Picking the ring

[Lauriebell82]

It is, but make sure he gets you a full carat (at least.)

 

Why? What's the difference?

[allina]

I saw such a pretty ring in the jewelry store today, I couldn't resist trying it on. It's so beautiful!

 

http://www.kay.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product1|10101|10001|-1|150851602|15051|15051.15057.15106

 

That's beautiful LB

 

I hope you get it or whatever your dream ring is when your bf proposes

[almost famous]

1 carat shows up better. Don't you want the bigger diamond? Under a carat hardly is even worth it, IMO. I think most guys know nowadays to go for the carat.

[allina]

Don't you want the bigger diamond? Under a carat hardly is even worth it, IMO.

 

Your opinion may not be LB's opinion, not every woman is all about more, bigger and more expensive. A smaller, simpler stone is classy and right for a lot of women (not that 3/4 carat is small to begin with)

[johan]

Your opinion may not be LB's opinion, not every woman is all about more, bigger and more expensive. A smaller, simpler stone is classy and right for a lot of women (not that 3/4 carat is small to begin with)

 

Some women are even ok with gold plating and glass. Those are the keepers.

[Stung]

my live-in boyfriend and i have recently decided that we want to get married sooner rather than later. we are expecting our first baby together in a few months, we're trying to sell the small condo we live in to buy a bigger house in a depressed real estate market before the baby gets here, the mother of his 8-year-old has been making our lives miserable and then today his car was totaled. what i'm trying to say is, we're insanely stressed out and financially spread thin. to me, what matters is that we love and support each other through all this and make a stronger union in which to raise our son and his daughter together. personally, i have a problem with diamonds because of the conflict controversy AND because of the overinflated prices due to corporate marketing strategy; as soon as we started talking marriage, we agreed to look at sapphires, a beautiful stone that is in reality more rare and unusual than a diamond, and also, nice side benefit, less expensive. he won't let me pick it, because he wants to surprise me at least to some extent, but he did ask me for input about my favorite styles, which i really appreciated because i view jewelry as art and can be quite picky. however, after the accident today and because my partner was stressing about the high insurance deductible eating into his ring budget (we're having a baby and looking at houses--money's a little tight), i told him he could buy me moonstone and sterling silver and we'd go elope in our jeans at some seaside bed and breakfast with nobody but his daughter there, and then have a picnic. the idea that nothing less than a one carat diamond counts is actually kind of offensive to me; what counts here is that we're making a family. in fifty years i won't look back and mourn the loss of some fancy expensive wedding trappings, but i would mourn the loss of a good man. when i saw his car like a chewed-up accordion with metal and plastic car-shrapnel all over the street this afternoon i had a vision of raising my son without him and i cried right there on the side of the road, i was so relieved that he was okay.

 

this is not to say that the ring isn't important: i wouldn't want to wear something i found hideous, not because i'm materialistic, but because i have a sense of aesthetics. i happen to like moonstones; they were a popular engagement choice in the 18th century, and they are said to symbolize emotional love, fertility, new beginnings, and the moon. i also happen to find elopements romantic and less stressful as well as less expensive. i'd still love the sapphire ring and maybe i'll get it someday for some future anniversary, along with a longer honeymoon once our son is old enough to stay at his grandparents for a while. the point is, engagement rings are mostly important as a symbol, not in and of themselves. i want my ring to be what i consider beautiful, sure, but i want my ring to symbolize our commitment to each other and how well we work together, not how many sheep he could have given my father for me back in dowry days.

 

in response to the original poster: as you can see from the variety of responses, what your lady will like really, really depends on who she is individually. none of us can tell you what she will like, as none of us, as far as i'm aware, have met the woman. personally, i would much rather have a simple moonstone than a heart-shaped or pink stone of any kind, even if i did want a diamond. personally, i think the advice to go with a more classic cut and a solitaire is pretty wise, overall. but maybe she's a pink hearts kinda gal. that's why the best advice is still to ask her, or at least one of her good friends.

[porter218]

this is not to say that the ring isn't important: i wouldn't want to wear something i found hideous, not because i'm materialistic, but because i have a sense of aesthetics.

 

This is all I was trying to say. I feel like if budget is an issue then it is important he finds what you would appreciate within his bugdet. Taking the time to consider your style is sweet and touching...especially when they get it right. I think it is very unfortunate when a man blows thousands of dollars on a ring and didn't take the time to find what you may like.

[almost famous]

Your opinion may not be LB's opinion, not every woman is all about more, bigger and more expensive. A smaller, simpler stone is classy and right for a lot of women (not that 3/4 carat is small to begin with)

 

 

It's not about more expensive, it's about quality and if you're getting your woman a ring, go for the carat.

[Lauriebell82]

Your opinion may not be LB's opinion, not every woman is all about more, bigger and more expensive. A smaller, simpler stone is classy and right for a lot of women (not that 3/4 carat is small to begin with)

 

The one caret ring is HUGE and it would look huge on my finger because I'm petite so my hands and fingers are tiny. I'd be afraid it would fall off!

