Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

What is the smallest carat size you would wear?

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

luckynumber

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
665
ok, let''s turn this on its head....

is there a carat size under which would not wear a solitaire, or do you rock any size?
 
Because of my fat hands I prefer not to wear solitaire ring under .25 ct but, you know, if it''s melees total it''s not a problem!
16.gif
 
I'm first and foremost a size girl, so if a diamond was out of budget I'd go for less pricey coloured gem. I like the look of a 5mm stone on my finger
1.gif
 
If it''s a beautiful stone, I''ll wear it no matter how small it is.
 
Ha, this seems like it could end badly, but I''ll play!

I really like smaller diamonds in more modern settings. I really love Phoenixgirl''s .25 she got for a push present. It has a wider band that''s almost the same width as the diamond or even the exact same width. If I were going to wear a smaller diamond, that''s exactly how I would want it set. Here''s the link to her thread: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-push-present.131640/
 
I''ll wear any size! I really love the way older settings show off smaller diamonds, as well as rings like the one Thing2 linked to.
 
Date: 4/23/2010 4:32:30 PM
Author: thing2of2
Ha, this seems like it could end badly, but I''ll play!

I really like smaller diamonds in more modern settings. I really love Phoenixgirl''s .25 she got for a push present. It has a wider band that''s almost the same width as the diamond or even the exact same width. If I were going to wear a smaller diamond, that''s exactly how I would want it set. Here''s the link to her thread: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-push-present.131640/
Click to expand...
That is a lovely ring.

I have no problem with smaller stones. In fact, I love small stones as long as the setting is appropriate (but, then again, this applies to large stones as well). A balanced ring is always lovely.
 
I love dainty gems and I adore the under 1 ct thread. Smallest carat size? Its hard to say an exact carat weight without a particular setting in mind, even if it is a solitare. Chenry on Etsy has a gorgeous setting for a 4mm stone that is just perfect.
 
I''m sorry, I don''t get the point of this thread. Are you just trying to be offensive or do you genuinely not understand how this question can potentially be offensive and demeaning to some?
 
It might be potentially offensive, but it's a legitimate question I think. There is a "I know I don't like" thread, we all have different preferences in what we like to wear. She didn't specifically mention engagement ring, and I know I for one buy a lot of rings for myself, and I usually only consider colored stones over a certain size for solitaires.,

I'm choosing to interpret this question as excluding engagement rings since those have a lot of sentiment etc beyond my general aesthetic preference (which is what I go on when buying a ring for myself). If my DH had given me a .05 ct I1 solitaire when he proposed, I'd still wear it and smile when I saw it.

That being said, I love delicate rings. My favorite RHR is a solitaire emerald cut that's around .25 ct.

I recently saw a gorgeous 3mm hauyne with a stunning blue color, but couldn't figure out how I'd set it, so I passed.
 
Hmm. This one requires some thought for me. I used to be all about size but I think I''m over it? I''ve tried on some really lovely bezel settings with .25-.50 stones in them and I really like the way they look.

SO and I have talked about stone shapes and sizes here and there and I know what his comfort level is. It''s not huge, but he is way more into cut and color than I''ve ever been so I am pretty confident that if he proposes it won''t be with anything less than gorgeous no matter what size it is.
 
er, no it's not meant to be offensive!

i LOVE smaller stones. just because a stone is small, doesn't make it less beautiful.

just wondered if people ever think stones are too small for their finger, in their opinion, and whether there is any reason behind it. and would anything change their opinions?

i would like MORE discussion about smaller stones, not less.

ETA: i'm not a size girl just for the sake of it. my e-ring has already been bought by my FF and i have no idea what size it is. i'll be wearing it whether it's 0.05ct or 5cts.
 
Date: 4/23/2010 3:51:31 PM
Author:luckynumber
ok, let''s turn this on its head....

is there a carat size under which would not wear a solitaire, or do you rock any size?
Click to expand...
I like my diamonds to be .5ct or over. I''m a big girl and I think smaller strones get lost on my size 8 hand. I do wear a .5ct heart shaped diamond on my right hand and my 16 year old wears a matching one. It''s sentimental and it doesn''t need to be any larger.
 
