Which would you choose?

[karee888]

More spinel setting advice requested!

So the bezel is out...do you like any of these?

Here is the stone.

 

[karee888]

1

 

[karee888]

2

 

[karee888]

3

 

[mercoledi]

I prefer the second one. Pretty stone!

 

[karee888]

4

5

6

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

I love #s 2, 3, and 6 (I''m a bit biased on that one though!). But I actually really really like #3 - I''m a sucker for delicate sparkly bands that show off the stone!

Followed by #6

 

[T L]

#3 is the best for this stone since it's the "airiest" and it's also very elegant. I don't like #2 because even though it's not a bezel, it has a gallery that would close off the pavillion and make the stone look too dark. You want to keep the pavillion open as much as possible. #1 is pretty, but again, I don't think the halo will let in sufficient light.

 

[platinumrock]

I''m not too crazy about the first one. The prongs on the third one are a little bulky. I prefer the second one. Is it a cathedral setting?

 

[cinnamon013]

I like 5 and 6!

 

[BWise]

I will go with #1. If you order a size that is larger than the stone and have it mount with an airline then it will allow the lights to get on the stone.

 

[Kelli]

I think #1 is the prettiest.

 

[cellentani]

I like #1 and #3 - they''re the most delicate looking and will allow light to get to the stone. How big is your stone? I would only like 4-6 if your stone were a substantial size, i.e. bigger than 7 or 8 mm.

 

[karee888]

Thanks for all of your opinions! You guys are so smart and helpful!!

I do like #3 very much, as well as #4 and #5. I really like the, for lack of a better term, "swoopiness" of the prongs on #5.

#3 probably has the best quality diamonds, although since they are so small, it might not matter much. I also like the "airiness" of it. Attached are 2 other views.

I like #2 as well, and it is a cathedral. It may block light, as was mentioned.

The stone is 6.5 mm, 1.39 ct. I can't wait to see it! Should be here in a few days.

If you guys see anything else that is elegant that might be good, I'd love to see it!

Thanks again, you guys rock!!

 

[karee888]

other view

 

[T L]

My only qualm with the one I liked is that it''s six prong. I would do a four prong setting. Too many prongs, so again, it darkens the stone. It''s also not necessary to have a six prong setting on a stone that''s not a diamond. The six prongs are basically for added security since diamonds are thousands of dollars, but I think your spinel will be safe enough in a four prong.

 

[marcy]

My favorite is # 3.

 

[ma re]

#1 looks a bit overwhelming for your stone IMO and the workmanship doesen''t look good even on photo.

#2 seems more appropriate for an asscher or something similar, as it has a shank of rectangular profile.

#3 looks nice for your stone, no objection.

#4 is even better if you ask me, but that''s just my preference. It''s a bit more unusual and not something you see too often.

#5 is too modern for my taste and I''m not sure if that shank is comfortable to wear.

#6 is IMO too "sturdy-looking" for your stone which looks somewhat delicate. It would be great for a square rhodolite or something similar, but it might overpower your stone.

 

[karee888]

I really like #5, but the site states that it is for a .75-1.00 ct stone. I emailed the seller to see if they could do anything for it to fit my stone, but I haven''t heard back. I agree, it''s unique and different looking. The diamond tcw is .20 and it says they are G color but I1 clarity. Do you think, that since they are so small, the I1 will affect the appearance much?

#3 has VS, G-H diamonds. But again, they are tiny so it might not matter.

 

[mochi]

I''m no help because I don''t know which one I like. Maybe #3.. but not sure.

 

[chrono]

Ooh, I like 3. Classic and timeless. Clean lines with diamonds to accent.

 

[karee888]

I''ve decided to get #3. I''ll post pics of the finished project...and maybe a few shots of the stone itself once it arrives.

 

[ma re]

Regarding the diamonds, you might not notice inclusions in I1 stones of that size (except by looking really closely), but if you''d place an identical piece with VS stones next to it, the diference in brilliance would be obvious.

 

[tyty333]

#3 gets my vote...just a hint of diamonds to show off your beautiful stone!

 

[chrono]

Date: 2/14/2009 11:55:44 PM
Author: karee888
I''ve decided to get #3. I''ll post pics of the finished project...and maybe a few shots of the stone itself once it arrives.

Good choice (because it was my pick too.

). When are you expecting the stone?

 

[karee888]

Thanks! I think it will look good.

It should be coming any day now - Barry sent it on Thursday morning. Maybe even tomorrow!!!!

 

[karee888]

Thanks again for all of your advice and suggestions, I really appreciate it!!

One last option....I found this one. It is very similar to #3, but has .50ctw, F-G, VS2-SI1 diamonds, as opposed to the .15ctw, F-G, VS2-SI1 of #3. It is about $140 more, but I really like the profile on this one [but I think it might be easy to get dirty!].

Thoughts?

 

[T L]

Date: 2/15/2009 3:37:54 PM
Author: karee888
Thanks again for all of your advice and suggestions, I really appreciate it!!

One last option....I found this one. It is very similar to #3, but has .50ctw, F-G, VS2-SI1 diamonds, as opposed to the .15ctw, F-G, VS2-SI1 of #3. It is about $140 more, but I really like the profile on this one [but I think it might be easy to get dirty!].

Thoughts?

That''s a very pretty ring, and if the diamonds are up to par with the description, then I think it''s worth the $140 extra. I don''t know about that jeweler, so I''m hoping the quality is decent. Again, my only qualm with these settngs is the six prongs. I would rather see four prongs with your stone. JMO.

 

[karee888]

I''ve done some reading on people who have purchased from them, and they all seem quite happy. They have a 30-day return policy, so if I get frozen spit, back it goes!

 

[ma re]

If you look at that last ring you posted, you''ll see that it''s got 16 diamonds on each side, so 32 in total or about a point and a half each. If you look at the #3, you''ll see that you can only count 5 or 6 on each side, and I''m pretty sure they would attach another photo if there were more of them (profile shot). So my guess is that #3 has only about 10-12 diamonds in total i.e. about a point and a half each.

In other words, in the more expensive one you would be paying for stones you wouldn''t even see most of the time, but you would feel them scratching your neighbouring fingers and maybe feeling uncomfortable. Not to mention you would have to be more careful with it, not to bang it from any side and watch for all those stones not to loosen and fall out (and they''re set more open than those in #3, so the chance is greater for that to happen).

All in all, I don''t think it''s worth the extra money.