I have a SIZE question

[jcard71]

Hi everyone,


I bought my GF a 1.17 3 stone setting with 0.5 for the side diamonds.
She is about 5'' 7" and her ring size is a six...

My question is do you think this ring will look small on her finger?
Should I go bigger? If I add another say $1,000 to my budget, how much bigger
of a center stone will I be able to get?

Thanks in advance for your replies...

 

[Mara]

I think that you did fine..my center stone looks like a 1.35c and the band is all pave, the center stone looks very big on my size 6 finger. I am 5'8". With those side stones, and that center stone (doesn't it have a larger diameter than 1.17 if I recall correctly?), chances are it will look nice and big on her finger...it will definitely be 'commanding' because of the 3 stones spreading across her finger.




3 Stones are so much more popular these days for e-rings..my coworker just got engaged and has one but if I'm not mistaken, the diamonds look smaller. I haven't gotten an up close look. Maybe a 1ctw center stone and .30c sides?




I have .50c each earrings (1ctw) and sometimes for fun I put them against my center stone to see what a 3 stone would look like with these proportions (so center stone 1.35 diameter and .50c each on side). Bling bling and more than PERFECT size for my finger. So IMO you're fine!

 

[jcard71]

Mara, thanks again!!!!

Anyone else?

 

[Obsessed]

i don't think its small... it will easily look beatiful on her hand. It is very impressive to have even a bigger rock always, but you have to consider your gf's lifestyle and social circle. 1 carat is huge and ostentatious in many parts of the world, including some US cities. However, 1 carat is only a starting point for more affluent demographics like in LA, NY, etc... But even in LA, there are plenty of people who consider a 1 carat purchase expensive since not every LA residents are well off. Does your gf work as an investment banker or a housekeeper? Does she work in a small private company or a Big five accounting firm? Also, consider your standing in society as well... are you a medical doctor or a doctor of philosophy? Are you a student or a 40yr old business owner? Size is all relative. But for pure asthetics of it, anything over 1 carat will look substantial on a woman's hand IMHO. Make sure you don't get a yellow and dull diamond trying to go big. A smaller icy white sparkler is far more beautiful than a huge piece of glass.

 

[pqcollectibles]

I'm 5'9", wearing a 1.25 carat solitare, half-bezel set on a wide band. Looks just right on me!

Obsessed made some good points about your social circle and what your gal does.

Ultimately, the decision is yours. What makes you and your gal happy.

 

[Nicrez]

I think that size is just perfect for her finger size! I have seen the polar opposite where a tiny woman wears a HUGE rock and in my opinion, it just looks silly and tacky. A ring that has a great sparkle and fits well on a slim finger seriously adds a touch of elegance, than tackiness. It doesn't matter how much you can afford size-wise, becuase if you get a well proportioned ring (with sidestones included) it will always look nice and not too flashy...I can't wait to see pictures!!!

 

[jcard71]

I really appreciate everyone's help!!!
Mara, has been like my own personal diamond "shrink"

I'm about to call my insurance company and get it covered before I leave the J store with the ring. I'll post pictures by the end of the week...

Thanks again everyone!!!

 

[Mara]

Can't wait to see pictures..

Congrats!

 

[Obsessed]

Congrats

. You have to post pics.

 

[lara]

Ok, wait a minute... these are all very nice posts and I'm sure just meant to help this guy decide... but would someone please tell me how and when it came about that you can tell a woman's profession, her husband's profession and/or her place in society by the size of her rock???

 

[dbgaap]

Well, let's face it - a big diamond is a staus symbol to many.

And, marketing has played a big role in making this so.

 

[lara]

Yep, that's true, dbgaap. But I doubt it really correlates as well as people think it does!

 

[pqcollectibles]

----------------
On 3/1/2004 1:59:46 PM lara wrote:

Ok, wait a minute... these are all very nice posts and I'm sure just meant to help this guy decide... but would someone please tell me how and when it came about that you can tell a woman's profession, her husband's profession and/or her place in society by the size of her rock??? ----------------

You can't.

There have been posts on the Forum from guys buying who don't think about the ring from the gal's point of view. Maybe her job dictates she can't wear her ring at all at work. That could be a Doctor or an Electrician. Maybe she can wear her ring to work, but needs a low set or a smaller diamond. Possibly, in their social circle, all the gals are getting 1-1.15 carats and she does not want to stand out one way or the other. Not too big, not too small.

