How Big is too Big?

[paris29]

Is a 3 carat round diamond going to look ostentatious/overwhelming for a 3 row pave setting, is a 2 ct more suitable? Is there such thing as too big?

 

[nararabbit]

It depends somewhat on where you live and your circle of friends/family - a NYC CEO will likely have a larger diamond than a Nebraska vet tech, know what I mean? In most places, a 3 carat diamond with 3 pave bands will draw attention, you just have to decide how YOU feel about that. People will feel free to comment about it, so you have to be okay with that! I don't think there's a standard for 'too big' that's universal, it varies for each person. I wouldn't feel comfortable wearing a 3 carat diamond in my peer group, but my 1.5 carat doesn't cause any raised eyebrows - back home in rural TN it would have. See what I mean? Good luck with the decision, whatever you decide!

 

[Dreamer_D]

No such thing as too big. But from a practical perspective, try on diamonds in the size you are considering and decide if you like the look and feel of such a large diamond.

 

[betty6333]

I dont think 3 carats is too big, but I have size 9 fingers, so anything under a carat just looks small IMO. if I had size 3 fingers though, 3 carats would look significantly larger!

If you can afford it, and you like it, get it! with time the diamond shrinks to your eyes and what looked HUGE will no longer be so big and you may wish you had gotten a bigger stone the first time. Most people unless they are diamond fans wont even notice a ring on a finger so get what you like and enjoy!

 

[kenny]

It also depends on cut.
A 3-ct asscher looks much smaller than a 3-ct round.

Also "how big is too big" is a matter of opinion.
The only opinion that really matters is yours.

 

[pistolpete1979]

When my gf first started looking at rings she was told by the jeweller anything over a carat (for a single diamond) wouldn't look good on her 4 1/2 size finger, and considering it's in the jewellers 'best' interest to make a large sale you would have to have trusted their opinion. (Obviously the real best interest is finding a diamond & setting that the customers loves, and is within budget)

It does, however, come down to personal choice as to what looks good on your finger, as some celebrities with the really big bucks buy big just for the hell of it, whether it looks good or not!

If 3 carats suits you, then go for it.

 

[antelope1]

Remember, there are three other factors (color, clarity, cut) that can affect price! So ct wt is not the only way to make a killing for a B&M store. You could buy an AGS0 1 carat D color, IF clarity diamond for ~$25k (online), for example. If you were to walk into Tiffany's and saw a 1 ct D IF, you might be quoted $72k (Lucida, set in yellow gold, just FYI -- really happened to me -- even the salesperson said it was "not worth it"!!).

If the B&M store (for example) rarely buys diamonds larger than 1 ct, then they might tell you (for example) that bigger than 1 ct would look "too big" -- that would save them the cost of shipping in diamonds for you to look at (diamonds that they would not normally stock). Since it's a B&M store, they would pay for the shipping from the distributor (most likely), which is absorbed into their overhead, which cuts into their profit. So it's in their interests to sell you something from their current inventory rather than do a search for you.

Good luck!

 

[Cehrabehra]

there's also how she lives... I mean I'd be happy to sport several carats to an event but for doing the dishes smaller is better and some women like to live full time in their diamonds - so they choose what not only fits the style of their life but their life style - if that makes sense...

 

[RedRobbin]

I think for me personally, if I were getting a 3 carat round, I would set it in a solitaire shank with no pave and with four double claw prongs, a la Leon Mege. I think this would be a more elegant statement for a stone of that magnitude. But that is just a personal preference. My concern with the double or triple pave is that it might detract from a stone of that magnitude. But I echo what everyone else has expressed in that you should really go with what you love since you are the only one who will see it every day.

 

[Amys Bling]

I agree with RedRobin- If I were getting a 3 ct RB I would set it in a think eternity style band or a plan wtgold/plat band. Since the diamond is pretty large I would want a thin/simple setting. IMHO

as for "is 3ct too large for your hand" depends on ring size. I wear a size 5....I could definitely go larger than my 1.55, maybe a 2...(non halo- if I would halo I could prob go larger since that style is an overall look), but would a 3 ct RB be too large for me... I think so (but maybe not )

 

[clgwli]

This is such a personal answer honestly. The idea of what is too big for me will definitely vary for other people. I tried on a beautifully cut D I1 2 ct RB once in a store. It looked silly on my hands. My fingers are short and the width of my fingers is small for my 4.25 ring size (I have extra meat & skin that makes my ring size larger than it looks like it should be). Someone with average sized fingers could probably wear the same stone and have it look stunning, while I looked like a kid playing dress up.

