What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall set?

[momma2boys]

Hi!

I was just thinking about this, so thought I'd see what others think as well. What do you think catches people's eyes more when looking at someone's ring finger - the size of the center stone or the set as a whole? Sparkle factor should be taken into consideration as well. For me, I love my set and I love my diamond (even though it's not nearly as large as so many on this forum). I hope that others who see my set and diamond think it's as beautiful as I do. However, I am realistic and know that size does matter, hence the reason why I love so many large stones that I see here. I would also like to think though that a beautiful stone, regardless of the size, combined with a beautiful engagement ring and wedding band(s) will also have a decent wow factor.

What do you all think? I'm sure it depends on many things and everyone will have a different opinion, but WHATEVER, I want to ask anyways!!

 

[SB621]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

I think it is the whole set. You can have a beautiful diamond but it will look underwhelming in a simple set or tacky in a large ornate setting. You have to find middle ground with a good settings. Where as diamonds you can dress up to hide flaws in cut or clarity. Color which I don't consider a flaw can also be played up or down in the right setting.

This of course is coming from the girl who loves settings though and thinks that is the most important part of the ring!

 

[heididdl]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

I don't know about the size part of the question but when you see an ideal cut diamond regardless of how it is packaged you realize you are seeing something special. I like both over the top as well as simple settings but the sparkle of that center stone does it for me.


My stone is GIA certified H si1 but it is so clear you can see right through to my finger. People stop me all the time because it is so clear. So I am happy that I have an ideal cut stone. Not that I care but I do know others appreciate it.

 

[momma2boys]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

Thanks for chiming in! I agree with both of you! I think there are several things that play into what catches someone's eye. But I definitely think there are certain more obvious factors that grab your attention immediately. There is no question that a large center stone will do that, but I also think that both a well-cut stone, and the set/setting can have that affect as well. And I'm like you, SB621 - I am really into settings and think they are what makes the center stone shine when in the appropriate setting.

 

[msop04]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

I think it is the whole set. You can have a beautiful diamond but it will look underwhelming in a simple set or tacky in a large ornate setting. You have to find middle ground with a good settings. Where as diamonds you can dress up to hide flaws in cut or clarity. Color which I don't consider a flaw can also be played up or down in the right setting.

This of course is coming from the girl who loves settings though and thinks that is the most important part of the ring!

+1

Yeah, I used to think otherwise, but I noticed my eyes going to the "whole look" more often than not. Big stones, small stones, nice stones, not-so-nice stones... it's the sparkly spark-a-liscious-ness (it could be a word!! ) that catches my eye -- EVERY TIME!!

 

[Sidius]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

For me it's the size of the diamond that catches my eye and "wows" me. I'm going to be purchasing an e-ring in the next couple months for my gf, so they catch my eye these days more than they used to and the size of the diamond is always the biggest wow factor. Of course the cut/sparkle of that diamond plays an almost equal role but for me, unless the setting/ring is extra special, I don't notice it much. That's of course just my opinion.

 

[Upgradable]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

It may be because I'm a Pricescoper, but I always look at the featured stone first!! Were I starting again, I'd choose the best stone I could get for the budget and set it in a quality, but simple setting. Later on I'd consider updating/upgrading the setting. After all (I've been married 26 years) styles change. Can you imagine wearing the same pair of shoes the rest of your life?

 

[GreenBling]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

My smaller stone together with the halo is bigger in dimension than my solitaire. When I asked DH which one catches his eyes he said the haloed is blingier from a distance but up close the solitaire wins all.

 

[heididdl]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

did you see Holly madison's ring. Does this illustrate a fabulous center stone with a fabulous setting makes your eyes shine. Some people think this is so over the top. I wouldn't turn it down if my DH gave it to me

 

[Tekate]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

I think it is the glitter, or bling or dazzle.. whether it's the whole package or just a solitaire, so I guess it's how good the cut is.. My .02 then.

 

[missy]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

My smaller stone together with the halo is bigger in dimension than my solitaire. When I asked DH which one catches his eyes he said the haloed is blingier from a distance but up close the solitaire wins all.

I agree with this. From a distance the whole ring (setting and stone) is what catches my eye but from up close it's the stone that catches my attention. But it's the whole package that completes the beauty of the finished piece.

 

[momma2boys]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

My smaller stone together with the halo is bigger in dimension than my solitaire. When I asked DH which one catches his eyes he said the haloed is blingier from a distance but up close the solitaire wins all.

I agree with this. From a distance the whole ring (setting and stone) is what catches my eye but from up close it's the stone that catches my attention. But it's the whole package that completes the beauty of the finished piece.

+1!
Part of me wonders if it's the finger coverage that also is noticed? That would go along with the halo concept - from far away you notice the finger coverage and bling-factor, but up close it's the diamond that you're paying attention to?

 

[CharmyPoo]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

The whole set but I am a huge setting girl. A diamond's beauty can be hidden by a poor setting.

 

[Laila619]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

I think the whole set is what makes it noticeable. Someone could have a smaller diamond but a much blingier set than someone with a large diamond in a plain setting. It's why I have a love/hate relationship with solitaires--they are so elegant and classy, but I feel like they are too plain for me sometimes.

