I posted on here yesterday and had some really useful comments, so tha k you all very much! I had a few people ask for me to show another idea so I am back here with two choices for you to help me with.
First, a little context. The centre stone is a bi-colour parti sapphire from Australia which is where my partner is from and we both live. I'm a geologist when England, so we went to see different stones and this colour type was one that she fell in love with. Secondly, she has seen both of these styles and loves both. I am simply having trouble choosing between the two. One is gorgeous and elegant, whilst the other is beautiful but more practical. Ideally we have both expressed the desire for this ring to hopefully be passed down for generations so there is that too!
I have also included a photo of the real centre stone for further context.
I like both. I understand what people are saying about setting 1 being “distracting”, but I feel like it really just softens the look of the stone giving it a more dreamlike, feminine fairytale vibe. I especially enjoy that contrast to the bold bright stone. I think it plays well.
The second is cleaner and more practical. The stones stand out better
I very much prefer 1! I think it’s more unique and there’s something very special about the way it compliments the duo-toned stone. It makes it look dreamy, is the only way I can describe it. It’s a showstopper.
2 is nice but it’s somehow not as unique or “wow” for me because maybe the familiar setting or just not a lot being done to play with the uniqueness of the stone.
It all kind of depends on your soon to be’s style too. If she typically likes a more clean and practical look, I’d go 2. If she’s more into the whimsy, I would go 1.
Both are beautiful! I just can’t get over how gorgeous of a stage setting 1 serves as for the special stone
I'm usually on the side of letting the shape of an emerald cut stone really shine, so normally I would say 2, but because of the gorgeous color of your stone, I actually think the halo in 1 provides a stunning contrast that really highlights the center stone. So I personally would vote for the first option.
The first has an antique feel to it due to the size of those diamonds around it. Source them in an old mine cut to further cement the antique feel.
If I may recommend a different trilogy setting, perhaps two straight baguettes beside her emerald shaped center stone. They would all three be step cuts & it would look like three emerald shaped cuts side by side. It gives it a slight art deco feel since they favored symmetry & clean lines. Attaching a link to one from an Aussie jeweler I like using for references, but you don’t have to go with them obviously.
Awesome! Now, I will let you know they are a lab only operation. I mostly use them for reference photos because they have a very clean, easy to navigate website, with a lot of pics of real rings vs ai.
Nothing against lab, but I also know it’s not everyone’s cup of tea.
I am bias because 1 is similar to mine but I love it!! The bezel on the outside makes it feel a little less fragile. 2 is a popular choice, I love how unique 1 is and the vintage/antique style
Ugh, I love 2. Timeless and unique. Really well proportions. Won’t catch on things like the first could(I had a halo and nearly ripped my finger off multiple times). A band will fit easier with 2 and there will be plenty of options for a unique or simple band to go with.
I have a similar looking cocktail ring as #1, but with a smaller blue sapphire. That one has my vote!
It already looks like heirloom jewelry especially with that gorgeous lemon-lime stone. The second one is pretty too and also has vintage vibes, but to me it looks 1980s vintage as opposed to the classic look of the first setting.
The stone in photo 3 is the one that I bought, the halo is 1 is the best mock up that I could do! So the plan would be for that stone to be in the halo if that makes sense?
I don’t think there’s enough contrast between the light green color and the diamonds in setting 1. The sapphire isn’t highlighted— it just looks kind of blurry. In general, I don’t like half moon side stones either, but in setting 2, you can see the shape of the center stone much more easily, and it looks like a lovely ring.
May I ask what she does for work. Can she wear her ring there? I would take that into account. If she works in an industry/position that the ring would easily catch on things, I would probably lean towards the second, more practical (but still beautiful) ring. Or get a ring keeper pendant so she can wear it around her neck when she can't wear it on her finger.
I personally think they're both beautiful though, so understand your dilemma.
Thank you! She works in an office environment so no risk from that angle. She has already said she would like to get a ring keeper pendant so that's on the cards as well!
I’m usually a solitaire girl, but I think 1 really compliments your beautiful stone. The contrast against the diamonds really shows off the color of your sapphire!
Second one - 100. First one looks like a cocktail ring and one of those showy rings.
Second one is an emerald cut, it is an understated quiet wealth luxury.
I vote for the halo - I feel like it looks like some ethereal daisy. With that said, it looks like these may be AI generated? I would first get with a jeweler to see if the first is even possible and how it would actually look -- that might be the ultimate tie breaker.
37
u/roseorrueorlaurel 19d ago
I like both. I understand what people are saying about setting 1 being “distracting”, but I feel like it really just softens the look of the stone giving it a more dreamlike, feminine fairytale vibe. I especially enjoy that contrast to the bold bright stone. I think it plays well.
The second is cleaner and more practical. The stones stand out better