To the ladies : what is an appropriate size (dimensions) for a pendant ?

[haagen_dazs]

To the ladies

I was wondering what is an appropriate size (dimension wise) for a pendant necklace?

Something that is not too small to be "lost" but nothing too huge and fancy (like wearing a giant rock over one''s neck)

eg say if we use the american coin system

Do you think a nickle (d=21mm)or a quarter (d=25mm) will command some "presence" on a ladies chest but yet not too overpowering.. yes? no?

okok i know this is really subjective... eh
anyone have photos to share?

ps
Is a 19.20 x 19.10 x 11.20 mm ( LxWxD )trillian-ish shape reasonable?

 

[arjunajane]

haagen, best to do a search on pendants and see what sizes appal to *you* to make up your mind -
there isn''t really an answer to your question as too many variables - setting and stone type; body shape/height of wearer; wearer''s personal tastes and style...I could go on..

 

[beaujolais]

To not be lost, on me, about 2 1/2 carats. Sometimes tiny, about 1 ct., is nice, though.

 

[Kismet]

My garnet pendant is around 5 carats and the whole thing is somewhat bigger than a quarter.

My chrysoberyl pendant is around 4 carats and is probably more in the dime range. The chrysoberyl pops more when it''s worn against bright pink or red rather than against my skin.

My rubelite necklace is about 1.5 carats. Even though it''s smaller than the others it has a lot of presence because it''s brighter.

 

[chrono]

The appropriate size is a subjective question. Some like it dainty and some prefer to make a statement. It also depends on the size of the lady: a smaller stone might get “lost” on a lady who is well endowed and a larger stone might make a strong presence on a very small framed person. Part of it also depends on the setting whether it is a plain metal or something flashy with lots of diamond accents.

 

[arjunajane]

Date: 10/23/2009 8:02:23 AM
Author: Chrono
The appropriate size is a subjective question. Some like it dainty and some prefer to make a statement. It also depends on the size of the lady: a smaller stone might get “lost” on a lady who is well endowed and a larger stone might make a strong presence on a very small framed person. Part of it also depends on the setting whether it is a plain metal or something flashy with lots of diamond accents.

hey C - isn''t that what I said above...?

(just j/k, of course!)

 

[chrono]

 

[haagen_dazs]

Date: 10/23/2009 8:07:34 AM
Author: Chrono

shucks... knew it was a subjective question thanks all

 

[Arcadian]

Date: 10/23/2009 11:24:14 AM
Author: haagen_dazs



shucks... knew it was a subjective question thanks all

It would help if we had an idea of build. If she''s blessed in the chest area you may not want to go with a long skinny pendant because well...you know...

but other than that, it would be a matter of what her likes are.


-A

 

[fierypyropixy]

Date: 10/23/2009 11:39:34 AM
Author: Arcadian

Date: 10/23/2009 11:24:14 AM

Author: haagen_dazs




shucks... knew it was a subjective question thanks all

It would help if we had an idea of build. If she''s blessed in the chest area you may not want to go with a long skinny pendant because well...you know...


but other than that, it would be a matter of what her likes are.



-A

LOL - "Blessed in the chest" . . . I''m going to have to start using that one.

It really is subjective, there''s no way to say what''s right or wrong . . . even to a veritable boulder on a chain. Well, maybe then . . .

My everyday pendant is a 1/3 carat round diamond in a double buttercup setting that of course makes it seem a little bigger overall. 1/3 on my chubby finger would feel tiny, but as a pendant it''s perfect, even seemed larger than I was used to in my hometown. What with halos and colored stones being much cheaper than diamonds, for my next pendant I''d probably hit . . . oh, maybe a 14mm.

Like everyone''s said, depends on taste and shape and all that goodness.

STILL laughing at "Blessed in the chest"!

 

[MakingTheGrade]

And it's not just about how big the stone is.
The color, shape, the sparkle, the setting all play into how visually large something will be.

For example: a 6mm bezel set diamond would look larger than a 6mm prong set dark blue sapphire. etc.

Even the length of the chain will change how large a pendant looks.

