shape
carat
color
clarity
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. PriceScope Upgrade Completed
    For issues, questions and comments click the link below
    https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/pricescope-upgraded-comments-and-issues.229551/

    Dismiss Notice

Visual Difference between a 1.5 and 1.8 stone?

Discussion in 'RockyTalky' started by nelly81, Feb 28, 2012.

  1. nelly81
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    by nelly81 » Feb 28, 2012
    Hi there,

    Just wondering if there is a visual size difference (once set) between a 1.5 stone (measuring 7.4m) versus a 1.8 stone (measuring approx 7.8/7.9)?

    The difference in size seems so slight that I cant even imagine it being visible to justify the $$$ increase?

    Any thoughts or photos on the size differnece?

    Thanks! :P
     
  2. YT
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    4,105
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    by YT » Feb 28, 2012
    I would like to know also :)
     
  3. thbmok
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    891
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    by thbmok » Feb 28, 2012
    I have no pics comparing the two, but yes IMO it's definitely noticeable. In my experience I see a memorable difference in size as long as there's at least a 0.3mm increase in diameter for stones up to 2ct.
     
  4. thbmok
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    891
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    by thbmok » Feb 28, 2012
    Here's a video from GOG comparing 1.50ct vs 1.70ct vs 2.00ct: http://vimeo.com/26931860

    The size difference between 1.5ct and 1.8ct is more like the size difference between the 1.70ct and 2.00ct in the video.
     
  5. nelly81
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    by nelly81 » Feb 28, 2012
    Thanks,......based on the video - there doesnt seem to be much of a difference between 1.5 and 1.7?

    or is it just my eyes?? :wink2:
     
  6. hearts-arrows_girl
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    1,045
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    by hearts-arrows_girl » Feb 28, 2012
    I saw a difference. And you would be going up to a 1.80 not a 1.70 right? So there would definitely be a difference.
     
  7. Christina...
    Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    5,028
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2011
    by Christina... » Feb 28, 2012
    I agree. If the two stones you are considering are cut similarly, then you should be able to see the size difference. I have seen a well cut 1ct beside a not well cut 1.5 and couldn't see a huge difference because of the poor cut quality. So, if all things are equal you should be able to clearly see a size difference.

    EDIT: Although you should be able to see the difference in size, it still may not be enough for you justify spending the additional $. I found that a 1.5 gives ME enough finger coverage, and that the cost of getting into a 1.75 vs the minimal size differance wouldn't be enough for ME to make the additional investment.
     
  8. nelly81
    Rough_Rock

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    by nelly81 » Feb 28, 2012
    Thanks everyone!!

    Depending the price difference vs the visual difference, I was comparing a 1.5 v a 1.7 AND a 1.5 v 1.8.

    I know the minimum spread (or face up appearance) of a 1.5 stone should be 7.4mm.

    What the minimum measurements for a 1.7 and a 1.8 stone?

    Christina - your cut comments are so interesting! I had never thought of that. Yes - I would be comparing stones of equal cuts - AGS000 or GIA triple ex!

    Thanks!
     
  9. Amys Bling
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    11,025
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    by Amys Bling » Feb 28, 2012
    I think you have I way out the cost difference. That would be my deciding factor
     
  10. thbmok
    Brilliant_Rock

    Messages:
    891
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    by thbmok » Feb 28, 2012
    For AGS 0/GIA Ex, if you look through PS search, 1.7ct is generally around 7.7mm and 1.8ct is typically around 7.8mm.
     
  11. ChrisES
    Shiny_Rock

    Messages:
    220
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    by ChrisES » Feb 28, 2012
    I read somewhere that .1 mm is the smallest distance that the human eye can readily distinguish, assuming normal vision and viewing.

    But since you probably aren't wearing two similar stones of such size right next to each other, I wouldn't worry about a difference as small as .1.

    But you're talking about .4 to .5, which is definitely noticeable.
     
  12. diamondseeker2006
    Super_Ideal_Rock

    Messages:
    50,423
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    by diamondseeker2006 » Feb 28, 2012
    I have had a 7.6mm and a 7.45mm diamond and I could absolutely see the difference. No question that a 1.8 would be noticeably larger than a 1.5. A 1.8 is a good range for someone who really wants 2 cts but whose budget needs to say under 2 cts for the specs they want.
     

Share This Page