Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Whats the smallest in diamond size you could go?

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
So, what carat size is TOO small for your taste (on your own hand of course)?

There are always questions about what is TOO big but never really about whats TOO small.

I have heard people make comments like, "thats is way too big!" but would you ever walk up to someone and say "that is way too small"...?

I have chunky fingers...so I think anything below 1.5 carats would look too small.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
I don't think there is such a thing as too small a diamond as long as it has sparkle and scintillation. I would wear a small diamond if that's all we could afford.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
If I can still walk straight and upright while it's on my hand, the diamond is just right. ;))

The thing with big diamonds is that it really depends on their shape, in my opinion. I really don't find RBs over a certain size all that attractive, probably somewhere around 3 cts is the cutoff for me. I also think RB rings that cover the entire finger (either with the stone itself or with a halo) look very cocktail-ish to me, and maybe even a bit gaudy. (THIS IS ALL MY OWN OPINION, PEOPLE! Please don't be offended if you have a honker of an RB on your hand. If you do, take solace in the fact that you could use it to knock me out if we ever meet. :cheeky: )

However, I think fancy shapes look amazing in very large sizes, even if they cover the entire finger and beyond.

I could easily (and happily) wear a huge fancy cut everyday.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
28,715
As long as they have sexy colors I can go down to 8-points.

Screen shot 2011-05-08 at 3.08.15 PM.png
 

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
Haven|1304892482|2915625 said:
If I can still walk straight and upright while it's on my hand, the diamond is just right. ;))

The thing with big diamonds is that it really depends on their shape, in my opinion. I really don't find RBs over a certain size all that attractive, probably somewhere around 3 cts is the cutoff for me. I also think RB rings that cover the entire finger (either with the stone itself or with a halo) look very cocktail-ish to me, and maybe even a bit gaudy. (THIS IS ALL MY OWN OPINION, PEOPLE! Please don't be offended if you have a honker of an RB on your hand. If you do, take solace in the fact that you could use it to knock me out if we ever meet. :cheeky: )

However, I think fancy shapes look amazing in very large sizes, even if they cover the entire finger and beyond.

I could easily (and happily) wear a huge fancy cut everyday.

I agree but I think that it depends on the cut for small diamonds too.

I think people tend to be...how do I say this....much more "careful' when talking about small diamonds.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
Autumn--I can see that people may be more careful when talking about small diamonds. However, I really do think small diamonds are beautiful, and while I obviously chose to wear a larger diamond because we could afford it, I wouldn't have a problem wearing a small diamond because for me, there really is not such thing as a "too small" diamond.

I agree that cut matters in smaller diamonds, too. I'm not a big fan of RBs in general, but I do love my eternity band wedding ring, which has 7 point RBs in it, and if we could have only afforded a small stone, say around .25 ct, I might have opted for a bezeled RB. My favorite stones are cushions, but I haven't seen many very small cushions, so I don't think I'd have had the same options in that size.

I will say that I'm not a big fan of very small prong-set diamonds, I much prefer a smaller diamond embedded into the band, or bezeled. I think it's a metal-to-stone ratio for me, and with very small stones the prongs are sometimes overwhelming.

Kenny--I will never tire of looking at your beautiful colored diamonds. I would be tempted to keep them all together in that case, the colors look so amazing grouped like that.

ETA: I think people are more careful when discussing small diamonds because some have budgets that only allow for small stones, and thus it would be in bad taste (in my opinion) to criticize the *size* of the stone in such a case.

That being said, I still like small stones, and I find some of the smaller engagement rings to be so very elegant. One of my favorite rings is AlloAmie's ring, and her stone isn't that large:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-new-set-does-this-look-ok.115349/
 

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
Haven|1304894761|2915658 said:
Autumn--I can see that people may be more careful when talking about small diamonds.

But essentially what I'm wondering is WHY people are more careful? Why do people feel its ok to be much more honest about larger diamonds than smaller ones? I've noticed that a lot of people who do post their E-rings that are smaller usually start out by saying "this isn't as large as some of the PS diamonds..." and its almost like people feel the need to defend their smaller stones.

I too, think that any diamond is beautiful. But, the question I originally asked...doesn't involve if you can or can't afford it.

So, what is the smallest you would go? Let's take money out of the equation completely.


ETA: Isn't it distasteful either way?
 

rosetta

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
3,417
I got 0.3 carats in my ears, and 2.6 carat on my finger.

I'm happy with all sizes!
 

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
rosetta|1304895280|2915669 said:
I got 0.3 carats in my ears, and 2.6 carat on my finger.

I'm happy with all sizes!
Ok so, what is the smallest you would go on your finger?
 

rosetta

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
3,417
Ok money no object.

I like any size from 0.5 to 3 carat RB on my finger.

Smaller than 0.5 ct: I would wear a marquise set east-west

Bigger than 3 ct: emerald, cushion or asscher
 

Amys Bling

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
11,025
Haven|1304894761|2915658 said:
Autumn--I can see that people may be more careful when talking about small diamonds. However, I really do think small diamonds are beautiful, and while I obviously chose to wear a larger diamond because we could afford it, I wouldn't have a problem wearing a small diamond because for me, there really is not such thing as a "too small" diamond.

