore all options before making a final decision.

 

[zoebartlett]

I like the one on the left, the lower set stone.

 

[FancyDiamond]

The right is a photoshopped image of how you think you'd prefer your ring to be?
Because the metals don't match up perfectly, it looks poorly made, but if its just a photoshop job, then I vote right. It has a more "finished" look.

Let me clarify. The left image is the actual ring, The modified one on the right (papercutting) is a result of the followings.
1. Make a copy of the photo of the actual ring.
2. Cut out the stone with its basket/cradle, and move this piece higher up.
3. "Collapse" the shanks and move them in towards the diamond.
4. Add a swoop to the center metal (without changing the position of the tip of the upside down "V".

 

[Amys Bling]

I am partial to the lower set stone, myself.

 

[yiska]

I prefer the lower set one too HOWEVER I would add the more tapered cathedral shoulders and the swoop-ier center "v" to the lower setting. Does that make sense?

 

[Mayk]

I like the curves. So for me less about high or low. I get it I have been following so I know it's stone size but like you I loves the swoops.

 

[emeralddreams]

After reading the other posts, maybe it is the swoops that drew me towards the higher setting. It also seems to flow a little more and seems more "regal" to me.

 

[FancyDiamond]

After reading the other posts, maybe it is the swoops that drew me towards the higher setting. It also seems to flow a little more and seems more "regal" to me.

Like you, I love the swoops, which are what attract me to the Royal Crown setting in the first place. I think the swoops can be an easy fix, because it is independent of the stone size and stone's setting height. The inward shank, however, is dependent on the stone size and stone's setting height. The bigger the stone and the lower it is set, the more outward the shank will be.

I purposely phrased the question in such a way that it is either no change or redo the setting. In the latter case, I can have the stone set somewhere in between the two images shown.

 

[nfowife]

I prefer the lower set one. I have a very similar head style but my head is not integrated on my ring so there are no swoops coming up to the prongs. I love the low setting and how the basket is right up against my stone- it isn't just "hanging" in there like my previous tiffany-style head was.

 

[mrssalvo]

I prefer the swoop of the second one, but the low set diamond and cross shank of the first.

ETA: okay, so I see the second is a photo shop and my description is actually what the Royal Crown should look like

 

[luckky]

I vote for the second one, the SWOOP make it more SWEET look, soft look and elegant that the way suppose to on the original ideal. Cheer!

 

[Winks_Elf]

I voted for higher set, ONLY because it would be easier to clean the bottom of the diamond.

 

[luckky]

After reading the other posts, maybe it is the swoops that drew me towards the higher setting. It also seems to flow a little more and seems more "regal" to me.

Like you, I love the swoops, which are what attract me to the Royal Crown setting in the first place. I think the swoops can be an easy fix, because it is independent of the stone size and stone's setting height. The inward shank, however, is dependent on the stone size and stone's setting height. The bigger the stone and the lower it is set, the more outward the shank will be.

I purposely phrased the question in such a way that it is either no change or redo the setting. In the latter case, I can have the stone set somewhere in between the two images shown.

I don't know why I'm so excited for the out come of your decision Since I follow you in the other posts, keep checking on the vote LOL but seems most of PS love the first one. So...whatever the vote will be please listen to your heart also...Hope everything work out and make you happy again

 

[FancyDiamond]

Can't thank you all enough for your helpful comments and votes.

To those who voted for the second option (right image) with higher set stone, narrow shoulder, and lovely swoops, what if I keep the stone set low, but only add the swoops, like the leftmost image in this attachment? This new option will definitely simplify the modification and thus carry less risk/uncertainty of outcome.

 

[FancyDiamond]

I don't know why I'm so excited for the out come of your decision Since I follow you in the other posts, keep checking on the vote LOL but seems most of PS love the first one. So...whatever the vote will be please listen to your heart also...Hope everything work out and make you happy again

Happy to hear that you are excited about the outcome of my decision. Thank you very much for your support. At first, I panicked, felt sad, anxious, and lost. After I got more responses, advice, and comments from fellow PSers, I have calmed down, become wiser/more knowledgeable, and learned to articulate what I do not like. Thanks to fellow PSers like you and also thanks Pricescope for giving me the means to ask questions.

Seems that you and I have very similar preferences. I guess you voted for the second (right image) choice, right? If so, how does the leftmost image of the new attachment (one with same low stone set but with swoops) look to you? In order words, does adding the swoops alone make you like the setting more? Or do you still prefer the ultimate, "regal" look of the rightmost ring?

 

[luckky]

I don't know why I'm so excited for the out come of your decision Since I follow you in the other posts, keep checking on the vote LOL but seems most of PS love the first one. So...whatever the vote will be please listen to your heart also...Hope everything work out and make you happy again

Happy to hear that you are excited about the outcome of my decision. Thank you very much for your support. At first, I panicked, felt sad, anxious, and lost. After I got more responses, advice, and comments from fellow PSers, I have calmed down, become wiser/more knowledgeable, and learned to articulate what I do not like. Thanks to fellow PSers like you and also thanks Pricescope for giving me the means to ask questions.

Seems that you and I have very similar preferences. I guess you voted for the second (right image) choice, right? If so, how does the leftmost image of the new attachment (one with same low stone set but with swoops) look to you? In order words, does adding the swoops alone make you like the setting more? Or do you still prefer the ultimate, "regal" look of the rightmost ring?

Hi FD, I'm so glad that you are more calmed and try your best to figure it out with all our PS friends suggestions and ideas. I would felt the same if I were you but with these amazing people on PS that help a lots!. If wasn't PS I wouldn't be able to upgraded and get the best (as I can) that made me happy. Long story short, my first diamond was LEO that my DH got me 5 years ago, I was so skeptical about LEO and at that time we were know nothing about it and not even know PS was exist...I couldn't thanks enough for PS to educated myself.

YES! I did voted for the second one and still insisted on my voted Even though the low stone set but adding swoops alone doesn't make the ring look elegant (this on my 2 cents opinion OK no offend to our friends who vote for the low stone set). YES the ultimate "regal" look is so slender shape that made the ring more soft sweet look and elegant in the same time, and I think that what you falling in love with it at the first place. (And now I think I'm too I wouldn't compromise to change for something I love and will be with me forever!
Don't get me wrong, the low stone set is beautiful also but more look ordinary and chubby look Well...if can be fixed or redo...I would stuck with what I really want, expect and love if I were you. Good luck!!