So for me I couldn't wear a 3 ct comfortably. Heck my just under a carat is considered large among my friends so a 3ct would make me really stand out. But I love the idea of a 3 row pave. I've seen them and just love the over all look. The size of the stone has to be what you like and what you are comfortable with.

 

[CharmyPoo]

As you have heard, there are so many factors that determins if it will look too big. 3 ct is going to look big regardless - unless her fingers are like size 20. For me, 3 ct is too big for a ring since it will almost cover the whole width of my finger. I also feel no need to be overly flashy - too me large isn't necessarily better. Granted my e-ring isn't small but I think it is too large as it is.

 

[RedRobbin]

As you have heard, there are so many factors that determins if it will look too big. 3 ct is going to look big regardless - unless her fingers are like size 20. For me, 3 ct is too big for a ring since it will almost cover the whole width of my finger. I also feel no need to be overly flashy - too me large isn't necessarily better. Granted my e-ring isn't small but I think it is too large as it is.

I agree that there comes a point where less is more. I wouldn't halo a 3 carat diamond, for example. I guess same with pave. At some point a stone of that size and magnitude could look almost like a fashion ring or a cocktail ring rather than a ring you can wear every day. I think that was already mentioned too, but I'd echo that you want a ring you can wear to dinner and to breakfast. I think you can do that with a 3 carat solitaire but when you add pave it can get more difficult to pull it off. But again, the single most important driver is what you want and what you love.

 

[bgray]

Is a 3 carat round diamond going to look ostentatious/overwhelming for a 3 row pave setting, is a 2 ct more suitable? Is there such thing as too big?

Personally yes, a three carat will look ostentatious (and potentially fake) in a pave setting. A 2 carat is probably the maximum for that. "Important" diamonds (which is usually referencing 3 carats plus I believe) are usually set in classic settings --either a solitaire or with proportioned side stones. Graff, Harry WInston, Tiffany and Cartier set large stones in very classic mountings. By all means do what you want and have your heart set on but the fact that you are even asking the question makes me think you have some sense of scale and are weighing appropriate-ness. I have a 5 carat stone set in platinum with slim side stones. I had a 3 carat set in an over-the-top confection of pave and had it for one year. It was attention getting and I felt more uncomfortable wearing that than my plain vanilla 5 carat.

 

[AnneinGA]

I agree with what bgray said and I think the larger the diamond, the more simple the setting should be.

For me, I am looking at 2 to 2.5 and my ring size is a 9.75. I have a couple of colored gemstones larger than that - one I need to post on the colord gemstones forum because I don't know what it is (it was given to me by my grandmother). It's a 11mm round and it's VERY large and a light green, but I can carry it because of my hand size. But I do not wear it every day - and it would not be as special to me if I did. It's a "when I'm in the mood to" or "special occasion" ring.

Your question though, and my thought process in responding has helped clarify my diamond search however. I never thought about my grandmother's stone and how I wouldn't want to wear it everyday - it's just too big. So maybe I'll stick in the 2 ct range and get a better clarity/color rather than trying to go too big.

So thanks !

 

[Dreamer_D]

When my gf first started looking at rings she was told by the jeweller anything over a carat (for a single diamond) wouldn't look good on her 4 1/2 size finger, and considering it's in the jewellers 'best' interest to make a large sale you would have to have trusted their opinion. (Obviously the real best interest is finding a diamond & setting that the customers loves, and is within budget)

hee hee... it is in his best interest to make a sale, period. He probably sized her up and thought that under one carat was about what she would get -- and that is indeed was the vast majority of women get -- or maybe she implied that, and thus pitched his sale that way.

 

[Sizzle]

Is a 3 carat round diamond going to look ostentatious/overwhelming for a 3 row pave setting, is a 2 ct more suitable? Is there such thing as too big?

Personally yes, a three carat will look ostentatious (and potentially fake) in a pave setting. A 2 carat is probably the maximum for that. "Important" diamonds (which is usually referencing 3 carats plus I believe) are usually set in classic settings --either a solitaire or with proportioned side stones. Graff, Harry WInston, Tiffany and Cartier set large stones in very classic mountings. By all means do what you want and have your heart set on but the fact that you are even asking the question makes me think you have some sense of scale and are weighing appropriate-ness. I have a 5 carat stone set in platinum with slim side stones. I had a 3 carat set in an over-the-top confection of pave and had it for one year. It was attention getting and I felt more uncomfortable wearing that than my plain vanilla 5 carat.