Obsessed's comments ring pretty true. The bigger the paycheck, the more one can afford. In some circles, excesses are frowned on. Older women tend to sport bigger diamonds from upgrades than young brides receive initially. Stay-at-home Mommies tend to wear smaller diamonds than professional working women.

JC's request had nothing to do with social status or her profession. It had to do with the physical size of the diamond based his gal's physical size. Nothing more and nothing less.

Congrats on the ring, JC!!

And the upcoming Engagement!!

 

[Obsessed]

----------------
On 3/1/2004 1:59:46 PM lara wrote:

Ok, wait a minute... these are all very nice posts and I'm sure just meant to help this guy decide... but would someone please tell me how and when it came about that you can tell a woman's profession, her husband's profession and/or her place in society by the size of her rock??? ----------------

Ok, i see your point. I feel that a man who loves his woman should get whatever he can afford without putting undue financial hardship on himself. Usually when you make more money, you can afford more. I am not saying that you can tell what their profession is by looking at the ring, but that the ring DOES reflect the status. Its the truth... I have a friend who makes a little more money than I do, he bought his fiancee a relatively small stone. Now he is in the process of looking for the 'real' stone, because his fiancee is not quite happy. Yes, it is shallow and vein, but look at it this way. If he is making 100K a year, and decides to spend 2K on her e-ring ring and then spends 3K on alloy wheels for his BMW, what does that imply? It is reflective of how much of HIS disposable income he is willing to spend on her VS on himself. Everyday, a man who makes a lot of money will spend more money on luxury goods than an average person, be it fancy clothes, nice cars, golf clubs, etc. I think it shows alot when the man makes some sacrifice on his creature comforts to get a beautiful ring for his fiancee. Ofcourse there are exceptions.... but in general, their exists a correlation between social/financial status and quality/size of ring.

 

[dbgaap]

The size question ...
OK well I am 5'9" but I am built sort of willowy. Sometimes I can wear very delicate things and it looks good (to me, anyway, ha ha).
Boyfriend gave me a lovely pave diamond 'friendship' ring that is very thin & elegant and I love it.
Now that we are looking at diamonds and settings, we both agree that a heavier ring looks best on me (I guess it's the height thing)
We've picked out a semi-bezel setting & we've decided that anything from .75 to 1.1 looks pretty good, especially when the cut is amazing and it sparkles.
My finger is size 6.

I am really into the aesthetics and the proportions of the whole thing.

BUT, for every size stone /setting combo, there is a woman who can pull it off.
Lotta gorgeous rings out there, someone has to enjoy them!!!

 

[lara]

If modest is about 3/4 carat with a 3/4 carat anniv band, then yes he did, obsessed. He bought me a modest ring, b/c he knows that I would be more than satisfied by it. Partly b/c my tastes run towards simple and understated. Partly because he and I agree on our priorities... My husband earns a six-figure salary + generous bonuses (sorry, had to put that in there due to insinuation that we can't afford what others can), but we simply have other priorities. My point is- I really don't think it correlates very well. Certainly not in my case, and not in the cases of most of my friends! If I had wanted a much larger diamond, I could have had it. I chose not to- we want to continue to save for retirement, pay for 3 kids' college, pay off our house, travel overseas, etc. That's not to say that it's not OK to spend your $$ on a larger diamond. But unless you're Donald Trump or somebody, that $ is being taken away from something else in your budget. Some are willing to do that, some are not.

 

[lara]

I see that you editted your original post, Obsessed, but my reply is based on your earlier comment (editted out) that you 'don't know what to say" if my husband bought me a modest ring.

