Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

L/W Ratio??

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
My intended made this statement to me last night.

"I would rather have a pear diamond that is a little short and fat than one that is long and skinny."

Would you guys consider a pear with a l/w ratio of 1.70:1 or 1.66:1 to be too long and skinny given this comment?

I am now thinking that maybe 1.60:1 should be the longest and maybe look for a 1.55:1 to stay on the shorter spectrum.

Any thoughts?
 

barry

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2001
Messages
441
Rook;

L/W ratio in fancies is but one important variable
in determining the desireability of your diamond.
In my experience a L/W of 1.5-1.58 is the
sweet range. Other important factors to consider:
1. Crown angle/height-pavilion angle
2. 4 or 6 pavilion mains (and their angles),
affects light output. The "butterfly" that many
jewelers recommend avoiding, we have
actually found, working with the BScope
tends to result in an increase in dispersion.
3. Length and width of the girdle facets on the point
facet. Critical.

Barry
www.superbcert.com
 

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
Thanks Barry,

I have done quite a bit of research on pears and feel comfortable in buy one. I am now most concerned with limiting the shape. I have found three. Assume all three are identical in every respect but l/w ratio. The first is a 1.70:1, second 1.66:1 and third 1.60:1.

Would you think a girl you would state they like a slightly more short and fat compared to a long and narrow pear, would not like the shape of a 1.70:1 or a 1.66:1?

Not really what some of you might like, but what someone who would make that statement would like.

I think they are all very nice but I am concerned that the 1.70 and 1.66 might be considered to long and narrow for her tastes.

But, how notice able is this difference between all three?
 

dimonbob

Brilliant_Rock
Trade
Joined
Dec 12, 2000
Messages
670
Hi,
Since your lady has made her wishes known, may I suggest you listen. 1.50:1 is the ideal for a pear. Anything longer tends to what she does not want. Try to find a 1.50:1 or slightly less and she will be happy. Otherwise make sure the diamond is bright.
dimonbob
 

barry

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Mar 21, 2001
Messages
441
Everything being equal as you say,
go with the 1.6:1

Barry
www.superbcert.com
 

Hest88

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
4,357
I have the same preference with ECs, so I can tell you that I would be very unhappy to have a long and skinny stone.

I took a look at some of the pears on Jonathan's (GoG's) site for a visual comparison. I'd say the 1.7 is really pushing it.

This 1.65 I find too long and skinny as well. http://www.goodoldgold.com/pear_2_01ct_e_vs2.htm

However, this 1.6 I could, with minor reservations, live with:
http://www.goodoldgold.com/pear_1_14ct_e_vs1.htm

Ideally, though, would be apprrox. a 1.5 and below, such as this one: http://www.goodoldgold.com/pear_1_89ct_e_vs1.htm

It looks really nice on the hand, and is definitely my definiton of short and fat. If you want to be really safe, stay in the 1.5 range, and possibly into the very low 1.6s.
 

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
Thanks Richard,

You read my mind. I was just coming to ask if anyone would do that for me


Any chance you could do a 1.45:1. 1.55:1. 1.65:1

Then I am going to show all the pics to her and say, which do you like/not like.

This way I will know for sure. She already has an ideal it is comming, but I don't want to show her actually pics or the actual stones. Now thanks to Rich I don't have to

 

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
By the way,

personally I like the 1.70 - 1.60. I think the 1.50 is too fat for me. Maybe the setting can either hide or accentuate the l/w ratio though.
 

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
Richard,

Thanks a lot. That really helps me. I actually just asked her based on these pictures. I think she likes the 1.55:1 to 1.60:1 ratios best. But, that is when viewing them side by side in diamonds of the same size and perfect shape and symmetry. She even said that up to 1.70:1 was ok, but admitted that she probably would not know the difference when viewing the actual diamond set in a ring.

Would you agree with that?

Would you think it would generally be difficult to see a difference between a 1.55:1 ratio and a 1.70:1 ratio when set and viewing alone?

Thanks again this will really help me.
 