I agree that cut matters in smaller diamonds, too. I'm not a big fan of RBs in general, but I do love my eternity band wedding ring, which has 7 point RBs in it, and if we could have only afforded a small stone, say around .25 ct, I might have opted for a bezeled RB. My favorite stones are cushions, but I haven't seen many very small cushions, so I don't think I'd have had the same options in that size.

I will say that I'm not a big fan of very small prong-set diamonds, I much prefer a smaller diamond embedded into the band, or bezeled. I think it's a metal-to-stone ratio for me, and with very small stones the prongs are sometimes overwhelming.
Kenny--I will never tire of looking at your beautiful colored diamonds. I would be tempted to keep them all together in that case, the colors look so amazing grouped like that.

ETA: I think people are more careful when discussing small diamonds because some have budgets that only allow for small stones, and thus it would be in bad taste (in my opinion) to criticize the *size* of the stone in such a case.
That being said, I still like small stones, and I find some of the smaller engagement rings to be so very elegant. One of my favorite rings is AlloAmie's ring, and her stone isn't that large:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-new-set-does-this-look-ok.115349/

I totally agree with these statements!!

First of all, if my FI and I could only afford a .25 RB stone (which is what my mom has and all they could afford in 1980)...I would wear it proudly, so I guess no diamond is too small if it is representative of the love and commitment, and what we could afford.

If i was wearing a smaller diamond, I too would prefer NOT to set it in prongs, but I would most likely halo a RB stone in a cushion shaped halo, or bezel it, as I think that helps with size and don't overpower the stone in a negative way.

I also agree that many people may hestitate to answer for fear that those with smaller budgets or diamonds will take the responses negatively and personally.

So- let's say that I have unlimited money and was buying MYSELF a diamond for fun... I would look for something in the .50 range and halo it- maybe with a pink sapphire/rose gold halo. But that is me, and if I was buying a stone for fun and looking for a smaller stone, I think .50 is a nice looking size on my hand.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
28,715
Thanks.
Here's a newer pic of all 10 in the current Kennyllection.
It still qualifies for this small-diamond thread since the average weight is only 0.22 ct.

We all know that size isn't everything. :Up_to_something:
How it makes you feel is the main thing.

Small diamonds can inspire your heart too.

Screen shot 2011-05-08 at 4.41.15 PM.png
 

Lady_Disdain

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
3,988
People tend to be more careful when talking about small diamonds because it often isn't a matter of choice. If you can afford a 3ct diamond, you can choose a 2ct if you think it looks better. If you love a 1ct but can only afford a 0.5ct, then you are out of luck.

I think it is all about the design. I wear a little 0.2ct a lot - it is set with the most delicate of prong to a band that is the exact same width, so it even stacks nicely. It is worn alone, with a black onyx band for an art deco vibe, with other bands and so on.
 

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
Amys Bling|1304898144|2915679 said:
Haven|1304894761|2915658 said:
Autumn--I can see that people may be more careful when talking about small diamonds. However, I really do think small diamonds are beautiful, and while I obviously chose to wear a larger diamond because we could afford it, I wouldn't have a problem wearing a small diamond because for me, there really is not such thing as a "too small" diamond.

I agree that cut matters in smaller diamonds, too. I'm not a big fan of RBs in general, but I do love my eternity band wedding ring, which has 7 point RBs in it, and if we could have only afforded a small stone, say around .25 ct, I might have opted for a bezeled RB. My favorite stones are cushions, but I haven't seen many very small cushions, so I don't think I'd have had the same options in that size.

I will say that I'm not a big fan of very small prong-set diamonds, I much prefer a smaller diamond embedded into the band, or bezeled. I think it's a metal-to-stone ratio for me, and with very small stones the prongs are sometimes overwhelming.
Kenny--I will never tire of looking at your beautiful colored diamonds. I would be tempted to keep them all together in that case, the colors look so amazing grouped like that.

ETA: I think people are more careful when discussing small diamonds because some have budgets that only allow for small stones, and thus it would be in bad taste (in my opinion) to criticize the *size* of the stone in such a case.
That being said, I still like small stones, and I find some of the smaller engagement rings to be so very elegant. One of my favorite rings is AlloAmie's ring, and her stone isn't that large:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-new-set-does-this-look-ok.115349/

I totally agree with these statements!!

First of all, if my FI and I could only afford a .25 RB stone (which is what my mom has and all they could afford in 1980)...I would wear it proudly, so I guess no diamond is too small if it is representative of the love and commitment, and what we could afford.

If i was wearing a smaller diamond, I too would prefer NOT to set it in prongs, but I would most likely halo a RB stone in a cushion shaped halo, or bezel it, as I think that helps with size and don't overpower the stone in a negative way.

I also agree that many people may hestitate to answer for fear that those with smaller budgets or diamonds will take the responses negatively and personally.

