WWYD for a 3 stone project? (proportions)

[hoover]

Ok.... Another subjective question because I'm stuck.... I'm so indecisive and easily distracted

Since I lost my crack at the ever-in-demand 0.93 J AVR that has graced the hands of several PSers, I started pouring through the GOG site for alternatives.... Then when I was looking at the prices for the stones, trying to find alternatives within my budget, the 3 stone thread in SMTB caught my eye and the hamster wheel started turning

Now... I decided I don't really need a bigger center stone and I will be quite happy with the finger coverage that a 3 stone will provide. So that led to a flurry of emails to GOG and I now have a couple of options....

A) 0.30 - 0.60 - 0.30
B) 0.30 - 0.80 - 0.30
C) 0.46 - 0.60 - 0.46

Options B and C are at the top of my budget (and almost equivalent in price to getting the center stone upgrade) and option A gives me room to get a fancier setting (pave shank instead of plain WG)

The center stone on all 3 options have blue fluorescence too, so hopefully it'll turn out okay. The 0.6 is strong blue and the 0.8 is medium blue.

So which would you pick?

ETA: I didn't totally get distracted this time. My eyes are still on the ball and these will be AVRs

 

[TravelingGal]

Ok.... Another subjective question because I'm stuck.... I'm so indecisive and easily distracted

Since I lost my crack at the ever-in-demand 0.93 J AVR that has graced the hands of several PSers, I started pouring through the GOG site for alternatives.... Then when I was looking at the prices for the stones, trying to find alternatives within my budget, the 3 stone thread in SMTB caught my eye and the hamster wheel started turning

Now... I decided I don't really need a bigger center stone and I will be quite happy with the finger coverage that a 3 stone will provide. So that led to a flurry of emails to GOG and I now have a couple of options....

A) 0.30 - 0.60 - 0.30
B) 0.30 - 0.80 - 0.30
C) 0.46 - 0.60 - 0.46

Options B and C are at the top of my budget (and almost equivalent in price to getting the center stone upgrade) and option A gives me room to get a fancier setting (pave shank instead of plain WG)

The center stone on all 3 options have blue fluorescence too, so hopefully it'll turn out okay. The 0.6 is strong blue and the 0.8 is medium blue.

So which would you pick?

AVR's? I normally like the 2:1 ration myself...but like a larger center. Who's the person around here who is great at posting size ratio circles? Is it Dreamer?

 

[rubybeth]

Can you post the mm sizes? Also, could you ask GOG for photos of the combos?

 

[hoover]

oops... sorry... forgot some of the basic requirements.



Unfortunately, the GOG website doesn't list the measurements for most of their under 0.38 AVRs... I'm guessing the 0.30s are around 4.25 - 4.33 mm?

A: 4.25? - 5.39-5.37 x 3.47 - 4.25?
B: 4.25? - 5.92-5.90 x 3.94 - 4.25?
C: 4.92-4.95 x 3.09 - 5.39-5.37 x 3.47 -4.85-4.86 x 3.11

I don't have a pic with the 0.80 either because work got in the way of my new project plans and I forgot to ask Matt

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I think you need the .80 in the center. You can use this chart and it's percentages to figure out the proportions you like best.

 

[TravelingGal]

I like the .30/.60/.30. I don't see the pic with the .80 but I bet I'd like that too. Don't like the ones as close in size as much.

 

[Enerchi]

Hey Hoover - that sounds like a pretty sweet 3 stone project you're planning! What size is your finger? Do you want total finger coverage on the top? or do you want a bit of metal on either side (which may or may not have pave in the setting)?

If you create the little circles in the correct sizes to try on proportions, that will tell you. My 3 stone is on a size 7.75 finger so I needed more width to get the bling effect I wanted.

Just looking at the 2 AVR photo options you posted above, my preference is the .30/.60/.30 which makes the .60 POP better than the .46's do - they blend that way. Nothing wrong with a blend - but what effect do you prefer???

My princess 3 stone is a .50/1.09/.50 (I think... I have zero memory skills!!) and I like the way that proportion worked out.

 

[Gypsy]

I like the .30/.60/.30. I don't see the pic with the .80 but I bet I'd like that too. Don't like the ones as close in size as much.

This. I like the 60 point but the 80 point would be even better with the 30 pointers on the side.

 

[hoover]

Thanks Diamondseeker, TGal, Enerchi, and Gypsy

I'm leaning towards the 0.30 - 0.60 - 0.30 or the 0.30 - 0.80 - 0.30 too. The thing that was swaying me towards the 0.46 - 0.60 - 0.46 (J VS) is that the stones are perfectly colour and clarity matched, whereas the 0.3s and 0.6 (or 0. are all diff colors and clarities ( H or K sides, 0.6 J or 0.8 I center, VVS - SI2)

I was doing the number crunching and the light bulb moment came when I realized that I can get so much more finger coverage and carat weight for the same money when I started looking at the smaller stones. I think it'll be a RHR in which case my ring size is 5, but I will probably wear it on my left hand in the summer because my fingers swell when it gets hot.

