Post # 1
I’m having a tough time choosing between these couple of wedding sets!
this one each ring has a width of 1.9mm
and this one each ring is 2.9mm
the engagement ring is 2.7mm and the wedding band is 2.5mm
Regardless of the ring, we are going to go with 1ct round 6 prong. I’m a size 4.25 with long skinny fingers.
any advice/opinions? also, anyone have real life pictures of these rings?
i tried on rings, but i don’t remember what all the different sizes looked like! either that or i didn’t remember noticing a real difference?
Post # 2
- Wedding: November 2013 - St. Augustine Beach, FL
I’m not a fan of channel set diamonds but the first one looked the best to me.
Post # 3
I like 3 the best! I have a size 3.5 finger and my engagement ring and wedding band are both 2.5mm ..pic for reference
Post # 4
Mine is similar, 2.4mm channel-set band with a princess cut center stone..I’m partial to #3 because it looks a lot like mine, but the side stones are bigger than the ones in my band.
Post # 5
I personally like the look of #1 best because it has the smallest diamonds in the band and I feel that makes the center stone stand out more. But if you want to be able to really see the diamonds in the band, get #2. I like my wedding band to be wide enough to wear on its own, and 1.9mm wouldn’t be quite substantial enough for me. With #3 the bands don’t have the same width all the way around, and that would bother me. But I do like the cathedral setting more than the others. So many things to think about!
Post # 6
I personally love thinner bands, and I think it makes the center stone pop. When shopping, I thought even 2 mm bands was too thick for my taste. I went with a 1.6 mm band. I would definitely go with the 1.9. Even if it seems thin on its own, I think an almost 3 mm engagement ring plus a 3 mm wedding band would be very wide – vs an 1.9 ring and band.
Post # 7
thanks everyone! anyone else have more pictures??