Here are some diamond size reference pics

[stebbo]

As requested in another thread, here are some pictures giving an indication of round and princess sizes (including melee sizes) on an average sized hand (thank you dear for giving your hand twice). All AGA-1A proportions.

Stebbo

 

[poptart]

Do you have any idea how long I have been looking for something JUST like this??? Of course you don''t... but thank you!

*M*

 

[Ellen]

Great idea, however, putting stones that far up the finger (where it is smaller) won''t give the true picture.

 

[belle]

Date: 1/16/2007 7:50:09 PM
Author: Ellen
Great idea, however, putting stones that far up the finger (where it is smaller) won''t give the true picture.

hahaha...i was just thinking the same thing.
thanks for putting forth the effort stebbo!

 

[Lynn B]

WOW, that''s very cool! (And helpful, too!) Thanks for all your hard work with that.

Now... I''ll take the 10 carat round, please, sir. Sir?!

 

[stebbo]

Date: 1/16/2007 7:50:09 PM
Author: Ellen
Great idea, however, putting stones that far up the finger (where it is smaller) won't give the true picture.

The pics here are more for seeing the diamonds relative to each other in a single glance with the hand and finger more for scales of reference. Very hard to give a true picture due to varying finger lengths/widths, diamond spreads, etc but I hope they give a useful approximation.

Stebbo

 

[Finding_Neverland]

Really kewl!! And your work is greatly appreciated, Stebbo!!

 

[IrishAngel7982]

Thanks for that Stebbo!

 

[Modified Brilliant]

Cool chart Stebbo!

Thanks for the effort

www.metrojewelryappraisers.com

 

[Cehrabehra]

oooh great fun thanks!! an instant classic! nice hands too!!! thank you!

 

[jxl]

Very cool!!!
I wish I saw it earlier.

 

[kcoursolle]

Very cool!!! Any idea what size hand she has?? I would guess 6.5??

 

[yeewl]

Thanks for the chart. It''s very helpful as it will give me a fair idea of the carat size on the finger..

 

[Maisie]

I dunno if its just me but the .50 princess looks bigger than the .75......

 

[DillPickle]

I agree with above, though I''m sure the intent was to have the labels on the .5 and .75 switched.

 

[Maisie]

Aah of course - I''m so dim

 

[kenny]

Cool!

Is this for ideal cuts or for the more typical steep deep cut stones?

Or, are they so close that it doesn't matter?

I'd love to see asscher sizes too.

 

[:)]

To add to your list, this is a favorite of mine to be able to show differences in millimeters (although not on a hand!) between stone diameters..

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

 

[Class n Sass]

This is great!!! What size hand is this?

 

[stebbo]

Date: 1/17/2007 7:57:48 AM
Author: Maisiebelle
I dunno if its just me but the .50 princess looks bigger than the .75......

Date: 1/17/2007 12:14:56 PM
Author: DillPickle
I agree with above, though I''m sure the intent was to have the labels on the .5 and .75 switched.

Ha ha, you''re right - picture updated. Thanks. (You may have to refresh your cache to see (usually Ctrl-F5).)

Stebbo

 

[stebbo]

Date: 1/17/2007 2:07:05 AM
Author: kcoursolle
Very cool!!! Any idea what size hand she has?? I would guess 6.5??

Date: 1/17/2007 1:46:38 PM
Author: Class n Sass
This is great!!! What size hand is this?

Size 6.5 is correct.

Stebbo

 

[stebbo]

Date: 1/17/2007 12:34:18 PM
Author: kenny
Cool!

Is this for ideal cuts or for the more typical steep deep cut stones?

Yep, all ideal cuts.

Or, are they so close that it doesn''t matter?

So close that from the viewing distance of the hand here, the resolution wouldn''t be able to show any meaningful difference for the typical steep/deep. But, here are some thoughts:

It''s typically said that the average person needs a diamond to increase in weight by 20% to notice it without reference to other diamonds. This is due to that 20% being dispersed all around the diamond, whereas we only see the resulting 6% change in diameter.

Even though I think this is a bit overstated (we can easily notice when a person puts on 20% weight without a ''before'' picture), if we take an extremely bad steep/deep, let''s say 70% total depth (an AGS-10), the physical diameter would only be 3% smaller than an Ideal cut.

This 3% however is nothing compared to the loss in apparent diameter due to poor light performance (optical spread), especially with the dark perimeter.

The typical steep/deep though is not as bad in light performance, nor will it suffer as much loss in physical diameter. And still, further optical diameter can be saved if open-mounted up high so that light from below lights up the otherwise dark perimeter.

I''d love to see asscher sizes too.

Ok, I know the thumb''s empty, but the hugely different optical spreads between Princesses and Asschers over the range available make it meaningless to show, especially in such a small resolution. The Princess sizes are as close as estimation as any.

Stebbo

 

[pyramid]

Anyone have a comparison picture of a 0.25, a 0.33, a 0.40 and a 0.50. I notice although these are smaller stones we hardly see the third carat (0.33) mentioned nowadays.