 

[distracts]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

Overall set until you reach about 4 carats, at which point I think center stone size becomes obviously big. I mean. Not that I'm calling under 4 carats small or anything, but I don't go "wow" until about that point.

I really think the most eye catching thing is pretty color. My friend who also has a sapphire e-ring and I always talk about the RIDICULOUS number of compliments we get on our rings. I get a lot of compliments on my other colored stone rings as well. When I wear my diamond rings or my (very nice) CZ rings, no compliments whatsoever EVER.

And this tracks perfectly with my personal experience of pretty much ignoring solitaires unless they're honkers or particularly exquisitely made (often hard to tell from a distance), but usually trying to get a closer look at anything more intricate and always trying to get a closer look at colorful rings. Anything that is "usual" is seen enough to blend into the background and not be interesting to a random observer.

 

[Rhea]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

Size is what catches my eye first, but it doesn't hold my attention for very long whereas the set does. I saw a very large diamond on the tube the other day, but because of the way her hand was angled and where I was seated in relation to her I couldn't actually see her solitaire very well. The many diamonds on a set catch and hold my attention because no matter which way the hand is angled there's always something to look at!

 

[lknvrb4]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

The size of a stone is what catches my eye first.

 

[Daisyoz]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

It may be because I'm a Pricescoper, but I always look at the featured stone first!! Were I starting again, I'd choose the best stone I could get for the budget and set it in a quality, but simple setting. Later on I'd consider updating/upgrading the setting. After all (I've been married 26 years) styles change. Can you imagine wearing the same pair of shoes the rest of your life?

+1

 

[Acinom]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

For me it's the complete package. I love beautiful setting designs and I love stacks. As long as it is 'special', I will notice it. And yes, sometimes the size is an important factor.

 

[Laila619]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

Overall set until you reach about 4 carats, at which point I think center stone size becomes obviously big. I mean. Not that I'm calling under 4 carats small or anything, but I don't go "wow" until about that point.

I really think the most eye catching thing is pretty color. My friend who also has a sapphire e-ring and I always talk about the RIDICULOUS number of compliments we get on our rings. I get a lot of compliments on my other colored stone rings as well. When I wear my diamond rings or my (very nice) CZ rings, no compliments whatsoever EVER.

And this tracks perfectly with my personal experience of pretty much ignoring solitaires unless they're honkers or particularly exquisitely made (often hard to tell from a distance), but usually trying to get a closer look at anything more intricate and always trying to get a closer look at colorful rings. Anything that is "usual" is seen enough to blend into the background and not be interesting to a random observer.

Interesting! That's been my experience too.

 

[soxfan]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

In my opinion, the overall set. I love my center stone, but think it would have been underwhelming as a solitaire. I am so glad I went with the Emilya.

 

[iluvshinythings]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

I probably make ring contact before I make eye contact. I can't help it! I just love looking at rings. Big, small, sparkly, dull or whatever. I'm like a man in a strip club when I see a ring. I especially like checking rings out while driving because sunlight does such wonderful things. I know that's so bad....

My eyes are attracted to sparkle more than size and then I get around to checking out the whole set. I also pay special attention to colored stones and anything that looks antique since I love those.

 

[msop04]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

My smaller stone together with the halo is bigger in dimension than my solitaire. When I asked DH which one catches his eyes he said the haloed is blingier from a distance but up close the solitaire wins all.

I agree with this. From a distance the whole ring (setting and stone) is what catches my eye but from up close it's the stone that catches my attention. But it's the whole package that completes the beauty of the finished piece.

+1!
Part of me wonders if it's the finger coverage that also is noticed? That would go along with the halo concept - from far away you notice the finger coverage and bling-factor, but up close it's the diamond that you're paying attention to?

+2
I agree with all of this. The sparkle lures me in, then my eyes gravitate to the center stone -- ahhhhhh, how I love diamonds! Finger coverage is a big deal to me too, because let's face it... if it covers your finger, how could it possibly go unnoticed??

 

[lambskin]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

For me it is the center stone. For me halos or other ornate settings detract and can make a stone appear smaller. But I am very conservative re ER Settings-solitare or three stone.

 

[Christina...]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

I think for me, it could be either, a large center stone or the appearance of lot's of bling both catch my eye. If I'm lucky enough to get a closer look though, it's the total package that I appreciate the most.

 

[Sky56]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

The overall look. I wear a beautiful GIA 1.12 F VS1. Hardly anybody complimented me on my ring until I changed the setting. Now I gets lots of positive attention for its beauty. The current setting really frames the stone and makes it zing.

 

[momma2boys]

Re: What's more eye-catching - center stone size or overall

This is all SO interesting!! I thought hands down the majority of people would say that the size of the center stone catches their eye more than anything. Some have said that but most are saying that it's the setting that really makes the diamond look like a star or a dud, as well as the total package of everything together - diamond size, diamond quality, setting, etc. And I like the input from people who like colored stones.

It all does make sense though. My SIL has a diamond in the 1.2-3 range but it's set in an average-made Tiffany bezet replica...the diamond doesn't sparkle optimally and it looks smaller than it is. There is no wow-factor.