 

[Obsessed]

lara,

I apologize for the 'insinuation' since the edited remark wasn't meant to be directed at you. I realized you could take it wrong so I removed it. You said you had a .75 diamond? You have me all wrong.... by saying relatively modest diamond, I meant some people being really really cheap(the friend i was talking about had much smaller). Is your diamond a high quality diamond? I am sure it is.... I believe in quality over size... the ring I got for my fiancee was just a nudge over 1 carat. I totally understand the priority issues, as I have tons of grad school loan to pay off, my elderly parents to take care of(i'm asian), and am saving up for a home. But come on.... i just don't understand men who don't even spend 3-4 thousands dollars when they are making 100K plus(except for maybe if the wife is a homemaker and does not add income to household). Yes, everyone is different.... but in MOST cases, when a dude makes six figure, the couple is not starting off with pre-existing children, and the wife is a working women, there is a standard that is usually met. If your situation deviates from this description, the whole ring/status thing doesn't even apply.

 

[Obsessed]

BTW, lara...

I am sure in your case, your husband didn't spend more money on a car accessory than your engagement ring. That was the type of men I was scrutinizing, not practical and understated folks like you and your husband. I hope I cleared it up

.

In my case, I had some money set aside for 19inch rims for my Audi and some new speaker for my Home theater, but they took a back seat when I decided to shop for a ring.

 

[Mara]

Wow the drama sure is high on the Monday morning ?! Maybe we should start a Tiffany thread?

I didn't take any sort of offense to anyone's comments in this thread...alot of times diamonds and/or flashiness does speak to a status, but of course that is not absolute and does not mean that people who don't have larger stones can't afford them. Just like a flashy car speaks of something resembling wealth (or the illusion), so does diamonds. But also just because someone has something does not mean they can afford it.




I'm sure nothing harmful was meant by the statement...it seemed innocent to me!

 

[Cookiedough]

Uh oh Obsessed, foot in mouth with that homemaker comment. Do you mean that since I am a homemaker and since my husband makes well over six figures and I DON'T CONTRIBUTE FINANCIALLY to the household, my ring "should" be less?
ouch!

 

[Mara]

hehe I missed that homemaker comment too. Foot in mouth, Obsessed.

 

[jcard71]

" JC's request had nothing to do with social status or her profession. It had to do with the physical size of the diamond based his gal's physical size. Nothing more and nothing less. "


Thank you PQ...

When we went looking at diamonds a year ago, we both
noticed that anything under a 1 CT looked small on her finger (3 stone setting) and 2 CT looked rather Liz Taylorish and too big. We both make a good living, but
our circle of friends are really average Joe's and Joette's...We're both in our early 30's and her ring will
be bigger than her friends, but that's not
why I bought that size for her. We're not into keeping up with the Jones'...


Sometimes, I feel like I should have bought
her a 1.5 ct stone and .75 for the sides and REALLY blown
her away, but I did spend $7,000 on this ring and I know she'll love it. I was just talking to a customer service
rep about an hour ago and she has a 2 ct solitaire that
is about one step away from "dried spit" The funny thing
with women and diamonds is that from a man's point of view I always thought women were concerned with the size of a diamond, but I've heard other women at my company talking about how her ring is "big" but it doesn't shine...

I guess in the end I tried to get her as big an e-ring as I
could afford with the quality being the most important part and "shine"

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 3/1/2004 2:21:56 PM I have a friend who makes a little more money than I do, he bought his fiancee a relatively small stone. Now he is in the process of looking for the 'real' stone, because his fiancee is not quite happy. Yes, it is shallow and vein, but look at it this way. If he is making 100K a year, and decides to spend 2K on her e-ring ring and then spends 3K on alloy wheels for his BMW, what does that imply? It is reflective of how much of HIS disposable income he is willing to spend on her VS on himself. I think it shows alot when the man makes some sacrifice on his creature comforts to get a beautiful ring for his fiancee. Ofcourse there are exceptions.... but in general, their exists a correlation between social/financial status and quality/size of ring. ----------------

This is precisely my argument in the whole size/how much to spend issue. Clearly, this gal wanted a nice big diamond. Clearly, he chose to spend more on *his* unmeaningful wheels than he did on a meaningful engagement ring. That in itself speaks volumes of what life ahead of them will be like. It goes to issue of generosity & willing to please another besides yourself. I wouldn't have asked for an upgrade. I would have said "no" and walked out the door.

That said, if a diamond is not an important issue for either, then one doesn't need to buy "big". But, that should be a decision that both parties are on board with.

 

[dbgaap]

Uh Oh! I feel my protective instincts rising!
Hey, Obsessed, right after you wrote
"I feel that a man who loves his woman should get whatever he can afford without putting undue financial hardship on himself"
would have been a good time to stop!

