Emerald vs. round

[Carrie]

Hi there,

I have read that fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size....however, on this site it has been mentioned that rounds have better face up value....

When I compare emerald cuts to round cuts....emeralds seem to appear larger...and my guess is its because they have a larger table and tend to have more length....so what is the answer....do fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size?

 

[coatimundi_org]

Yesterday, I was out looking at exactly that...emeralds and rounds. I'm in the process of upgrading, and at first, I thought I wanted an emerald, but after looking at rounds, I was sold. I looked at emeralds and rounds of the approximate same weight, and I thought that the rounds definitely faced up larger, and as I am looking for size--this was great. I also have an oval cut, and it does face up larger than it's carat weight.

I was surprised, because I was sure the emerald cuts would look larger--because of the elongation.

 

[coatimundi_org]

Here's a great chart that cflutist posted. Conversion from carat weight to millimeters.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/mm-to-carat-stone-conversion-chart.17578/

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 1/20/2008 12:09:55 PM
Author:Carrie
Hi there,

I have read that fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size....however, on this site it has been mentioned that rounds have better face up value....

When I compare emerald cuts to round cuts....emeralds seem to appear larger...and my guess is its because they have a larger table and tend to have more length....so what is the answer....do fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size?

Generally shapes such as ovals, pears, marquise can look large for the weight compared with a round, emeralds I guess could vary, but in all cases you need to compare the spread or face up measurements to judge.

I will post a chart for you to get a rough idea in a moment, it is interesting to look at.

http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf Here you go.

This chart gives you some idea of mm measurements, but it is considered to be a little optimistic, so reduce given sizes slightly.

https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/mm-to-carat-stone-conversion-chart.17578/

Hee - Coati just posted this chart too!

 

[tberube]

Date: 1/20/2008 12:09:55 PM
Author:Carrie
Hi there,

I have read that fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size....however, on this site it has been mentioned that rounds have better face up value....

When I compare emerald cuts to round cuts....emeralds seem to appear larger...and my guess is its because they have a larger table and tend to have more length....so what is the answer....do fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size?

Popular opinion on this site is that RB's face up larger than every other cut, perhaps excluding the marquise. I tend to disagree - many elongated cuts, such as emerald cuts, look larger to me. This is part of the reason I decided on an EC. Not to mention, because of the RB's prolific popularity, they are much more expensive than fancies in a side-by-side carat comparison.

There is a grid floating around here that compares all the sizes side by side, and several threads on it (I think I even started one a month ago or so). Do a search, a lot will come up on this issue.

 

[coatimundi_org]

Date: 1/20/2008 12:44:45 PM
Author: Lorelei

Date: 1/20/2008 12:09:55 PM

Author:Carrie

Hi there,


I have read that fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size....however, on this site it has been mentioned that rounds have better face up value....


When I compare emerald cuts to round cuts....emeralds seem to appear larger...and my guess is its because they have a larger table and tend to have more length....so what is the answer....do fancy cuts appear larger than round cuts of equal size?

Generally shapes such as ovals, pears, marquise can look large for the weight compared with a round, emeralds I guess could vary, but in all cases you need to compare the spread or face up measurements to judge.


I will post a chart for you to get a rough idea in a moment, it is interesting to look at.


http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf Here you go.


This chart gives you some idea of mm measurements, but it is considered to be a little optimistic, so reduce given sizes slightly.


https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/mm-to-carat-stone-conversion-chart.17578/


Hee - Coati just posted this chart too!

I'm always using this awesome chart!!

I noticed on the millimeter conversion chart that 2carat rounds are roughly 8.2 mm with emeralds being 8.5X6.5. I think the narrowness is what made them look smaller to me. With a round it's 8.2 in total diameter. But, good spread can change everything. I love BOTH cuts, but alas! I can only choose one.

 

[Ellen]

Here''s another chart. Scroll down just a tad.

 

[Carrie]

I guess it must depend on the way the stone is cut....I have 3 friends who all have emerald cuts of different sizes....
One looks like .5 or .6 tcw and it is visually a smaller stone when compared to my 1 carat round, the other friend has one that looks like it may be just under a carat and could be very close to mine....and the other has a stone that sometimes looks big and other times....not so much. It is definitely wider than the other ECs, but hers looks bigger than my 1 carat...

I''ve also seen some pics on this site of 1 carat ECs that look the same size as my friend with the larger stone and I''ve seen some pics of ECs that are almost 2 carats and they look like her size as well....

I was reading a wedding magazine and it was mentioned that fancy cuts tend to appear larger than round cuts of equal size...and honestly, I think they do too...

Rounds in my opinion have amazing sparkle and can appear large....but when compared to a rectangular cut emerald I think they do look a little smaller...

I''m asking because a friend of mine is looking at rings and can''t decide.

 

[Lorelei]

Date: 1/20/2008 12:59:17 PM
Author: Ellen
Here''s another chart. Scroll down just a tad.

Yep, thats a good one El !

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/20/2008 1:04:39 PM
Author: Lorelei

Yep, thats a good one El !

Thankies.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/20/2008 1:03:13 PM
Author: Carrie
I guess it must depend on the way the stone is cut....I have 3 friends who all have emerald cuts of different sizes....
One looks like .5 or .6 tcw and it is visually a smaller stone when compared to my 1 carat round, the other friend has one that looks like it may be just under a carat and could be very close to mine....and the other has a stone that sometimes looks big and other times....not so much. It is definitely wider than the other ECs, but hers looks bigger than my 1 carat...

It does. That's why the diameter of a stone is more important to look at than the ct. weight. You can have 2, 1 ct. rounds, and one can have a diameter of about 6.5, which is what a well cut one should face up as, and the other could be cut really deep, maybe a thick girdle to boot, and have a diameter around 6.35. (this applies to all shapes as well)

But always make sure they are well cut, that's critical to a beautiful stone!

 

[lovewhitediamonds]

Hi...
I just went through the emerald vs round for an upgrade in November...
I already had a round, and wanted a different shape. I struggled with the "face up" as I wanted much larger than my original e-ring. During my personal experience and comparison shopping, a round faced up larger and had more overall (width and length) finger coverage vs all shapes... probably why they are so popular, in addition to being "classic". Rounds are so different than emerald cuts -- much more sparkle... but they are very common. But if it''s size you want, I think round is the way to go.
(altho, I would take a 4,5,6,7ct emerald cut over the same size round any day)

Good luck !!

 

[Independent Gal]

If you''re looking at stones on your friends'' hands, the other thing to take into account is the size of their finger. The smaller the finger, the bigger the stone looks.

 

[Cravin My Emerald cut]

Date: 1/20/2008 1:18:19 PM
Author: Ellen
It does. That''s why the diameter of a stone is more important to look at than the ct. weight. You can have 2, 1 ct. rounds, and one can have a diameter of about 6.5, which is what a well cut one should face up as, and the other could be cut really deep, maybe a thick girdle to boot, and have a diameter around 6.35. (this applies to all shapes as well)

But always make sure they are well cut, that''s critical to a beautiful stone!

Ditto. I hope to receive an emerald cut

and have noticed that many are cut too deep. I wish you could search online by dimensions not weight. I think I''ve read on here somewhere before that differences of about 0.2mm are necessary to make it visibly larger/smaller unless of course you''re comparing them side by side. I''m recalling that number from memory though so use with caution

 

[kcoursolle]

Usually the round of the same carat weight will appear larger than the EC. However, if the EC is cut shallow with a large table and the round is cut deep...it is quite possible that the EC will look larger. Honestly, I would go for which shape you prefer the appearance of rather than how much larger one faces up than the other.