Featured Bridal Set and Red Stone Ring

More jewellery exploration. These are a couple of pieces I've tried using google lens on, and tried looking up the maker's mark on the wedding band, but sadly come up with not a lot. With the wedding set the maker's mark (W. G&S) is still very clear on the wedding band, but anything that could be made out on the engagement ring is worn right out. I guess that might mean the original wedding band broke, and the one in the set is newer than the engagement ring. I was never told if that happened or not. They do look different in that the engagement ring band is very thin where the wedding ring has slightly more substance.
The red stone ring has me stumped, mainly in the way that it's tarnished. I'm going to be taking it to a jeweller to look into it because it's stamped 18k, and no indication of a "P" for plated, but looks coppery in the tarnished areas. I also can't figure out the era, google lens was all over the place.



I have more photos if needed.

 

The set looks like it goes together. It's hard to see in the way you photographed it but it looks like the engagement ring broke and got repaired in the place where a mark might have been. Did you check Lang Antiques Makers Mark database?

Pure gold (24k) does not tarnish but gold alloy does from the other metals in the mix. Just shine it up with a jewelry polish cloth. This ring looks second half 20th c to 21st c to me. I would personally say 90s? But others may know better on that.

 

The red stone looks like a lab-created ruby, which fits because I'd say 1970s birthstone ring. Maybe 1980s. Lab-created stones in those were common, especially rubies, sapphires and emeralds. THat way they could guarentee a supply and standardize the colors.

 

You are right on the lab created ruby. I was able to stop off with my jeweller today, and he said it was 18K gold plated with a lab created Ruby. I asked him why no "P" after to signify that it's plated and he told me that it wasn't required until like '96 or something like that? Regardless, he didn't seem to think much about the piece.

As for the bridal set, I was very sad to learn that it's pretty well damaged beyond real repair. I was told that it needs an entirely new shank, and wiring around the bridge. Essentially long story short he would be rebuilding it and all that would be saved would be the white gold holding the diamonds. His second best option would be to solder them together to strengthen the engagement ring and make the piece wearable, which is the route I am eventually going to take. He couldn't tell me much about the age beyond the fact that the diamonds are pre 1960, and thus cut differently than modern diamonds(new nugget of knowledge for me); and he couldn't comment on the maker's mark, so I am still going to be hunting that down for curiosity's sake. Informative visit though, which was pretty great.

 

unless they have sentimental value..... pop the diamonds, melt the gold.. imo

 

I am very bad at taking pictures. Where it looks broken on the engagement ring is just a flash of the light. I also combed through the marks on that site using all the letters, one of each letter, and pairs of letters, no luck. Closest I got to was 'G. & S.' for Graffe and Stanck, but I'm hesitant because there's no period after the G or the S on the ring, only after the W

You think very similarly to my husband. I dunno, I mean I know I would only be sinking money into a hole with a band aid fix like soldering, but they kinda are sentimental in a way. I never knew the woman who owned them, but my step dad never had any natural children, I'm kinda the one holding his legacy and it might be nice to carry on something from his family. Maybe I am looking at the wrong thing though, I dunno.

 

Modern round brilliant cut diamonds are the same today as they were in the 1920's,maybe the person who looked at the stones didn't know what they were talking about. https://www.briangavindiamonds.com/blogs/news/history-of-the-modern-round-brilliant-cut-diamond

 

Huh, he mentioned something to me about "Old Mine" cut maybe that's just the cut these specific diamonds are? Because he was pretty insistent they were pre 1960. I'd be kind of shocked if he didn't know jewellery; he apparently used to repair antique jewellery before he opened up his own studio, and has been in the jewellery design and repair business for 40 years. Second opinions are always worth while though, and there are a few other places I can think of that might provide one.

 

What did he say about the ruby? Looks like it was faceted by a 12 year old on a back street in India.

 

Probably was! It's lab-created.

 

Oh he agreed that is trash. I only brought the to him to get authenticated; it was fishy to me with a coppery tarnish and an 18K stamp. It's a synthetic Ruby, and that's no shock given the materials. I fully admit to not knowing nearly enough about faceting to recognize a poorly cut gem to a high quality one.

 

I am appalled that there was no legislation regarding gold v. goldplated marking.

The bridge of the engagement ring is Art Deco. If the diamonds are Old Mine, they could be pre-1920s and possible sourced from an earlier ring.
Old Mine cut diamonds are not perfectly round, but have more of a cushion shape with rounded corners. As komo shows in his post, they also have 'open culets', the back does not end in a sharp point, but in a small flat spot.

I agree, the shank needs to be repaired. If you have no particular emotional attachment to the wedding ring, I would suggest using that ring to make a shank, and keeping the maker's mark intact.

 

That is a brilliant idea! I could even ask him about using the gold from the shank of the engagement ring to recreate the art deco bridge. It would at least keep the set together in spirit. I actually did something similar with a piece of my husband's jewellery; I don't know why the idea didn't cross my mind. Thank you Any Jewelry!

 

When you take photos make sure they are really clear and don't enlarge them so much they get blurry or pixilated.

 

Ah, forgive me. I didn't think I cropped them to the point of distortion. I'll try harder to be more careful in the future.