what difference does finger size make?

[runner05]

A 1c diamond looks different on a size 4.5 finger versus a size 7 finger right?

What c size do you think looks best with a smaller finger - size 4.5 or 5?

Or any thoughts on this would be interesting - thanks

 

[Cath]

Yes, a size 4.5 finger is thinner than a size 7 finger, so a 1ct diamond will look more prominent on the smaller finger and give the impression of being "bigger".

As for the best carat size for a size 4.5, that is a really subjective question -- you might want to check out the Eye Candy thread in the "Show Me the Ring" forum to see some examples of ring size vs. carat size and see what you think is best.

 

[runner05]

hmmm thats a good idea - I will check that out!

 

[fire&ice]

The F&I mantra - your finger length is just as important as your finger size.

 

[windowshopper]

THE SETTING AS WELL CAN MINIMIZE OR MAXIMIZE ..........IE A ROUND DIAMOND SET UP HIGH OR FLUSH TO HAND CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE

 

[qtiekiki]

I don''t really think there is a best carat size for 4.5 finger. I mean of course something overly large will look overpowering on a small finger, but it really just boil down to personal preferences.

I would love a 3ct on my 4.5 finger but probably nothing more than that (that is until I catch the shrinkage syndrome again).

 

[Daniela]

Date: 1/21/2005 11:31:52 AM
Author: fire&ice
The F&I mantra - your finger length is just as important as your finger size.

Well said.

 

[rosy]

Yes, diamonds will look larger on a size 4.5 finger vs a size 7. As far as an ideal size, I say at least 1 carat or larger. Size is very personal, also depends on what size your friends & family have. If they all have 2-3 carats you may want the same, then again you might not care. I thought I was going to be happy with a 1.50 carat but after wearing it for a while decided it wasn''t big enough & went for the 1.85. I''m happy but still really wouldn''t mind having a 2-2.5 carat diamond! A 3 carat would be a little too big & people would assume it wasn''t real due to my age. I say 2 carats is a very safe place to be! Try to buy from a place that will let you upgrade. You can always start with a 1 carat & work your way up to a larger diamond if you catch the shrinking syndrome, which almost everyone I know has caught!

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Yes, diamonds will look larger on a size 4.5 finger vs a size 7. As far as an ideal size, I say at least 1 carat or larger. Size is very personal, also depends on what size your friends & family have.

I say 2 carats is a very safe place to be! Try to buy from a place that will let you upgrade. You can always start with a 1 carat & work your way up to a larger diamond if you catch the shrinking syndrome, which almost everyone I know has caught!

Size of diamond is definetly personal preference. My finger is around 4.75ish and a one carat is almost too big for me. I''ve tried on stones around .80ish to 1 carat and decided that for sure the largest I''d go is one carat (at this time in my life

).

Not to be rude, but I honestly don''t think two carats is a safe place to be. Not only is this size quite a large sized stone (almost to the discomfort level of some women) it''s also an expensive starting point and a bit unrealistic for many people. This person (runner05) is looking for stones around .80 and I think this size is perfect

 

[Jennifer5973]

Unfortunately for me (ring size 7.5) I think stone size perception/appearance does vary depending on the finger size. I have a 3 ct stone and it looks big but I have seen pple with size 5 fingers with a 1 ct!-- and it''s literally monsterous--there''s almost no finger showing around the stone!

What you want/are comfortable with is up to you--there are certainly no rules about this but your own. but I strongly believe that finger width does affect the appearance of the ring/stone.

 

[rosy]

Date: 1/22/2005 10

8:37 PM
Author: MichelleCarmen

Yes, diamonds will look larger on a size 4.5 finger vs a size 7. As far as an ideal size, I say at least 1 carat or larger. Size is very personal, also depends on what size your friends & family have.

I say 2 carats is a very safe place to be! Try to buy from a place that will let you upgrade. You can always start with a 1 carat & work your way up to a larger diamond if you catch the shrinking syndrome, which almost everyone I know has caught!

Size of diamond is definetly personal preference. My finger is around 4.75ish and a one carat is almost too big for me. I''ve tried on stones around .80ish to 1 carat and decided that for sure the largest I''d go is one carat (at this time in my life

).

Not to be rude, but I honestly don''t think two carats is a safe place to be. Not only is this size quite a large sized stone (almost to the discomfort level of some women) it''s also an expensive starting point and a bit unrealistic for many people. This person (runner05) is looking for stones around .80 and I think this size is perfect

Wow, this is the first time I''ve heard someone say that a one carat was too big for them. I think the setting of the diamond has something to do with the perception of size. My ring is set very low so from the side & certain angles it doesn''t look that big. My friend has a stone the exact size as mine but hers looks larger because it''s set higher & her prongs are thicker. Thats something else to consider the type & height of setting. It sounds like runner05 is a little unsure about what size will look the best. In this case I think the most important thing is to buy from a vendor that allows trade-ups. This way you can buy the smallest diamond you''ll be happy with today such as the .80 & try it out. If later you feel you''d like something larger than you have the option of applying the .80 to your next purchase.

 

[valeria101]

Date: 1/22/2005 10:13:19 PM
Author: Jennifer5973
I strongly believe that finger width does affect the appearance of the ring/stone.

Second that ! It seems that the classic Tiffany solitaire look assume a 1 carat on a size 6 ring... but that "look" would take different sizes of diamonds on different hands. Of course the stones will look their size on a side by side comparison, but the overall look of the ring on hand is all about proportions.

''Guess long fingers are just as good at shrinking rings as wide ones.

A bit back I found one rather inspired ring style guide talking about this size and shape issue. You might want to take a look - it''s hardly one page (here). Not sure if there is such thing as authority in matters of taste and style, but this bit sounds pretty common-sensical to me:

 

[DiamondsRagirlsbestfriend]

I think the person who said that the finger length is also a factor is right. I''d add that the shape of one''s finger also should be taken into accoung when selecting a ring/stone.

I''m about a size 5, but my fingers are terribly long and very straight. (I can NOT find gloves to save my soul.) So I decided to go with a three-stone emerald cut, because the stones seem to work well with my hands. The center stone is 1.17c - and I love it on my hand. I think a princess cut or even a round wouldn''t look as "right" on me as the longer shaped stones do.

If you can go into some local jewelry stores and try tons of rings on, the shape, carat weight and setting that works well for your finger might become more clear.

 

[codex57]

Was watching one of those entertainment shows Sat w/ my fiance and they showed Star Jones and her ring. It was like some 4 or 5 carat monster, but it didn''t look all that big b/c her fingers were proportionally large as well. My fiance''s 1 carat something ring looked just as big as Star Jones'' or possibly even bigger.