Diamond Too Big for a Ring?

[cflutist]

The sky is the limit for pendants, but when do you think that a diamond can to TOO BIG for a e-ring? Any thoughts?

 

[sumi]

There was a pretty heated and looong discussion about this just a little while ago. I think the thread is called something like "what size is too big" or something like that. You should do a quick search and find that thread, it answers this question from a lot of different perspectives.

 

[sevens one]

Hey cflutist: I think this is the link

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/how-big-is-big-enough-what-do-u-prefer.11769/

 

[Jennifer5973]

I know it's been discussed already but I actually do think there is a "too big" point for most people--unless you're Liz Taylor. I especially don't like giant rounds...I think fancies can take on more girth, so to speak.

If I had to give a ceiling size for rounds, I'd say 3.5-4 cts

For fancies, 5 cts.

 

[ame]

Call me modest...or inexperienced since Ive never put on over 1.2 ct (not mine)...but I think the biggest Id ever go is 1.5, MAYBE 2 for a round, princess, ascher or cushion. I have a .86 and maybe in a few yeras we can go above a carat but maybe Ill just add a couple .33s to either side....

I am rough on jewelery and my hands so since Ive already caught this on everything and banged it on everything (and subsequently spent a halfhour examining it under a loupe) I cannot even imagine bigger.

 

[cflutist]

----------------
On 7/23/2004 8:54:09 PM Jennifer5973 wrote:

I especially don't like giant rounds...I think fancies can take on more girth, so to speak.

If I had to give a ceiling size for rounds, I'd say 3.5-4 cts

For fancies, 5 cts.

----------------

Its funny you say that because in the GIA Diamonds class I took back in 1986 they said anything over 3 cts seems gaudy in rounds and that fancy shapes are preferred. Of course things could have changed in 18 years.

 

[Jennifer5973]

That's interesting, cflutist...I think they were onto somehting... I've seen a 5 ct round on someone (an executive at my company) and I swear it's not jealousy talking when I say it looked stupid. Plus she had one a huge eternity band with at least 40 pointers going around...too much.

But again--to each her own...I think most diamonds and styles are lovely, even if they are not something I wouldd choose for myself...

If someone handed me a 5ct RB, I'd sell it and get a 3 ct ring and 2, 1 ct ea. earrings.

I can dream, can't I?????? I once found a $10 bill in the street...maybe if I wander aorund 47th street long enough, a 5 ct, VS2, F color ideal will fly out from nowehere...

 

[researcher]

Jennifer~
Why don't you just keep your eyes open for your ideal 3 ct princess? Oh, and the matching pair of princess cut earrings too!

 

[hoorray]

I have a tiny friend with a 5ct round, and it looks BIG, but not out of place. I think it is because it is set in a very low, tasteful setting, and she wears it comfortably. It would be too big for me. I think everyone has a size that they feel comfortable with on their own hand in their own life. 2.5ct was the perfect size for me, butnot necessarily right for others.

 

[Jennifer5973]

That's some tough love, researcher...

lop--you raise (no pun intended) a good point about stones set high--the woman I saw had the stone super high and it definitely contributed to the oddity of it. Even in my new ring with a 1.5 ct, any higher and it would have had to be adjusted for my tastes.

 

[researcher]

I just figured that, if you were going to find a stone on the ground, it might as well be the one(s) you want!!!

 

[Jennifer5973]

I guess you're right....

 

[chialea]

I feel like there's a major difference in the size stone I'd wear for everyday wear, where I'd probably top out at a carat (or maybe 1.5 in an Asscher), and fancy-wear, where I can hopefully keep my hands out of major trouble for a few hours. I'm another one of those people who are pretty hard on their hands, and if I had to keep my hand out of my pockets, I wouldn't know what to do with myself. (well, I do know, I broke my left hand at least once -- reach into that pocket with my right hand) Still, I think I'd find it easier to go largish with a coloured stone than a diamond, since it wouldn't be so obvious. I hear that bling looks more tasteful when you get older (though my SO has a less flattering explanation), so perhaps my views will change.

I also think people in my line of work are generally supposed to care less about clothing and jewelery, so I'm used to a different standard -- there are very few women, and even many of those wear a plain wedding band!

 

[Jennifer5973]

What do you do, chialea?

 

[chialea]

I'm a computer science researcher. Well, actually I'm getting my PhD, so I'm an underpaid computer science researcher. I work on cryptography. Cryptography is responsible for making it so that everyone can't read your credit card number when you send it over the internet to buy something. A lot of the work I do is on ways to share sensitive data (like medical records for cancer research) in a way that protects the owner of the data. Other work is on letting people access data without telling the owner of the computer what data they are accessing. For example, say you want to learn about AIDS or breast cancer or mental illness without your insurance company or someone who wants to hurt you finding out about it -- you could access that information and no one would be able to tell you didn't just get the latest diamond pricing report or sports scores, even the person who gave you the data.

People who work with computers are supposed to be oblivious about style, graduate students are supposed to be oblivious about style, and people who work with math are supposed to be REALLY oblivious to style, so I'm working with a real handicap here. Believe it or not, I actually dress like a reasonable person to the point of regularly getting hit on by "normal" people. I'm marrying another grad student, though, so I suppose it's our kids who will /really/ have the handicap!

PS -- sorry. researchers have a tendency to blather about their research, partially to procrastinate and partially because they find it fascinating (otherwise they wouldn't be able to do it!). I should be writing a paper right now!

 

[cflutist]

----------------
On 7/23/2004 9:29:35 PM Jennifer5973 wrote:


If someone handed me a 5ct RB, I'd sell it and get a 3 ct ring and 2, 1 ct ea. earrings.