Richard Sherwood

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 25, 2002
Messages
4,924
-----------
Would you think it would generally be difficult to see a difference
between a 1.55:1 ratio and a 1.70:1 ratio when set and viewing alone?
-----------

The human eye / brain is an incredible measuring mechanism capable of awesome precision in the matter of a split second. I have no doubt that it would detect the difference between a 1.55:1.00 and 1.70:1.00 ratio, both side by side (piece of cake) and viewed alone (an intuitive "sense" of dimension).

I like her preference toward the 1.55 to 1.60 dimensions. She instinctively picked out measurements that carry great elegance and beauty. Stick with that neighborhood of measurements and you can't go wrong.
 

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
So I am looking at a 1.70:1 1.04ct F/SI1 and a 1.60:1 1.14ct E/VS1.

For arguments sake assume both are equally great cuts with only the differences I mentioned. I would not really consider an E/VS1 of any real value to me since I can not really tell (I wouldn't think) the difference with my naked eye, but maybe the l/w ratio in the E/VS1 would warrant paying the extra money to make sure she is completely happy.

By the way were talking a $1900 difference in price. Obviously the 0.10ct size diff, the E instead of F and VS1 instead of SI1 play a roll in that, but only the 1.60:1 ratio compared to the 1.70:1 is what I am really concerned with.

Is it worth the extra $$$$$.
 

Richard Sherwood

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 25, 2002
Messages
4,924
Oh geez Rook. Now you had to go and throw the money variable into it. That complicates things...

$1900 sure looks pretty too. Hmmm...

I got it! If the 1.70:1.00 looks good (many look fantastic), then give her that and a $1000 cash for "anything you want" money. She'll be blown away, and you'll look like one classy guy while keeping $900 bucks in your pocket.
 

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
Thanks Rich,

You crack me up.

I am sure if she saw the two stones next to each other, she would see the difference and want the 1.14ct E/VS1 with the 1.60:1 l/w ratio, but that is not saying she would not like the other stone as well. This is my current delema. If I can get the cheeper stone and have her love it, then cudos. If there is a chance that it will not be exactly what she wants, than maybe I need to break open the piggy bank.

????

Thanks again, those pics really help.
 

oldminer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Sep 3, 2000
Messages
6,397
All the l/w ratio photos looks like a great stone. There is someone out there who would prefer each one over the others.... It is a matter of taste and personal decision, not of inherent beauty.
 

Giangi

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 23, 2003
Messages
2,530
I really like short and fat pears --1.40:1 to 1.50:1... To me 1.60:1 or more is quite long and skinny looking... I must say that both diamonds are very beautifully cut and will be gorgeus
!!!
 

oldminer

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Sep 3, 2000
Messages
6,397
I forgot to mention in my short post above that the final determination of proper L:W ratio has a lot to do with finger size and shape. Long, slender fingers lend themselves better to long slender stones. Little, short or wide fingers are more prone to go along better with a somewhat wider, less long shaped stone. It makes sense to consider the hand, finger shape and size when buying a fancy cut.

A 5 carat diamond on a large hand will look fine. On a tiny hand, it may look completely too large...Like wearing the crown jewels. Size and L;W are both important to consider along with the size and L:W of the intended wearer.
 

Rook

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
294
Ok, I spoke with her more and showed her these pics again. Thanks again Rich. Here are her comments.

1.45 too fat
1.50 ok, a little fat
1.55 good
1.60 good
1.65 ok
1.70 ok, a little long
1.75 no way.

But, she could not see much difference between two close pics.

It seems to me though that the setting can make the stone appear fatter or more skinny though. So maybe those answers need to be adjusted to visualize the setting effect.

By the way, she has about a 4 3/4 ring size and very small petite hands and fingers.

I think I am going to drive my self nuts with this. Its like I have the world figured out and someone through me a knuckle ball. She probably won't even notice the difference anyways.

Any last advice?

I am going to take her shopping. If that doesn't work, she is getting the 1.70:1 I have already found, and she better like it
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    Radiant Ruby Cluster Ring
    Radiant Ruby Cluster Ring
    Recutting And Resetting A Heirloom
    Recutting And Resetting A Heirloom
    Princess Diana: Timeless Jewelry Every Woman Should Own
    Princess Diana: Timeless Jewelry Every Woman Should Own

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top