Post # 1
So I originally had my heart set on an emerald cut, pave engagement ring… like it was the ONLY shape I liked.
However, my aunt has generously gifted me a 2.5 ct brilliant cut diamond to get reset into my own setting. The size is bigger than what my boyfriend would be able to afford and it is a beautiful, good quality diamond so I am very, very grateful. It’s the economical decision to use this diamond too, since we are paying for the wedding ourselves. (Selling the diamond is not an option… would hurt my aunt’s feelings.)
But I am so uninspired with this shape. Since I am not getting the emerald cut I wanted, and since we’re saving lots of money by not having to buy the diamond, I want there to be some extra details on the ring that are nice, but I don’t like complicated rings. I like clean, dainty designs.
Can you share your pictures of 2.5 ct. brilliant cut rings, preferably pave and no halo (don’t mind under halos or hidden halos though)? I’m a ring size 5.5.
I don’t know what I want . Please help inspire me!
Pic of the diamond (Am I crazy for thinking it doesn’t look that big for a 2.5 ct? Will it look bigger once it’s set?)
Post # 2
No pics to show, but it is definitely huge! May be a bit crazy for thinking it looks small, yes 😉
Post # 3
- Wedding: August 2016 - Temecula, California
That is a beautiful stone! A very classic shape too! I think it will look a little larger once you set it. Here are a few inspiration pictures I found on Pinterest:
Post # 4
In My Humble Opinion, Verragio has stunning solitaires with gorgeous details you’d never expect. For example:
Post # 6
This is my 2.4 on a 5.75 so slightly smaller diamond and slightly larger finger. I definitely thought my diamond looked bigger once it was set. I had a setting custom made in brushed white gold with a hammered yellow gold band (to match my husbands.) Adding these small details to an otherwise pretty standard setting really made all the difference to me. I think Lauren B has some really unbelievable settings though most are a big glamorous for my taste. You could add emerald cut diamonds as side stones for your e ring or use some of the $$ saved to get an emerald cut temerity band I think that would create a nice contrast
Post # 7
I was in a similar situation. Had my heart set on emerald cut but was gifted an OEC. I ended up getting it set with baguettes so I still have some of that step-cut vintage look. I love it!
I’ll attach some pics of mine (which is much smaller than yours!) another I tried on and some internet pics!
A solitaire would be fabulous too and so classic but wanted to show you another option if you’re a step-cut lover like me!
Post # 8
my vintage ring is only 1.8, but from the late 1920’s and I LOVE the art deco setting. (also it’s a size 8 so a 2.5 on a 5.5 will be HUGE)
Post # 9
Mine is a 1.5 OEC moissanite so it’s a little smaller than yours and my finger is a 6.5 so that’s a little bigger. I love the simple look because it lets the stone shine and is so sophisticated looking imo. Excuse the awful nails lol I was waiting until today to get them done for wedding haha
Post # 10
Just following up…
He proposed this past weekend! We went with a reverse tapered pave. 2.5 ct. solitaire ring. I LOVE! 🙂
Post # 11
- Wedding: May 2019 - City, State
Gorgeous!! My engagement ring is very similar, so I think you have excellent taste 😉 Can we see the profile of your ring?
Congratulations on your engagement!!!
Post # 12
How gorgeous!!! Congrats bee!! And it does not look small at all! 😍
Post # 15
Beautiful ring! Congratulations!!