Really, my intuition tells me that you mean well, but your clarifications are getting you into trouble!!

 

[jcard71]

----------------
On 3/1/2004 4:06:32 PM fire&ice wrote:

----------------
On 3/1/2004 2:21:56 PM I have a friend who makes a little more money than I do, he bought his fiancee a relatively small stone. Now he is in the process of looking for the 'real' stone, because his fiancee is not quite happy. Yes, it is shallow and vein, but look at it this way. If he is making 100K a year, and decides to spend 2K on her e-ring ring and then spends 3K on alloy wheels for his BMW, what does that imply? It is reflective of how much of HIS disposable income he is willing to spend on her VS on himself. I think it shows alot when the man makes some sacrifice on his creature comforts to get a beautiful ring for his fiancee. Ofcourse there are exceptions.... but in general, their exists a correlation between social/financial status and quality/size of ring. ----------------

This is precisely my argument in the whole size/how much to spend issue. Clearly, this gal wanted a nice big diamond. Clearly, he chose to spend more on *his* unmeaningful wheels than he did on a meaningful engagement ring. That in itself speaks volumes of what life ahead of them will be like. It goes to issue of generosity & willing to please another besides yourself. I wouldn't have asked for an upgrade. I would have said 'no' and walked out the door.

That said, if a diamond is not an important issue for either, then one doesn't need to buy 'big'. But, that should be a decision that both parties are on board with.
----------------

Well said! I'm a GOLF ADDICT!! My Golf clubs are probably worth $1,500.00 and my GF knows it's my passion in life, but I would never spend less on a ring and buy more clubs...that would be kinda selfish.

The ring I bought was the 3rd biggest investment I've made in my life...


1) House
2) New SUV
3) E-RING

 

[Obsessed]

----------------
On 3/1/2004 3:58:43 PM Cookiedough wrote:

Uh oh Obsessed, foot in mouth with that homemaker comment. Do you mean that since I am a homemaker and since my husband makes well over six figures and I DON'T CONTRIBUTE FINANCIALLY to the household, my ring 'should' be less?
ouch!

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

No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am being misunderstood, yet again! should i put a bunch of

smiley face

s to clarify the tone of my statements

?

Yes, homemaker definitately contribute to the household financially! I wholeheartedly agree to that. My mother was a homemaker until I and my siblings became young adults. I think it is a tremendous job and has undeniable financial value. What I meant was that a 100K is a big salary for a man or woman. But as a household income, it is NOT AS big. So obviously, that will limit disposable income, wouldn't it? I was talking economics, not whether someone deserves a nice diamond or not.

 

[jcard71]

HEY THIS THREAD IS MINE...PLEASE YELL AT ME NOT EACH OTHER...

Can't we all just get along!!!!

 

[Obsessed]

jcard71 & fire&ice,

thank you for pointing out the 'heart' of my reasoning.
If anyone still misses this point, they are trying to deny the fact that their husbands were selfish. This is the last and only harsh thing i will
say.

 

[Nicrez]

Everyone give JCard a great big round of applause for effectively reclaiming his thread! YAY!

Go Jcard!!!




That said, Obsessed: what you pay for a ring depends on the people as well. My BF makes a very good salary. I make a good salary. One day for a few years I will be a "domestic engineer" while the little ones run around making me nuts. I may work, I may not. If we were in the e-ring mode THEN and not now, we would not have gotten the size we did. We would save money for the kids.




We got a nice size, and not because I bring so much to the table. We wanted to get a nice size (less upgrading) but we wanted to keep money in the bank for a house, for bills, for a wedding, for an E-party, for a honeymoon, for kids in the future. If we went on his 2 months salary we would feel completely irresponsible for spending so much on a RING! We could afforded total bling, but we agreed on a mutually painless percent.




Then there are people that make less than us combined with a ring twice the size...that's their decision. By the way, all those who do make money don't always correlate their e-ring with what they make. Some people have money, because they know how much to waste and how much to spend on investments that bring a higher return...if they are lucky, they are blessed with a woman who understands that it's just a ring, and not his love that correlates to size or price! (or she just has really REALLY small fingers!)