Please help with setting for 2.0 -2.5ct center

[bagladyseattle]

Hello ladies,
I am in the middle of getting my engagement replace with upgrade. My original ering was stolen a few years ago. I will get a round center stone with 2-2.5 ct and luckily my ring size is 4.5. I am a big fan of halo and I’ve tried on the cushion halo setting before.
I have my mind set on cushion halo setting; however, I like to know more on the split shank. Could someone please help to educate me on how would the split shank impact or effect the appearance of the ring or finger? Thanks in advance!
Pic of my wringly hand.

Below are some options of settings.
Option 1: Split Shank of 3. This pic is borrowed from the Celebrity Engagement Thread posted by twigski. This ring belongs to Gulianna Rancic after she resetted. I really love how it looks on her. I have not find similar one at my local jeweler yet.

Option 2: Split Shank. This ring belongs to tpf member “Adora1220”, she posted on the engagement thread. It’s absolutely stunning. Her center stone is also 2ct.

Here the setting at local jeweler.

Option 3: No Split Shank. This ring belong to a tpf member, “chrrie”. It’s Tiffany Soleste , center stone 1.02ct and her ring size 6.

Her is another pic that I like ring on hand that I found from wedding bee blog. Center stone also 2ct and ring size 5.

This is what I may like:

 

[ame]

Hello ladies,
I am in the middle of getting my engagement replace with upgrade. My original ering was stolen a few years ago. I will get a round center stone with 2-2.5 ct and luckily my ring size is 4.5. I am a big fan of halo and I’ve tried on the cushion halo setting before.
I have my mind set on cushion halo setting; however, I like to know more on the split shank. Could someone please help to educate me on how would the split shank impact or effect the appearance of the ring or finger? Thanks in advance!
Pic of my wringly hand.

What exactly do you mean by "impact"? It gives a wider ring appearance on the finger, and SOMETIMES can make a stone appear smaller IN the setting up close, and just a wide jumble from a distance.

You have long fingers so I think as long as you don't go TOO split that it will look awesome on your hand. Have you tried things on in a store and taken pics of that on your hand?

If I was going to do a split shank, I like Giuliana Rancics a lot. I like that the shanks are not super separated. It gives the main stone/halo a much more pronounced appearance on her finger, vs what could look like just a wide band or stack of bands. I don't know if I am making any sense.

 

[beachy10]

I would go with a slight split shank. You want the center stone to really shine and I think if too much is going on on the sides your eyes will get distracted.

 

[surfergirljen]

Love the simplicity of the soleste and the last design! Lucky lady!!

 

[Sprinkles&Bling]

I own the Soleste in a 2.51 ct size and I actually really like the split shank on this particular ring because its very small and actually you really can't see it from the top view, its just a nice little surprise to see the split from the side view, the Soleste is EXTREMELY delicate which is what made me fall in love with her Good luck!

Your stone would look gorgeous on a delicate split shank ring!

 

[bagladyseattle]

What exactly do you mean by "impact"? It gives a wider ring appearance on the finger, and SOMETIMES can make a stone appear smaller IN the setting up close, and just a wide jumble from a distance.

You have long fingers so I think as long as you don't go TOO split that it will look awesome on your hand. Have you tried things on in a store and taken pics of that on your hand?

If I was going to do a split shank, I like Giuliana Rancics a lot. I like that the shanks are not super separated. It gives the main stone/halo a much more pronounced appearance on her finger, vs what could look like just a wide band or stack of bands. I don't know if I am making any sense.

Hi ame,

Thank you very much for response. I think what meant by "impact" is that would the split shank do the appearance of the stone or my finger? Would it make the stone or overall ring or my finger look any larger or any difference?

I have not tried on the split shank right yet. I did 5 years ago but I forgot what is look like and how I feel about it.

 

[ame]

I think it depends how far apart the shanks are and how dramatic they are. If they're near each other and thinner the stone would look bigger on the finger.

 

[Candice0985]

I love split shanks but I am drawn more toward the delicate ones like the tiffany soleste where they are more Y shaped rather then the bands running horizontal to each other.

mine is slightly wider of a split shank then the soleste:

 

[Miss Kris]

It depends on how dainty you want it to look, too. If you are trying to make the stone look as big as possible, it's probably best to have the band as thin as possible...and without a split

 

[ame]

Whoa sparkles! Those are amazing shots Candice!

 

[Asscher]

Only one point of concern:

Shanks that are thinner might give a perception of larger diamond but the structure integrity of the shanks might be compromised especially if there're full of diamonds in the shanks.

ETA: I've seen many well-made think shanks. Find a reliable bench.

 

[surfergirljen]

I love split shanks but I am drawn more toward the delicate ones like the tiffany soleste where they are more Y shaped rather then the bands running horizontal to each other.

mine is slightly wider of a split shank then the soleste:
View attachment 1613580

View attachment 1613581

View attachment 1613582

Holy **SPARKLES** Candice!!! OMG that is a gorgeous picture of your "soleste!" Stop posting that you're going to make me want one!!!

Actually I think Candice has a pretty perfect shape for this ring especially at the size you are looking at - (hers is 1.25 I think??) I love the Y shape, it seems delicate yet supportive and if you're going into the 2.0 range it is going to be a big ring (like Sprinkles and Bling's)... so it definitely justifies having a split shank (where as if it were a .50 centre stone the split shank would probably over-do it a bit, kwim?)

Gorgeous rings here!

 

[skyqueen]

I own the Soleste in a 2.51 ct size and I actually really like the split shank on this particular ring because its very small and actually you really can't see it from the top view, its just a nice little surprise to see the split from the side view, the Soleste is EXTREMELY delicate which is what made me fall in love with her Good luck!

Your stone would look gorgeous on a delicate split shank ring!

I love split shanks but I am drawn more toward the delicate ones like the tiffany soleste where they are more Y shaped rather then the bands running horizontal to each other.

mine is slightly wider of a split shank then the soleste:
View attachment 1613580

View attachment 1613581

View attachment 1613582

Gorgeous rings, ladies!
OP...something like this would look stunning!

 

[ame]

Yea you don't want them thinner than 2mm and you will want them deeper than average and joined in the back.

 

[Candice0985]

Holy **SPARKLES** Candice!!! OMG that is a gorgeous picture of your "soleste!" Stop posting that you're going to make me want one!!!

Actually I think Candice has a pretty perfect shape for this ring especially at the size you are looking at - (hers is 1.25 I think??) I love the Y shape, it seems delicate yet supportive and if you're going into the 2.0 range it is going to be a big ring (like Sprinkles and Bling's)... so it definitely justifies having a split shank (where as if it were a .50 centre stone the split shank would probably over-do it a bit, kwim?)

Gorgeous rings here!

haha thanks I was trying to get a pic without sparkles so you could see the Y shaped shank but the non flash pics were just grey lol
yes it's centre stone 1.22 and sprinkles has the larger stone and her soleste is TDF!!! I think in 2.0 to 2.5 will be perfect for a split shank large enough where two bands will not look overwhelming!
as long as the split shank is delicate and the bands you pair it with (like sprinkles!) are delicate everything will be in proportion