(Closed) Could this have been avoided?

posted 6 years ago in Rings
Post # 2
Member
564 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: June 2016

From the pic you posted I do think it looks shorter. IDK if there is anything you can do, but take it back to the jeweler and ask him whats up with it. I find it odd he didnt tell you at time of pick up

Post # 3
Member
268 posts
Helper bee

This looks significantly different to me.  You can see the cutlet (or whatever its called) at the bottom in the old pic and its blocked from view in the new pic. I would try to calmly talk to the jewler about seeing if he can reset it back to its original form if you prefer that look.

I don’t think it looks bad… I prefer lower set rings, so I like the new setting.

Post # 5
Member
1627 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: July 2012

I doubt he could have done anything differently, if the prongs were broken the stone would have needed to be set lower to fix it. In theory, he might have been able to rebuild the prongs and,set it at the same height, but that can be costly and time consuming. On the bright side, having it set a little lower means less knocking it around! 

Post # 6
Member
5046 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: May 2014

View original reply
happybee15:  Maybe you should show another reputable jeweler nearby just to get a “second opinion”. I’m just thinking that if you like the original better it may be “fixable” if you want.

Post # 7
Member
2722 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: April 2017

I think it looks better set lower. It’s still the same ring so I’m not sure why you’re upset about it.

Post # 8
Member
2331 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 1995

I’m not sure I’m buying that. I have had prongs re tipped before and it did not change the height of the ring. They add metal not take it away. You might want to consult with another jeweler just to make sure he isn’t copping out or doing what was easiest instead of what was most likely to keep the ring in its original form. Not meaning  to panic you or anything but it just sounds a little odd to me. I actually have a similar setting  on an old ring of my aunt’s with a garnet stone and did have the prongs retipped and it stayed the same setting height.

Post # 9
Member
2331 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 1995

Also looking at the two pictures again it seems to me the lower setting is not perfectly straight. The stone seems to be sitting at a slight angle. Maybe it’s just my eyes? Does anybody else see that? I actually see Yop prefers the higher setting because it seems to look a little more delicate and symmetrical overall.

Post # 10
Member
1786 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: April 2016

View original reply
happybee15:  it looks like the prongs were way too high and didnt secure the diamond very tight. So they tightened the prongs. 

Post # 11
Member
4509 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: September 2017

I do think it looks much better with the shorter prongs.  Something seems off in the first photo.

Post # 14
Member
2331 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 1995

I will get out the ring that I had done when I get home and post a pic. I just think something looks off on the lower setting. The metal around the head  looks more rounded or wavy or something ( not sure how to describe it ) and less crisp. The stone appears to be sitting at a slight angle. There seems to be a small blob of white metal on the yellow gold part just under the setting that I don’t see in the first picture . Overall it just looks a little sloppy to me and I think a jeweler who focuses on refurbishing antique rings would not have done it that way.

Post # 15
Member
2585 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: January 2011 - Midland, TX

Its an obvious difference. Better IMO. But if you prefer it the other way, I’d go to a different jeweler and ask.

The topic ‘Could this have been avoided?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors