Post # 1
So my boyfriend and I have been looking at rings for a few months now, and naturally I fell in love with James Allen. I fell in love with this one setting style, but very recently have had mixed feelings towards it.
If you notice, the basket/diamond setting (I’m awful withbthis terminology- sorry!) is diamond studded.
Now the ring I’m having mixed feelings for is this one- essentially the exact same ring, minus all of the little diamonds around the basket:
Again- essentially the same ring, just without all of the little diamonds around the basket. I guess the thought I started to have was that yes, my original choice ring is undeniably beautiful, but will the excess of small diamonds eventually look sort of gaudy/trendy years down the road? Having said that, is the second ring choice a more classic option? Any opinions are welcome and appreciated! 🙂
Post # 2
- Wedding: May 2019 - City, State
I have a ring very similar to the second option. I personally think that adding pave stones to the basket would just make it catch on things more, which could lead to damage and losing the side stones. Also I’m not sure how much you’d really notice the pave basket?
Post # 3
I agree with @chelbell23. That extra pave on the basket may look great is super zoomed photos, but IRL I don’t think they will have much of a visual impact or are worth the extra cost. Also, more pave = less metal = diminished durability of the prongs holding your center stone and more pave = more prongs to snag, more crevices for dirt and higher risk of melee loss.
Post # 4
I uploaded the pictures of the second choice ring because they didn’t appear to be showing up in my original post. 🙂
Post # 5
I like the look of the second one better. I also agree with PPs that having all that extra pave may lead to snagging clothing, potential to damaging pave, etc.
Post # 6
Agree with everyone, number two. I envision lots of snags with number one.
Post # 7
The second choice is my favorite! It’s so timeless!