Length- to- Width ratio... expert help please!

[peanuts]

I have read that the l-w ratio for an oval diamond should be beteen 1.33 and 1.66. I like the look of ovals that are more round, with a lower ratio in the 1.2 ballpark. How will a lower ratio affect the overall look of the diamond (brillance, etc.)? thanks!

 

[rockaholic]

based on what I''ve seen, a stone with a larger ratio visually looks bigger, but not sure how the brilliance is affected...

~rockaholic~

 

[cinnabar]

With fancies, it''s not just the l/w ratio that makes for a beautiful diamond. It can also depend on how deep or shallow the stone is; a certain depth together with a certain l/w can give an oval a bowtie more than some other combination of percentages. A large table can make the stone look bigger, or it can make the stone look glassy.

It''s very difficult to predict perfect parameters in fancies, which is why the stones have to be seen. If you can''t get to see for yourself, ask the vendor to check the stone out and preferably send you photos.

 

[DiamanteBlu]

I prefer lower l/w ratios. My EC is approx. 9.9x11.8x6.5 and I think it looks great. Those are similar to the proportions of the oval you are thinking of.

You may want to go to http://www.gemappraisers.com/ and click on "old DIY cut grading" to see specs for well cut ovals. At the bottom it suggests the l/w ratios you quoted but it says that personal preferance should prevail.

In addition [and I am not an industry expert] I would expect a lower l/w ratio would yield a more sparkly stone as long, as it is well cut per the other parameters, because it more closely will approximate a RB.

Blu

 

[peanuts]

Date: 9/30/2005 5:45:48 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
I prefer lower l/w ratios. My EC is approx. 9.9x11.8x6.5 and I think it looks great. Those are similar to the proportions of the oval you are thinking of.

thanks DiamanteBlu... do you happen to have a pic of your ring handy? i would love to see it!