 

But yeah I don't need a whole carat, the 3/4 is really beautiful. He knows that is the ring I want too, so he wants to make me happy.

 

Thanks, Allina, I think it's actually going to happen within the next few months! He has been dropping hints like crazy and asking about ring sizes and types of rings and stuff. And living together has been awesome so we are doing really well!

[Stung]

It's not about more expensive, it's about quality and if you're getting your woman a ring, go for the carat.

 

help me out here, porter218, you worked in the jewelry industry. isn't it true of diamonds that size does not assure quality? you could get a two carat diamond with poor cut and color that would not compare to a flawless 3/4 carat with a perfect cut. bigger does not equal better quality.

 

and diamonds aren't necessarily the best quality choice for everyone, either. a lot of people look for alternatives these days.

[porter218]

help me out here, porter218, you worked in the jewelry industry. isn't it true of diamonds that size does not assure quality? you could get a two carat diamond with poor cut and color that would not compare to a flawless 3/4 carat with a perfect cut. bigger does not equal better quality.

 

and diamonds aren't necessarily the best quality choice for everyone, either. a lot of people look for alternatives these days.

Absolutly true. I have sold a diamond that was 3/4 carat in platinum setting for $30,000 it was a flawless diamond( I will never forget that ring!!). And I have sold many 1 - 1.5 carat diamonds in platinum for ~$3,000 and they were poor in quality(about a H/I I1-I2..standard for sold from the case).

[porter218]

and diamonds aren't necessarily the best quality choice for everyone, either. a lot of people look for alternatives these days.

 

True also. Here is a little info on alternatives:

First, the most important thing about an engagement ring is its symbolism. The ring itself is meant to symbolize something beautiful, rare, and precious—like the love the couple hopes to share for life. It doesn't have to be costly, and it doesn't have to be a diamond ring (just take a look at the royal family—the Queen Mother, Queen Elizabeth, Princess Anne and Princess Diana received sapphire engagement rings, and Princess Sarah Ferguson, a ruby). It simply has to show thoughtfulness and caring, and incorporate appropriate symbolism for the particular couple.

However I still like the diamond..To each their own...As long as she loves it.

[allina]

 

Thanks, Allina, I think it's actually going to happen within the next few months! He has been dropping hints like crazy and asking about ring sizes and types of rings and stuff. And living together has been awesome so we are doing really well!

 

Awesome! I think it will happen for you soon too, and for me! :bunny:

 

bigger does not equal better quality.

 

 

It definitely doesn't

[Lauriebell82]

Awesome! I think it will happen for you soon too, and for me! :bunny:

 

That's great, i'm so happy for you!

 

I looked at the 1 caret ring and it was so huge, I think it would fall off my finger or catch on something if it was that big.

[Stung]

porter218, i didn't know that about the british royal family and sapphires. interesting. it's likely to be sapphires for me, after all, as my partner/proto-fiancee is actually strongly against my idea for moonstone or opal as an alternative...i know they're not as durable, but where i wouldn't have a huge problem with having to get a repair made at some future date, as long as the ring is pretty and the symbolism feels right, he does. he's the one who wants something 'more precious' that's going to last forever, which is really pretty sweet. unfortunately for him, he doesn't want me to help him too much in this process, and finding a suitable sapphire ring in the colors i prefer is going to be harder than picking out a classic diamond solitaire. the man's got a stubborn streak a mile wide, but i can't say i don't secretly love it that now that's he's decided he wants to get married for the first time at 38, he's gotten all determined about it.

 

as for the diamond thing, i'd never knock anybody for having a diamond as their first choice. there are a lot of pros to a diamond: it's classic, it's easier to find, it's durable, it's beautiful, it goes with everything, american society expects it. hell, i thought about a diamond for those same reasons, although i was thinking about the laboratory diamonds, not the natural ones. in the end both he and i decided we just kind of preferred the idea of a natural, non-diamond stone to the idea of an unnatural diamond on an irrational gut level, but i would still recommend the lab diamonds to others who are at all concerned about the ethics of diamonds today, and i think if i was looking at diamonds for anything other than an engagement ring, i'd get the created version. a good created diamond is the exact same thing as a natural one on a mineral and structural level, it's just from a laboratory instead of a mine, less expensive, and actually more likely to be flawless. the technicians have to microscopically laser inscribe them because most jewelers can't tell the difference. i guess i just hate to see diamond bandied about as the only choice, as though my sapphire or moonstone or whatever will somehow be lesser. some people just prefer diamonds, and that's one thing, but the people who just assume they are the! best! stone!...my friends, that's just marketing strategy. sapphires are a rare, precious, and durable stone supposed to symbolize sincerity and faithfulness, they come naturally in every color except for red (a red or pink sapphire is a ruby); overall they're a great choice for an engagement ring (even if it didn't work out so great for diana).

[Stung]

also, early congratulations to lauriebell82 and allina.