Post # 16
I just bought a ring second hand with this setting (also two tone). I bought it more for the stone as was not sold on the setting as it is not my own style, but the setting is much nicer in real life! I will probably still eventually reset to something more my style but there is no denying it is a very pretty, classic, and dainty setting and I am happy to wear as is for a long time. I do really like being able to see the body of the stone so nicely, but still having the protection of 6 prongs.
Post # 17
The only reason i’m not 100% sold is because it looks like it is quite high but I know t is advertised as one of their lower settings so maybe I am just being ridiculous. I’m scared I would bash it on everything. It is absolutely dreamy from the top.
Post # 18
I have an OEC in mine which is a bit deeper stone, but it really isn’t that high, especially given my stone is an 8.5mm stone. The head is integrated into the shank (not a peg head) meaning it is lower to start with. In mine the culet comes right to the shank. You really can’t get much lower than that unless you have a setting that removes the shank underneath the stone entirely but that can expose the stone to more risk and can also mean your finger presses the stone. It’s not much higher than my 8mm bezel which has an opening in shank under bezel – no shank under the stone.
Here are a couple pics. The rose gold band pictured with the ring rises about 1.2-1.4ish mm to give you an idea:
Here is a side profile of my bezel for comparison. Keep in mind it is a smaller stone so has less depth! It can be a bit deceiving though as the band is a lot thicker!
Post # 19
i love your wedding band! Where did you get it?
Post # 20
Hi! Im wondering what wedding band to get with this ring since it does not currently have a matching band on there site.. I am looking into gettin just a 1.5 mm plain band. do you think one will sit “flug” against this e ring or no?