Are these diamonds you speak of on pricescope? What size finger? I think larger fingers can get away with more.

 

[Sizzle]

Is a 3 carat round diamond going to look ostentatious/overwhelming for a 3 row pave setting, is a 2 ct more suitable? Is there such thing as too big?

I think that all depends on the personal style of the individual. I started a thread the other day about people who like things that others may label "gaudy" or "tacky". Its all a matter of personal taste. I currently have a 3 carat princess in a "classic" setting and it's kind of boring to me. As for the worrying about whether or not others think it's "real" who cares what others think! Some people dont' think 2 carats is believable. And while someone discussed setting 3cts in classic settings. PLEASE check out Jennifer Hudsons FABULOUS setting. Her center stone is 5 carats.

 

[ms.halo]

I think the larger the diamond, the more simple the setting should be.

Ditto this.

I think three rows of pave with 3 cts is going to be very, very blingy. It would stand out even here in Beverly Hills not because of the size of the stone, but because of the setting. I'd stick with 2 cts. and three rows or 3 cts. and a simpler setting.

 

[shihtzulover]

Weirdly enough, I also had a jeweler tell me to buy the smaller diamond - and this is while I was also considering the larger one! I have a size 4.5 finger also, and I was looking at princess cut solitaires. I tried on a 1, 1.25, 1.5, and 2 carat. He told me that he thought the 1.25 carat diamond looked perfect on my finger and that the 1.5 looked a bit overwhelming, even though I was actually favoring the 1.5 carat stone (which was about $3k more).

I found that to be unusual, because he was trying to make a sale, and I was obviously leaning towards the 1.5 carat. I guess it is all personal taste, but like I said, I figured that he would have been trying to get me to buy the larger diamond.

We did not end up shopping there, but we did end up going with a 1.5 carat diamond - my FF and I both agreed that we love that size on my finger, and are even considering going up to 2 carats in the future (although I'm not sure that I will want to, just because of the sentimental value of this diamond).

 

[Sizzle]

When my gf first started looking at rings she was told by the jeweller anything over a carat (for a single diamond) wouldn't look good on her 4 1/2 size finger, and considering it's in the jewellers 'best' interest to make a large sale you would have to have trusted their opinion. (Obviously the real best interest is finding a diamond & setting that the customers loves, and is within budget)

hee hee... it is in his best interest to make a sale, period. He probably sized her up and thought that under one carat was about what she would get -- and that is indeed was the vast majority of women get -- or maybe she implied that, and thus pitched his sale that way.

Weirdly enough, I also had a jeweler tell me to buy the smaller diamond - and this is while I was also considering the larger one! I have a size 4.5 finger also, and I was looking at princess cut solitaires. I tried on a 1, 1.25, 1.5, and 2 carat. He told me that he thought the 1.25 carat diamond looked perfect on my finger and that the 1.5 looked a bit overwhelming, even though I was actually favoring the 1.5 carat stone (which was about $3k more).

I found that to be unusual, because he was trying to make a sale, and I was obviously leaning towards the 1.5 carat. I guess it is all personal taste, but like I said, I figured that he would have been trying to get me to buy the larger diamond.

We did not end up shopping there, but we did end up going with a 1.5 carat diamond - my FF and I both agreed that we love that size on my finger, and are even considering going up to 2 carats in the future (although I'm not sure that I will want to, just because of the sentimental value of this diamond).

That's actually a sales tactic. It makes you think he/she is more trustrworthy and therefore you're more likely to buy. I guess the joke son them!

 

[shihtzulover]

When my gf first started looking at rings she was told by the jeweller anything over a carat (for a single diamond) wouldn't look good on her 4 1/2 size finger, and considering it's in the jewellers 'best' interest to make a large sale you would have to have trusted their opinion. (Obviously the real best interest is finding a diamond & setting that the customers loves, and is within budget)

hee hee... it is in his best interest to make a sale, period. He probably sized her up and thought that under one carat was about what she would get -- and that is indeed was the vast majority of women get -- or maybe she implied that, and thus pitched his sale that way.