 

[TravelingGal]

Thanks Diamondseeker, TGal, Enerchi, and Gypsy

I'm leaning towards the 0.30 - 0.60 - 0.30 or the 0.30 - 0.80 - 0.30 too. The thing that was swaying me towards the 0.46 - 0.60 - 0.46 (J VS) is that the stones are perfectly colour and clarity matched, whereas the 0.3s and 0.6 (or 0. are all diff colors and clarities ( H or K sides, 0.6 J or 0.8 I center, VVS - SI2)

I was doing the number crunching and the light bulb moment came when I realized that I can get so much more finger coverage and carat weight for the same money when I started looking at the smaller stones. I think it'll be a RHR in which case my ring size is 5, but I will probably wear it on my left hand in the summer because my fingers swell when it gets hot.

I'm size 5.25 and you can see my stones provide WAY heaps of coverage, so a .30/.80/30 will look lovely!

My stones are G, J, I and I can't tell the difference, but apparently my eyesight is failing me.

 

[Enerchi]

with a size 5 ring, you'll get rockin' coverage with any of your options! You're looking at about 13+ mm of coverage across the top of your hand (based on 4.25mm/5.5/4.25 as an average guesstimate) which is serious coverage for you!

If you are concerned about the colours on the 30.60.30 sample you showed above, my weak old lady eyes are not picking up any difference in colour between the 3 stones.

I'm all about a great deal - if you can save a bit by going down slightly in size... then perhaps the money saved goes towards a slightly pricier setting?? Or up the size slightly to say --- 35/60/35's??

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I somehow missed your beautiful new anniversary/e-ring, and since it has a .70 diamond, I am not sure I'd use a larger center stone for a right hand ring. The only thing is, if you go 30-60-30, I almost feel like you need to make a 5 stone because I am not sure that combo is going to give good finger coverage as a 3 stone unless you set the stone in bezels or halos.

 

[yssie]

Thanks Diamondseeker, TGal, Enerchi, and Gypsy

I'm leaning towards the 0.30 - 0.60 - 0.30 or the 0.30 - 0.80 - 0.30 too. The thing that was swaying me towards the 0.46 - 0.60 - 0.46 (J VS) is that the stones are perfectly colour and clarity matched, whereas the 0.3s and 0.6 (or 0. are all diff colors and clarities ( H or K sides, 0.6 J or 0.8 I center, VVS - SI2)

Realistically in these sizes a 1-grade colour difference up or down will have no notable visual impact!

For "mind clean" I actually prefer the center to be one colour grade higher than the sides, especially if the sides are quite a bit smaller. Smaller stones will show less body colour in profile because there are fewer layers of tinted material, so for them to all *look* the same an I/J center and J/K sides may be perfectly matched. Practically speaking, you can't really go wrong here, though!

 

[Dreamer_D]

With chunky cuts you need bigger to see the facet pattern. Smaller ones just look like modern RBs in my experience -- you need to get over the 5mm point to really appreciate the chunkiness and see the faceting. SO that is something to keep in mind.

Did you see this?

http://diamondbistro.com/category/216/Natural-Diamond-Center/listings/28861/125-cttw-August-Vintage-Round-Three-Stone-Ring.html

 

[marymm]

For the AVRs I actually prefer the look of the .46/.60/.46 - I think that'd be a sweeet ring with a whole lot of bling going on!

 

[stargurl78]

I vote for option B, then option A. Option C is my least favorite, I think the proportions of the sidestones are just too large compared to the center.

 

[alene]

I'd go with .80 with 30-pt sides.

 

[miraclesrule]

I like the .30/.60/.30. I don't see the pic with the .80 but I bet I'd like that too. Don't like the ones as close in size as much.

What she said. I was just mentioning yesterday how much proportion plays into whether or not I have liked a 3-stone on a particular individual. TGal's is a perfect example of great proportions and it loves amazing on her hand. This is not always the case IMHO.

I don't find it as attractive if the stones are too close in size. However, I do think it comes down to a personal preference, because it's your ring and you get to wear it. I will just dream about it.

 

[hoover]

I somehow missed your beautiful new anniversary/e-ring, and since it has a .70 diamond, I am not sure I'd use a larger center stone for a right hand ring. The only thing is, if you go 30-60-30, I almost feel like you need to make a 5 stone because I am not sure that combo is going to give good finger coverage as a 3 stone unless you set the stone in bezels or halos.

Thank you Diamondseeker

 

[hoover]

Dreamer D - I must have missed something good - the listing doesn't work anymore

Yssie, Dreamer, Marymm, stargurl78, miraclesrule, Alene, Enerchi, Diamondseeker, Gypsy, TGal - your input is appreciated

Is it weird that I felt differently about how the combos look IRL compared to the pictures? I went to a maul store to look at some rings to get a feel for the different sizes and having the larger side stones seemed to work for me. I guess it's because the thing that was in my mind the whole time was being able to see the faceting. Dreamer brought up a very good point that you won't really be able to see the pattern on smaller stones and I spent the weekend squinting at my 0.25 MRB studs and trying to imagine how the 0.30 AVRs would look... It's not worth paying the premium for these if you can't see the pattern, right?

PS. One of my convos with a sales person:
Me (looking at a 3 - stone ring): are your stones certified?
Sales guy: these aren't but it will cost you extra for certified stones
Me: are they GIA or AGS?
Sales guy: AG what? We use EGL. I've never heard of that other one.
Me: thanks, I'll just keep looking