- 3 years ago
Ohhhhh!!!!!! I faint at the beauty of this vintage rings! I LOVE vintage rings!
Entirely unoffical, I’d say that (judging by the prongs on the center stone) it is 1940’s, circa 1944. That center stone seems a bit larger than many typical 1940’s center stones.Is that center stone set in a bezel with allso prongs? Of is that the classic ’40’s “illusion” setting, I can’t tell.
The sides stones are elegantly placed. I really really like the side stone details in the way they are placed in a half curve.
Do I detect miligrain detailing on the bezel settings of the sidestones? I love that.
i love the style, but honestly, if the center stone is a diamond, it appears to have a very low clarity, and quite a few visible inclusions, in my opinion. but i really love the setting!
It is from the 40’s! The jeweler told us the center stone is about .75, old European cut and the clarity is good. It doesn’t look yellow at all in person – I don’t know what’s going on in that picture!
I wish I had a magnifying glass to look for inclusions – I can’t see any with my uneducated eye.
dizzybee130: Hey OP I look at a lot of vintage rings. I am not a profesisonal in the field, but my general observation is that a .75 stone is on the large side of average for that time period. See, a lot of young guys were going off to war and didn’t have a ton of money, and getting engaged quickly was the norm. Or else they came home fro the war and got married ASAP.
The “illusion” setting (which your does not have, you’re right) was popular for enlarging the center stone size. And that square setting for a round stone was typical but bezel + prongs may be a little unusual.
I don’t see inclusions, I think it’s fine.
For the last time I will say: love that setting! I’d definately wear this ring, and I look at a LOT of vintage rings and would choose only 10% of them.