 

[AustenNut]

Thank you so much for posting this, Haagen Daaz, as I've been trying to figure this out myself. A few observations though:

I think that the length of the chain is perhaps a more important factor than the size of the chest. If a chain is within 2-3 inches of the collarbone then I don't think the size of the chest really matters. But if you want it to hang down lower, then that will come into play.

Also, LovingDiamonds also brought up a good point in a related thread (Calling LovingDiamonds!) about the depth of the stone. As a stone's size increases, so does the depth and then some stones may hang awkardly if they're too deep.

I suspect that the shape of the stone will also influence matters. I think it's easier to get away with a small round or trillion than it is to get away with a small pear or marquise, simply because it's a more common look.

Also, look at the dimensions of stones rather than carats as not all gems have the same weight/size. Spinels seem to be larger for their carat size whereas sapphires tend to be smaller, etc.

I've ordered a 7x12 pear and a 14.8 round, and I'll see how I like them when they come in. But since they're not on me yet, I don't know!

And kismet, I love that rubellite!

 

[Fly Girl]

My smallest pendant is a 1/3 ct Alex that I like to wear on a 16 " chain just peaking out of an open shirt color. My medium sized gemstone pendants are more in the 3 to 4 ct range, and I like to wear them on 18" chains against my skin with V-neck sweaters. My most substantial pendant is this 1 1/2 inch long Barbara Smigel design with goldsmith Felipe Sandoval, made of botryoidal carnelian, orange-yellow grossular garnets and honey chalcedony. I wear it on a heavy 20" gold chain and it looks fantastic with my fall sweaters.

My point is, not only does one size not fit all, one size doesn''t even fit one.

 

[haagen_dazs]

Date: 10/23/2009 12:35:24 PM
Author: AustenNut
Also, LovingDiamonds also brought up a good point in a related thread (Calling LovingDiamonds!) about the depth of the stone. As a stone''s size increases, so does the depth and then some stones may hang awkardly if they''re too deep.
!

ahh that is a very good point. i never thought about this because i do not wear jewellery

i actually think the thin narrow pear shapes can look very elegant as it hangs down the upper middle of the chest.
a shape such as this (24mm long)

 

[jstarfireb]

I tend to prefer pendants on the larger side, much larger than I would normally consider for rings. Dainty pendants tend to get lost. And I'm very poorly endowed in the boobage department, so I don't think it has as much to do with chest size as with general build...I'm 5'8" with a substantial bone structure (i.e. broad shoulders).

ETA: As an example, the smallest pendant I wear on a consistent basis is probably my 0.5 ct bezel diamond, and I hope to upgrade that to 1ct or more some day as it tends to get lost on me. However, the shorter the chain, the smaller the pendant you can get away with, and this is a short chain that lies just below my collarbones:

 

[haagen_dazs]

Thanks jstarfireb

Do you know the dimensions of that pendant?
Do you have a photo of your larger pendants by any chance?
Thanks!

 

[jstarfireb]

The diamond in that pendant is 5.16x5.18mm. The bezel probably bumps it up toward a 5.5-6mm diameter.

I don''t have a photo on my neck, but one of my larger pendants is in the collage I made for this thread (bottom right in the collage). I don''t have the exact dimensions on that citrine, but I think it''s something in the neighborhood of 11x17mm.

 

[Fly Girl]

This morganite pendant is a 4.35 ct pear, 16 x 9 mm, with a 15 point accent diamond. This is about as large as I tend to go with a shorter necklace. I tend to wear larger pendants on longer chains and over my clothing.

 

[Fly Girl]

The blue chalcedony drops are about 1" long each, but together they make for a more substantial look. They hang on the equivalent of about a 26" chain.

 

[AustenNut]

Thanks, FlyGirl, for posting those neckshots. I''ve actually been talking to Dan Stair about a 9x16 pendant, so it''s great to see yours!

 

[Fly Girl]

Date: 10/24/2009 10:11:55 AM
Author: AustenNut
Thanks, FlyGirl, for posting those neckshots. I''ve actually been talking to Dan Stair about a 9x16 pendant, so it''s great to see yours!

Glad to be of help. I think 9 x 16 makes for a very elegant shaped drop. Looking forward to updates on your project.