What shape looks biggest???

[zhuzhu]

Any consensus on which shaped (cut) of a single diamond (per same carat weight) looks BIGGEST in a simple setting?

Thanks!

 

[ladykemma]

marquise and pears

 

[zhuzhu]

Unfortunately neither strikes my "fancy". What are the 3rd and 4th in ranking? Thanks@!

 

[anne_h]

Oval is up there. Then probably rounds.

Anne

 

[ladykemma]

ooohh, ovals! i have a 25 point round, a 28 point oval and a 29 point marquise. guess whick looks biggest? the oval !

Oval gets my vote.

 

[zhuzhu]

My favorite is the emerald (not asscher), what ranking does it receive?

 

[diamondfan]

I think ovals or rounds...

 

[jaz464]

Date: 4/3/2007 6:29:27 PM
Author: zhuzhu
My favorite is the emerald (not asscher), what ranking does it receive?

Sorry, ECs do not face up big for their weight

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/3/2007 6:29:27 PM
Author: zhuzhu
My favorite is the emerald (not asscher), what ranking does it receive?

I wouldn''t rank it very high in the "looks big" category - but there are other factors to consider. If you like emeralds, get an emerald. If you want it to look huge then get an oval or marquise. To *some* extent its all negligible anyway - just get the shape you enjoy.

 

[FireGoddess]

ECs, asschers, and cushions *generally* look small for their weight. There are exceptions though, but in general, this applies.

 

[kcoursolle]

I''m saying what everyone else is at this point...but ovals, pears, mq tend to look large as long as they are cut not too deep. Rounds look bigger than princesses, asschers, etc. In general though, a lot is determined by the depth of the stone and the girdle thickness. For example my radiant has a depth of 60% and a thin girdle and it looks much larger than *most* rounds of the same carat weight while the average radiant with a 70% depth looks much smaller than the typical round of the same carat weight.

 

[JenStone]

Hi zhuzhu - you may have seen this before but here is a size comparison chart: http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf

To those who say ovals look the largest....is this due to an optical illusion? Looking at the chart above, it almost looks like the princess looks larger than a round! (In general, the square shapes look larger than the round ones.) Is it different in real life?

 

[justjulia]

Date: 4/3/2007 8:22:45 PM
Author: kcoursolle
I''m saying what everyone else is at this point...but ovals, pears, mq tend to look large as long as they are cut not too deep. Rounds look bigger than princesses, asschers, etc. In general though, a lot is determined by the depth of the stone and the girdle thickness. For example my radiant has a depth of 60% and a thin girdle and it looks much larger than *most* rounds of the same carat weight while the average radiant with a 70% depth looks much smaller than the typical round of the same carat weight.

ditto

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 4/4/2007 9:01:07 AM
Author: JenStone
Hi zhuzhu - you may have seen this before but here is a size comparison chart: http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf


To those who say ovals look the largest....is this due to an optical illusion? Looking at the chart above, it almost looks like the princess looks larger than a round! (In general, the square shapes look larger than the round ones.) Is it different in real life?

I don''t think that chart is realistic for the fancy shapes. For example, it says a 1c cushion is 5.5mm. Mine is only .81 and measures 5.94 x. 5.16. So I think it''s best just for a reference for size, but I don''t that it isn''t too accurate for most shapes. If you see IRL a princess and a round of the same carat weight the round always looks bigger to me. And ovals always look bigger IRL too, but this chart doesn''t reflect that...

 

[Tacori E-ring]

Date: 4/3/2007 6:16:17 PM
Author: ladykemma
marquise and pears

Agreed! Both my mom and MIL MQs (1.2-1.4) look as large as my 1.72 EC (IMHO)

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 4/4/2007 1:02:04 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/4/2007 9:01:07 AM
Author: JenStone
Hi zhuzhu - you may have seen this before but here is a size comparison chart: http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf


To those who say ovals look the largest....is this due to an optical illusion? Looking at the chart above, it almost looks like the princess looks larger than a round! (In general, the square shapes look larger than the round ones.) Is it different in real life?

I don''t think that chart is realistic for the fancy shapes. For example, it says a 1c cushion is 5.5mm. Mine is only .81 and measures 5.94 x. 5.16. So I think it''s best just for a reference for size, but I don''t that it isn''t too accurate for most shapes. If you see IRL a princess and a round of the same carat weight the round always looks bigger to me. And ovals always look bigger IRL too, but this chart doesn''t reflect that...

actually if you take the average of your length and width it comes to 5.55 LOL I don''t know why it assumes that cushions are square and radiants are long... but whatever! I used the emerald outline and mine was basically spot on for size.

One of the reasons that marquise and ovals look large for their weight is because they can be relatively shallow cuts.

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 4/4/2007 5:07:09 PM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 4/4/2007 1:02:04 PM

Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/4/2007 9:01:07 AM

Author: JenStone

Hi zhuzhu - you may have seen this before but here is a size comparison chart: http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf



To those who say ovals look the largest....is this due to an optical illusion? Looking at the chart above, it almost looks like the princess looks larger than a round! (In general, the square shapes look larger than the round ones.) Is it different in real life?

I don''t think that chart is realistic for the fancy shapes. For example, it says a 1c cushion is 5.5mm. Mine is only .81 and measures 5.94 x. 5.16. So I think it''s best just for a reference for size, but I don''t that it isn''t too accurate for most shapes. If you see IRL a princess and a round of the same carat weight the round always looks bigger to me. And ovals always look bigger IRL too, but this chart doesn''t reflect that...

actually if you take the average of your length and width it comes to 5.55 LOL I don''t know why it assumes that cushions are square and radiants are long... but whatever! I used the emerald outline and mine was basically spot on for size.


One of the reasons that marquise and ovals look large for their weight is because they can be relatively shallow cuts.

Cehra, you are totally right if you average them it comes to 5.5. BUT my cushion is a .81, which is 19 points away from a carat and according to the chart a CARAT should be 5.5. Weird huh? I just think that some shapes are misrepresented, which is why princesses look bigger than ovals on the chart but not in real life.

 

[JohnQuixote]

Date: 4/4/2007 1:02:04 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 4/4/2007 9:01:07 AM
Author: JenStone
Hi zhuzhu - you may have seen this before but here is a size comparison chart: http://images.amazon.com/media/i3d/01/actual-diamond-size.pdf

To those who say ovals look the largest....is this due to an optical illusion? Looking at the chart above, it almost looks like the princess looks larger than a round! (In general, the square shapes look larger than the round ones.) Is it different in real life?

I don't think that chart is realistic for the fancy shapes. For example, it says a 1c cushion is 5.5mm. Mine is only .81 and measures 5.94 x. 5.16. So I think it's best just for a reference for size, but I don't that it isn't too accurate for most shapes. If you see IRL a princess and a round of the same carat weight the round always looks bigger to me. And ovals always look bigger IRL too, but this chart doesn't reflect that...

Correct. Cut - not carat weight - determines spread, especially with fancy shapes. For example, a PS search for 1.5 princess cuts today turns up avg face-up spreads from 6.20 all the way up to 6.77, and the most 'square' candidates at that weight are in the 6.40 range. Of course that could change tomorrow. There is more variation as size increases.

Use the spread information on that chart when making comparisons. Don't assume the carat weight will match.