Stone size and facet arrangement

[Circe]

Just seeking corroboration here ....

My hands have finally returned to their usual sizes and I'm wearing my original 1.5 e-ring on my left hand, and my 2.5 anniversary ring on my right. And despite the incredibly similar settings (which ... mea culpa: those of you who read my reset thread know I was thinking of keeping this setting, which plan is now being put by the wayside; it does look silly, and I'm currently strongly leaning toward's putting it in that bezel setting I'd recommended to Gypsy which she'd passed on and passed back ) they look SO DIFFERENT.

I spent the last day or two staring back and forth from one hand to the other, trying to figure out what accounted for the difference - LGFs in the mid-eighties vs. the low seventies? a high fifties table vs. a low fifties table? There's definitely a difference in size, but it doesn't account for the different impressions all on its own. I finally came to the tentative conclusion that it's just SIZE, but not stone size - facet size. Or not JUST stone size, anyway: what I'm wondering is, is it the interplay between the big facets and the carat weight? Is this like the received wisdom about asschers looking best once they're past a certain point, so you can see the windmills clearly?

Basically, I'm guessing that bigger facets on a bigger stone just look, well ... bigger.

What I'm wondering, though, is if the same is true across the board, or if it's an optical illusion caused by the settings, or my slightly differently sized left-hand and right-hand, or what. Anybody out there who has a MRB and an OEC of similar circumference want to comment?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Thye lgf ratio difference would be partly responsible partly responsible for the difference you see, especially if your old cut has such short lower facets that they do not reach under the table at all; that totally changes the look of a diamond. But carat weight would also be a huge contibutor as you intuit. Larger diamond have larger facets, both real and virtual. The facet pattern is the same no matter the carat weight, so the end result is bigger weight = bolder chunker flash. This is one reason why I appreciate large diamonds -- I really like how you can appreciate the faceting so much more.

Can you post a macro image looking into the tables of your two stones? That might allow us to comment even more specifically.

 

[SweetAsscher]

Your reasoning sounds completely plausible.
Isn't that why some people only prefer the modified rounds in larger sizes? Like the Star129 has been called too busy in the smaller sizes because that number of facets look tiny but in a larger carat weight the same number of facets looks fine?