I really like how rare and precious a small, fiery diamond looks. One of my nicest rings has a 0.15ct stone in an abstract gold swirl. Very fluid, very elegant. I have no minimum or maximum size, it just has to be beautiful.
 
My ering is all of .48cts but haloed, and I think it''s perfect. I also think my mom''s .27ct ering is a great size because it sparkles like mad! I wouldn''t wear smller than that I guess.
 
I don't really know. A friend has a very small solitaie - probably 0.1-0.15ct?? It's from her grandma and is in a gorgeous art deco setting that I would totally wear.

If it was just a regular six prong type solitaire, probably not less than 0.4ct. For a smaller stone I would want a setting to show it off rather than a traditional solitaire.
 
20 carats.
31.gif



Just kidding. I like all diamonds. Prefer bigger ones, but a small stone that is gorgeous... fine by me!
 
I like talking about "smaller" stones
1.gif
My engagement stone is a .44, it is a family stone. I love it, I think it''s great for everyday wear.

I find myself taken with all different sizes of diamonds, so I guess I don''t have a minimum size. I just like whatever''s pretty!
 
Date: 4/23/2010 4:14:17 PM
Author: Madam Bijoux
If it''s a beautiful stone, I''ll wear it no matter how small it is.
Click to expand...

+1!
 
I have short fat fingers so I NEED
31.gif
the larger look. If I had to have a 1ct..then it has to be Halo''d.
 
My e-ring is .35 and I don't think I'd really want anything smaller. But I love it paired with my wedding band. If I was always going to wear it alone, I think I'd go with .5ish (or slightly more or less)...but the cut and setting style make a big difference, so that's not an absolute preference.

ETA: I wear a 4.75-5, so I think more delicate rings look better on me -- I'd be overwhelmed by something too big.
 
I adore antique rings and the majority of those showcase smaller stones. Back in "the day" they used to have all sorts of clever settings that made even the tiniest stone wearable on larger hands. I have one of my grandmother''s rings that probably has a .25ish Transitional stone set into it -- but because of its larger filagree setting the ring looks okay on my size 10ish ring finger. Now I have a loose .31 OEC stone that looks like it could NEVER work on my beefy fingers ... but I guess it could, in the *right* setting! If I didn''t know about the wide variety of tricky antique settings available, I''d probably believe it was too small for my extremely large hands/fingers.
 
As a prong-set solitaire, I think 0.5 ct is the smallest I''d like, but I''d take smaller than 0.5 in a more interesting setting (tension set for eg). They are just beautiful. One of my friends has about a 0.30 ct rb in a semi-bezel that is just gorgeous.
 
This is the ring I mentioned .. not sure if I''ve posted before ... you can see how the filagree kind of makes the ring itself larger while the stone floats in the middle. Unfortunately you can also see the poor chipped sapphire that needs replacing someday. Its not obvious in real life ... but in this magnified pix it looms
15.gif
.

transitionalringwithribbon.jpg
 
HI:

Damani has the most elegant setting for a marquise stone--that wouldn''t "work" if bigger than 1ctw. IMHO--I could totally rock that. Sometimes less is more.

cheers--Sharon
 
I have this tiny little oval ring that is a very nice clarity and about .10 or .15 and I love it! I don''t think there is any such thing as too small.
 
Depends on how it is set. Standard six or four prong ''tiffany solitaire''... probably 5.5 mm or more in a non-round, rounds don''t look good on my hands unless the setting makes them look square. I''d easily wear a .20 diamond in the right antique setting like Deco demonstrated.
 
Honestly, I would probably never say no to any diamond, as long as it wasn''t a dead,heavily included, or otherwise crappy...
 
I don''t think I have a lower limit :)
 
One of my favourite looks is a .25ct in a Tiffany etoile!
30.gif
I think that is as small as I would go in a solitaire.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top