The question

GBNI

Try Gardiners in Belfast for the ring, they are very popular. They're in the Cathedral Quarter.

19lottie82

First off, before you even think of the design, you'll need her exact ring size for her ring finger on her left hand, so picking the ring and presenting it as a surprise, may not be an option, unless you have a very cunning plan as to how you can get her size.

But back to the original question, unless you are 100% certain about what she would love (not like), I'd pick it together.

Slinky

My OH didn't buy a ring for me in advance. When I asked what he would have chosen he described a diamond solitaire 'up on wires' ie with a very high setting. My idea of a nightmare, catch and snag on everything sort of ring.

What we had designed was a heart shaped solitaire diamond with a rubover setting which is really easy to wear everyday.

themadvix

I can't help with whether to choose it yourself or not (I'd spotted my ring online some months before my now-husband proposed and made my feelings clear!), but you may want to read the advice and information given on GIA's website - it's a non-profit organisation that offers impartial information and stone grading (as mentioned above). There's loads of useful information on there. Start here http://www.gia.edu/gia-news-research-Purchase-Diamond-Engagement-Ring, but perhaps also take a look at the diamond grading information so that you know what to look for when shopping.

Good luck!

gettingtheresometime

I'm another one for choosing it together.......

Evil_Olive

Like your intended, I have slim small fingers and don't really wear rings much so I'll have an idea of what will suit her hands at least if it helps, though it won't necessarily take account of her individual taste. I was researching engagement rings for myself not so long ago and being pedantic, perfectionist and not a little OCD I spent a LOT of time making sure that the ring I would hopefully be wearing everyday for the rest of my life would be absolutely right for it's purpose

My then fiance (now husband ) let me help him choose and I had all sorts of ideas about blingy, multi-stone, antique style and alternative type rings etc but after trying loads on, they all looked wrong/tacky on my small hands and I could tell they would be uncomfortable/annoying to wear full time for someone who didn't wear rings in general. I also, after a while started to think about practical stuff like - how likely were they to catch on things or get in the way when doing everyday tasks and also whether this years fashionable type would look dated in 10 years time (my aunt has one that looks horribly and obviously '80s' though it was probably the bees knees when she got it).

My usual jewellery style is very obviously antique/vintage or alternative and I was resistant to the more classic styles but OH eventually persuaded me to try on a few simple solitaires and I had a lightbulb moment - there are many good reasons why they are the 'classic' engagement ring. So, if you decide to follow tradition and do the choosing on your own, I can absolutely recommend a plain, simple solitaire, with a diamond or other clear stone (from my own 'tryings on' I'd say no more than 1/2 a carat for slim fingers or small hands) with a slim plain band of a reasonable depth and a 'low profile' setting, for the following reasons which occurred to me during my various 'tryings on'.

• A plain simple solitaire with a plain band is a design classic. It will never look dated or out of place and will always look classy and elegant.

• A single stone means that you are spending ALL the money on that one stone and can get a really good one rather than, say, three inferior quality, smaller stones or a load of really tiny crap ones set into the band. I found that a single 1/2 carat stone looked way more impressive than three smaller stones which added up to 1/2 a carat.

• I found that stones of more than 1/2 a carat swamped my hands or looked tacky and were more likely to catch on things during everyday wear. If you can afford more - just up the quality of the diamond you choose - better colour/clarity etc. The 'Blue Nile' type companies are good for this as you buy the stone and band separately and they set them for you. Quality is usually considered to be more important than quantity

• I found that if the stone was set low on the band (ie. 'low profile' / a shallow angle on the 'shoulders') it looked much better on my small/slim fingers and was also less likely to get in the way during everyday wear.

• A clear ('white') stone is less likely than a coloured stone to clash with anything your fiance is ever likely to wear, whether clothes or other jewellery and they do sparkle more - especially in white metal settings like platinum. For those on a budget, I saw quite a lot of aquamarines that were almost colourless and very sparkly too.

• I found the very slim plain bands had better proportions on my slim finger and were loads more comfortable to wear than fancy shapes or bands set with stones. It also meant that it sat closer to my wedding ring and a matching very slim wedding ring could be chosen so that I didn't end up with 3/4 of an inch of metal on my finger - very uncomfortable. It will also cost less, again meaning more money to spend on the main stone. The band can wear away over time anyway, whatever it's width (my mum's 4mm wide band wore so thin it eventually snapped) and you may need to have the stone reset in a new band in, say, 20 years time, so it makes sense to spend the bulk of the money on the stone and go for depth over width with the band as the depth will make a difference to wear.

I've been wearing mine for a year now (2 months with my wedding ring) all day and night which I never thought I would be able to do, only take it off for dirty or rough jobs and I am more convinced than ever that it was the best choice.
Hope this helps

InsideInsurance

Evil_Olive wrote: »

I found that stones of more than 1/2 a carat swamped my hands or looked tacky

The "appropriate" weight of stone will also depend on which cut you go for as a 1/2 ct round brilliant cut will look fairly different to a 1/2 ct emerald or marquise cut due to the different proportions even though all three would weigh 0.1g on the scales.

fairy_lights

Something else to bear in mind is that if she has very slim fingers getting the fit right is even more important. Ive got freakishly small hands and took an old family ring to be resized last year. The jeweller couldn't take it down to a small enough size for me because it would have warped the shape of the band and the stones couldn't be bent round to the right angle. I wear it with one of those plastic ring resisers but wouldn't want to do that with a ring I was going to wear everyday for the rest of my life!

Gloomendoom

InsideInsurance wrote: »

The "appropriate" weight of stone will also depend on which cut you go for as a 1/2 ct round brilliant cut will look fairly different to a 1/2 ct emerald or marquise cut due to the different proportions even though all three would weigh 0.1g on the scales.

The depth of the OP's pockets might have some bearing on it too.

Pollycat

Hi Zola
You've mentioned platinum but not stones.

Are you set on a diamond or open to alternative stones?
What would your fianc! prefer?

My OH is totally rubbish at buying me gifts of any kind so choosing an engagement ring on his own was a definite 'no-no'.
But it sounds like you get things right so maybe that is the best way to go, it's certainly more romantic.

If you are thinking of a diamond, I'd do a bit of research.

This website has a very good section on the 4 'C's.

http://www.diamondgeezer.com/diamond-buyers-guide/

If your girlfriend's fingers are slim, you may want to go for a smaller size diamond but upgrade on the clarity and/or colour.

Note: I'm not recommending this website as I've never bought from them. They appeared (years ago) on Dragon's Den.