Post # 1
So after spending a few days worrying about the size of the diamond we purchased (2.22 oval) I posted about how to deal with people being rude about the size.
(My previous thread – http://boards.weddingbee.com/topic/no-such-thing-as-a-too-big-but-now-i-wonder?replies=34#post-)
I have been browsing looking for settings for a while and had decided on something like this:
Which is gorgeous! The center diamond in the picture is 2.25, so mine will look very similar. This afternoon, I was browsing at settings an came across this one, which had me floored:
I LOVE IT! That said – it is 2.83ct, so if I had a setting made like this one, along with my center diamond, my engagement ring would come to – 5.05ct – which is insane. And seeing I was worried before….
What do you bees think? Do you prefer the first setting or the second one? Why?
AND – if you like the second setting…how would I have a wedding band…
Post # 3
I prefer the first one 🙂 OR, If I were to get a split shank I would prefer one like this:
BUT, I also love this TAcori 2620:
Post # 4
I prefer the first set for a more “traditional” look, as you can wear a wedding band with it.
The second ring is beautiful, but I think it could certainly be worn as a “stand alone” ring, an e-ring and wedding band all in one.
Overall I am biased towards the first ring because I prefer simplicity, but you have to choose what makes your heart sing. 🙂
Post # 5
I prefer the simpler first one. It’ll put more focus on your center diamond!
Post # 6
I prefer the first one because I think it would look better with a wedding band than the second one.
Post # 7
The second one is beautiful, but your center stone would hide the diamonds that go under the stone. so a lot of your diamonds will be hidden.
Post # 8
I like the first one best but if you decide on the second one I would not wear a wedding band with it.
Post # 9
Thanks for all the comments, I do love the first and the way it will make the diamond stand out, but there’s something about the second one that just calls to me. I don’t like not having a wedding band or having one that isn’t a straight band.
I am thinking maybe I could have the two outter bits that hold the center stone sit higher so I can slip a weding band under…
Post # 10
I like the first one the best. I think it showcases your center stone the best.
Post # 11
- Wedding: June 2009 - Mountain Meadow/Mansion
I also prefer the first setting! Love the simplicity and think it will showcase your stone beautifully! Also, I don’t think the TCW stands out as much as the center stone, so get what you like without worrying about how big it will look. Rock it!
Post # 13
Definitely the first one! The second has way to much going on!
Post # 15
Although there seem to be a lot of votes for the first option— you seem to be moved by the second option.
While I understand the point of the ring is that third piece in the center— have you thought to leave it open (kind of like a split shank) and that way the wedding band could fit in that spot..that open space thereby creating that third band effect you seem to be wild over. That way it’s all flush—looks like one ring and you dont have to concern yourself with where to put the band.
Not sure if that made a bit sense….lol But I saw it in my head perfectly..lol
Post # 16
@soy: I’m going to be honest here. If I was to get an oval of that size I would set it an a setting with tiny side stones (no halo) and double prongs. BUT it’s not my ring and although I think the first setting will make the center stone stand out more you seem to really love #2. So go for what you love! As far as a wedding band goes I would just wear a tiny thinbola in band because I wouldn’t feel the need for more bling.