I just bought the ring in this link: http://www.cobone.com/deals/dubai-fashion/mamere-diamond-ring/6573 (pics at bottom)

It is like a slightly smaller copy of the one that Diana got for her engagement and now William gave to Kate. It has a 7-9 carat sapphire (Diana's was 12 carat) in the middle surrounded by 14 small white diamonds.

It costs $8,167 originally but on the site above (Arab version of groupon) it is for $2,450.

I spoke to the company offering it and they said they can make the same style with a giant red ruby or green emerald in the middle, if that's what I prefer.

It is easy to decide for small stones, but for something that big (1.3 cm long, 1.1 cm wide), it is hard. I skimmed through some GIS results for large ruby and emerald rings but I am not sure.

* I believe I like the rarer, shinier, and more translucent look of emeralds.
* My wife's favorite color for gemstones is red (but she has never had a giant one like that).
* If going for the princess factor (Diana and Kate's ring), then sapphire is the right one.

In terms of visibility under various light conditions, especially low light, I would rank from highest to lowest visibility as:

Emerald > Ruby > Sapphire

So my question to all of you is this: If you were giving/receiving that ring, what would you prefer?

Probably the biggest impulse purchase I will ever make (unless I get rich one day)

3/10/2012 6:44:36 AM

Sapphire.

And actually, Harry gave it to Kate. It was his inheritance from Diana, and he wanted Kate to have it.

3/10/2012 8:30:07 AM

^ Thanks, and yeah I just read that.

Guess what... when I flew last August to England to see my wife, I got a jewellery set on the plane called as "The Royal Collection".

I just looked at it now, and it is a good replica of the exact same ring (but not precious stones), even the almost the same size as the one in the OP. And to make it a set, they also made matching stud earrings (same shape as the ring, but a bit smaller) and a matching necklace with the same pendant.

So basically, I have the same ring sitting at home, except that it (the whole set actually, with 4 fake sapphires!) cost just around $150

It still looks amazing. My wife told me when she wore it to work, her colleagues were asking her if they were real gemstones!!!

Anyway, she still said she prefers red (I asked indirectly), but said the blue and red are pretty close.

More opinions?

3/10/2012 8:57:46 AM

Rubies don't really look red, they look more pink

3/10/2012 9:42:52 AM

ruby > emerald

also

>

3/10/2012 9:54:17 AM

lounge

[Edited on March 10, 2012 at 10:25 AM. Reason : :/]

3/10/2012 10:18:04 AM

^^^^ Will gave it to Kate, not Harry.

At 0.05 ct. per diamond, those things will barely be visible... nothing near what you see in the picture.

3/10/2012 10:20:39 AM

I love my emerald ring that actually looks pretty similar, but if your wife likes red then maybe go for the ruby. The sapphire is beautiful too, but I think too many people are copying this style so it may not feel unique to her. Was she totally into the royal wedding? what kinds of colors do you see her wearing the most?

3/10/2012 10:22:59 AM

i expected a thread about pokemans

3/10/2012 3:03:39 PM

the Princess Diana ring is way too over played and I'm tired of seeing all the replicas.

get her the emerald and make her feel special. ruby is also a good choice.

3/10/2012 3:21:53 PM

I'm going to vote you use the money for something practical and / or productive instead.

3/10/2012 3:49:22 PM

^ You are right, I should. However, I have mostly bought practical things in my life, and haven't spent that much on clothes/shoes/jewellery/watches as compared to others who are in my profession.

So for once I want to buy some expensive personal accessory, even though it is not for me. I would love to buy a $2,450 watch for myself, but I think I will do that when I am 50 or so.

Quote :

"Rubies don't really look red, they look more pink"

Depends on the ruby, but they are definitely more dark blood-red than fire engine red. Check google for real world images (not studio shots).

Quote :

"At 0.05 ct. per diamond, those things will barely be visible... nothing near what you see in the picture."

Yes, they are small, but they will show as they will reflect light. And the (non-precious) replica I already got her, looks great even though it isn't that shiny. Even the little ones show, because of the high contrast with the dark blue middle stone. Small diamonds that size on their own set in white gold would barely show, but next to the giant sapphire, they definitely stand out.

Quote :

"The sapphire is beautiful too, but I think too many people are copying this style so it may not feel unique to her. Was she totally into the royal wedding? what kinds of colors do you see her wearing the most?"

Not many people are copying this style where we are, in fact we know no one. Yes, she was totally in to the royal wedding (recorded it), she loves red for clothes and precious/replica stones, and her name is Diane, but prefers to go by Diana.

So I think blue is the logical (ha, logical!) choice, but perhaps to stand out more and be different, I should go with red. I did ask her indirectly, and she said red, but said blue was also almost as good, but prefers red. No green.

Blue is very elegant and mature, whereas red is passionate and more visible. Don't know... will sleep on it.

3/10/2012 5:27:59 PM

I'm not a fan of rubies, so that one would be out for me. Now if it were garnet...this would be a different discussion.

I would probably go with sapphire. Even though I like emeralds, sapphire seems more appropriate for such a large stone. For some reason I don't think emeralds look appropriate larger than ~4 carats.

3/10/2012 7:29:21 PM

well the only thing i can think of is that the sapphire when dirty (it will get dirty) will get very dark, and she will prob end up wanting it cleaned more, just bc it will lose the luster faster as grime builds. Also, bc the ruby is more unique (me personally, I wouldn't want the "diana ring" if my name was diana, too many cliches) but also depending on how you slipped the question, she may have recognized what you were asking, and maybe she was dropping a major hint.


either way, gorgeous ring with a classic/simple/elegant ring, so you can't go too wrong.


ps if you are too worried, just ask her

3/11/2012 3:13:28 AM

Quote :

"haven't spent that much on clothes/shoes/jewellery/watches as compared to others who are in my profession."

This is a good thing.

3/11/2012 9:35:43 PM

i want a ruby set like that. baileys had a beautiful one last time i was in there

3/12/2012 11:25:43 AM

Personally I'd go with sapphire > emerald > ruby.

3/12/2012 12:10:35 PM

G.O.D has a antique one that I got her several years ago. We recently got it recut (the stone was worn) and the setting re-done.

3/13/2012 1:59:58 PM

Thank-god you didn't buy this or you would have gotten hosed. The center stone is not even translucent even with being heated and diffused.

3/13/2012 4:15:10 PM

This is what you would want more. Notice the cornflower blue of the stone, and that it is not so dark and inky that you can see through it.

3/13/2012 4:19:31 PM

yes, but that stone is easily worth twice the price of the ring he's talking about at 1/4 the cw

[Edited on March 13, 2012 at 4:31 PM. Reason : ]

3/13/2012 4:29:41 PM

^^ yes that looks amazing. i, too, would prefer a more translucent lighter blue.

so is that a blue diamond?

3/13/2012 4:33:19 PM

no, that's a sapphire.

they come in a wide range of blues, as well as greens, pink, orange and all that.

3/13/2012 4:44:05 PM

Green jay is right sapphires come in all colors, and red ones are rubies.

3/13/2012 8:12:26 PM