Jennifer, you are short changing yourself ... remember price per carat rises as the weight increases ... you could get yourself a 4 ct princess and 2 - 1ct earrings!!!!

 

[cflutist]

----------------
On 7/23/2004 11:16:25 PM chialea wrote:


People who work with computers are supposed to be oblivious about style,

I am a Consultant in the IT business (started by programming mainframe computers more than 20 years ago).

You are probably right when it comes to clothing. Most of the men and women in the office don't know how to dress. I can't remember the last time I saw anyone in a suit. The best dresser in our office is our administrative assistant (the lowest paid) who is now shopping for a 4 ct pear (she is married to a rich husband, drives a Mercedes etc.). Most of the women in the office also don't wear much makeup, myself included.

However, when it comes to jewelry, there are a number of women who have some substantial and beautiful pieces of jewelry that I drool over.

 

[websailor]

I've heard the Queen of England wears a ~3 carat e-ring, tho I think she has a few diamonds larger than that (

)...




So I'd say that's the max round e-ring size..... Who wants to wear a larger diamond than the Queen? How tacky!

 

[websailor]

----------------
On 7/23/2004 11:16:25 PM chialea wrote:






People who work with computers are supposed to be oblivious about style, graduate students are supposed to be oblivious about style, and people who work with math are supposed to be REALLY oblivious to style, so I'm working with a real handicap here.

----------------

You're making me check - yup, both shoes are the same today....

Yup, got socks on...even the same color....

Hmmm, hawaiian shirt and dockers.... guess that's okay...

Glad my DW picked out all my clothes... yup!

 

[Jennifer5973]

Wow-Chialea--good for you!

Hmmm, that's right, cflutist...I'll keep looking for that stone to fall off the back of a truck?

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 7/23/2004 9:13:53 PM cflutist wrote:

Its funny you say that because in the GIA Diamonds class I took back in 1986 they said anything over 3 cts seems gaudy in rounds and that fancy shapes are preferred. Of course things could have changed in 18 years.----------------

The message is still going strong: large round stones are still said to be awkward, for what is that worth to everyone's personal choice.


As for what the tollerance level for big rings are... no idea! For example

it is funny that Liz was mentioned on the thread, she famously declared 60 carats too much for a ring while being known for wearing a 30 carat piece routinely. This may make sense (on another planet) but, for the record, the 30 carat had been auctioned with the mention: "I am selling this because it is too big to wear in society" by one Mrs. Krupp.

After quite a bit of Pricescope, I would bet this type of argument can take place between any two girls regarding any two diamonds of random different sizes

 

[headlight]

Here is a photo (sorry for the blur) to show how my 3.29 RB is set very low -- as low as possible without the culet touching my skin. I agree that the height in which a stone is set makes a big difference in if it "adds" to a large stone looking ridiculous or looking understated. The photo is so enlarged so it might not give an accurate representation of how low it is.

When I was going to have a three-stone mounting with side trillions created for my stone, my jeweler showed me a ring they had made of the same design, also set very low, but it held a 4.85 RB. Honestly, it looked ridiculous in that size. Could I get used to it? I'm sure anything is possible

My DH's step-mom has a 5 carat Lucida-inspired cut in GIA graded D color and honestly, it screams FAKE. I mean, who (other than celebrity) has a diamond that size in perfect white color???

I think the max I would go in a round would be 4 ct. and maybe a little larger in a square cut since they look a little smaller than a round of same weight. I have a size 4-1/2 finger yet despite the size being relatively small, I have short, chunky (ugly) looking fingers with big (beginning of osteoarthritis) knuckles, so I don't get the benefit of having a small ring size with diamonds looking larger

 

[headlight]

Here is another angle. I don't think it gives an accurate representation of how low it sits, but my ring (honestly) doesn't look big. The center is a 9.59mm but it just doesn't seem obnoxious (or am I so jaded

 

[valeria101]

----------------
On 7/24/2004 4:40:14 PM headlight wrote:

Here is a photo (sorry for the blur) to show how my 3.29 RB is set very low ----------------

This must be what every round diamond dreams of

No need to suspend a good size rock in mid-air to let it show off... so the mounting is just perfect. So is the hand picture! Thanks

 

[Jennifer5973]

headlight, that is a 3 ct I'd wear in a minute--the setting makes it major bling withougt any gaudiness at all

...NOTHING like the super-high, mini-light bulb that woman i work with has!

Oh, boy, now I am in trouble...I had myself all contented to get an upgrade to 2 ct down the line...

 

[cflutist]

I tried on a 4 ct marquise while at the SF Gift Show today and my mother said it looked horrible on my finger (probably because I wear a size 3 3/4 ring). Good news for websailor though, he doesn't have to worry about me upgrading my e-ring stone

 

[Mara]

I tried on a 5c oval cut and it looked like glass on my finger...for me I think 3c is the sweet spot..that is my aspiration point anyway. I've seen a 4c on a hand similar to mine, and it ends up crossing that line into possibly maybe a bit much...but possibly not if you have the hand and/or presence to wear it.




Solange's looks spectacular on and off her hand...but right now I think I'm still at 3c for MY personal limit on what I'd want to wear. But I'm only 29.

Then again if I got a 4c I don't know if I couldn't adjust.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Brought a 3.34 ct 9.7mm rb, too big, looking to down size to 2.75 ct.

 

[cflutist]

----------------
On 7/25/2004 10:20:33 PM vtigger86 wrote:

Brought a 3.34 ct 9.7mm rb, too big, looking to down size to 2.75 ct. ----------------

Is this the one that cost more than your truck?

 

[moremoremore]

I'm probably in the minority...I would never go bigger than a 3 carat fancy.....That's just my personality e/t I'm a big girl

at 5'10+....and 2.5 round is the limit....