Weirdly enough, I also had a jeweler tell me to buy the smaller diamond - and this is while I was also considering the larger one! I have a size 4.5 finger also, and I was looking at princess cut solitaires. I tried on a 1, 1.25, 1.5, and 2 carat. He told me that he thought the 1.25 carat diamond looked perfect on my finger and that the 1.5 looked a bit overwhelming, even though I was actually favoring the 1.5 carat stone (which was about $3k more).

I found that to be unusual, because he was trying to make a sale, and I was obviously leaning towards the 1.5 carat. I guess it is all personal taste, but like I said, I figured that he would have been trying to get me to buy the larger diamond.

We did not end up shopping there, but we did end up going with a 1.5 carat diamond - my FF and I both agreed that we love that size on my finger, and are even considering going up to 2 carats in the future (although I'm not sure that I will want to, just because of the sentimental value of this diamond).

That's actually a sales tactic. It makes you think he/she is more trustrworthy and therefore you're more likely to buy. I guess the joke son them!

This may be true! It was odd, because his manager came over and my FF made the comment about not wanting to go so large that it would look weird on my finger. The manager said that it would be pretty much impossible to do with a solitaire unless we went above 4 carats - haha.

I guess it is all a matter of what is the norm in your area, and also what your personal preferences are. If I were getting a round, I don't think that I would go above 2 carats, and possibly not even larger than 1.5 - just because they face up a slight bit larger and are wider in diameter (since they don't have the corners that a princess has). That is all how I feel about my finger size and personal taste though, and I would have to try them on to be certain.

Of course, I personally don't know anyone with more than a 1 carat round (or maybe just a bit over) or a 1.5 carat princess, and most center stones that I see are definitely under 1 carat. I would probably be singing a different tune if I were somewhere where huge diamonds are the norm.

 

[Jessie702]

Personally, i think a 3CT. should be set by itself or with simple sidestones. As someone else mentioned it could look fake. Sometimes less is more, espically with a diamond that size. Also, it depends on your ring size, im a 8.5 and think a 2 Ct. looks to be a bit much. Go for what you want, its your ring you have to wear, and like.

 

[slg47]

I think a 3-row pave needs a larger diamond so the setting doesn't overwhelm the diamond. (although it depends on the melee size). I am not a huge fan of this style but there is a gorgeous Leon ring with 3 row pave and an oval stone

 

[Dreamer_D]

Is a 3 carat round diamond going to look ostentatious/overwhelming for a 3 row pave setting, is a 2 ct more suitable? Is there such thing as too big?

... And while someone discussed setting 3cts in classic settings. PLEASE check out Jennifer Hudsons FABULOUS setting. Her center stone is 5 carats.

I love Jennifer Hudson's ring! I would love to be able to rock that look, but I think it would be OTT for me. I am not, after all, a grammy and oscar winning celebrity, much to my dismay.

 

[luvshinyrocks]

I think a lot of it depends on the people you hang with and your profession.

I've mostly worked for small public interest organizations. There's something incongruous about working on behalf of poor people while wearing a 3ct rock all day, you know? If I were an Ibanker it would be totally fine.

 

[AprilBaby]

I agree with everyone who says it depends on how big you finger is. I also think it has to do with your age. I could pull it off because I am over 50 and I have a size 8 finger. People would think I was a diva.

 

[septsparkle]

So many factors...as many have pointed out....finger size, profession, social circle, personal preference, setting, age, location, financial situation, etc.

I think 3 carats is too big for me, particularly in a round. However, many years ago I thought 1.5 carats was too big and now I think it's a smidge smaller than I'd like. I was younger, less established and less financially sound and able to make a purchase like this back then, so I'm sure that played a role. What's too big to some of us now, may not be later on....ask me again in 10 years and I bet I'd give you a different answer. On the flip side, many of us that want a larger rock now, may later on want something more subtle and less flashy...maybe even just start wearing our wedding bands on a daily basis. It all depends on where you are in your life I think.

I think my personal preference for a setting on a stone of this size would be a solitaire. I do think the diamond will speak for itself.

 

[CharmyPoo]

A 2 carat is probably the maximum for that. "Important" diamonds (which is usually referencing 3 carats plus I believe) are usually set in classic settings --either a solitaire or with proportioned side stones. Graff, Harry WInston, Tiffany and Cartier set large stones in very classic mountings.

This is not true especially for Tiffany. Their "Statement" = "Important" diamonds are often set in designed / ornate settings.

 

[Dancing Fire]

saw the title of this thread i thought you gals was gonna talk about something interesting....