So- let's say that I have unlimited money and was buying MYSELF a diamond for fun... I would look for something in the .50 range and halo it- maybe with a pink sapphire/rose gold halo. But that is me, and if I was buying a stone for fun and looking for a smaller stone, I think .50 is a nice looking size on my hand.

Hmm interesting. Yet people are not afraid of saying a stone is too large and therefore potentially offending the individuals here who DO have large stones. Either way, a person can be easily insulted and take it personally.

I raised this question partly because of the other thread and partly because I remember TWO people saying something about my stone being too big for their taste. How would it be any different if my response back would be "your stone is too small for my taste."

Personally, I would not ever comment on someones stone being too large. I would never tell someone their diamond is too small.

Its so easy for people to bash large stones than small stones. Just interesting.
 

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
Lady_Disdain|1304898532|2915686 said:
People tend to be more careful when talking about small diamonds because it often isn't a matter of choice. If you can afford a 3ct diamond, you can choose a 2ct if you think it looks better. If you love a 1ct but can only afford a 0.5ct, then you are out of luck.

Great point! Except judging from the other threads here, to many it HAS been a choice. Real world? Not as much of a choice for people as PS probably. It still boggles my mind though, that people find it okay to tell someone directly to their face that a stone is too large for their taste. THAT is distasteful to me.

In the other thread, people voiced certain sizes being TOO large. While I too, have my own preferences I still think people need to be careful when talking about ANY diamond size big or small.

I expected this thread not to be as popular as the other because as I said before, people find it much easier to say things about large stones than small ones.
 

Amys Bling

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
11,025
Autumnovember|1304898548|2915687 said:
Amys Bling|1304898144|2915679 said:
Haven|1304894761|2915658 said:
Autumn--I can see that people may be more careful when talking about small diamonds. However, I really do think small diamonds are beautiful, and while I obviously chose to wear a larger diamond because we could afford it, I wouldn't have a problem wearing a small diamond because for me, there really is not such thing as a "too small" diamond.

I agree that cut matters in smaller diamonds, too. I'm not a big fan of RBs in general, but I do love my eternity band wedding ring, which has 7 point RBs in it, and if we could have only afforded a small stone, say around .25 ct, I might have opted for a bezeled RB. My favorite stones are cushions, but I haven't seen many very small cushions, so I don't think I'd have had the same options in that size.

I will say that I'm not a big fan of very small prong-set diamonds, I much prefer a smaller diamond embedded into the band, or bezeled. I think it's a metal-to-stone ratio for me, and with very small stones the prongs are sometimes overwhelming.
Kenny--I will never tire of looking at your beautiful colored diamonds. I would be tempted to keep them all together in that case, the colors look so amazing grouped like that.

ETA: I think people are more careful when discussing small diamonds because some have budgets that only allow for small stones, and thus it would be in bad taste (in my opinion) to criticize the *size* of the stone in such a case.
That being said, I still like small stones, and I find some of the smaller engagement rings to be so very elegant. One of my favorite rings is AlloAmie's ring, and her stone isn't that large:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-new-set-does-this-look-ok.115349/

I totally agree with these statements!!

First of all, if my FI and I could only afford a .25 RB stone (which is what my mom has and all they could afford in 1980)...I would wear it proudly, so I guess no diamond is too small if it is representative of the love and commitment, and what we could afford.

If i was wearing a smaller diamond, I too would prefer NOT to set it in prongs, but I would most likely halo a RB stone in a cushion shaped halo, or bezel it, as I think that helps with size and don't overpower the stone in a negative way.

I also agree that many people may hestitate to answer for fear that those with smaller budgets or diamonds will take the responses negatively and personally.

So- let's say that I have unlimited money and was buying MYSELF a diamond for fun... I would look for something in the .50 range and halo it- maybe with a pink sapphire/rose gold halo. But that is me, and if I was buying a stone for fun and looking for a smaller stone, I think .50 is a nice looking size on my hand.

Hmm interesting. Yet people are not afraid of saying a stone is too large and therefore potentially offending the individuals here who DO have large stones. Either way, a person can be easily insulted and take it personally.

I raised this question partly because of the other thread and partly because I remember TWO people saying something about my stone being too big for their taste. How would it be any different if my response back would be "your stone is too small for my taste."

Personally, I would not ever comment on someones stone being too large. I would never tell someone their diamond is too small.

Its so easy for people to bash large stones than small stones. Just interesting.

Totally agree! People always say that X is too big for me! When asked what is the biggest, I said about 2ct because that is all I am comfortable wearing around on a daily basis for numerous reason- don't get me wrong- I would accept a 2.5 ct or 3ct in a heartbeat- but they weren't in the budget for us, and I accepted that. I also at times have to work in areas of poverty in which case I don't wear my ring at all. I would be VERY comfortable wearing a 3ct in the more affluent areas and out at night to dinner and such, and around the house of course!!! lol.

I think people are afraid to comment on smaller diamonds because the assumption is there that the budget was the reason for the smaller stone purchase as opposed to personal taste- but again, that is another assumption.

What about you Autumn November? what are your thoughts on the smallest??
 

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
Amys Bling|1304898863|2915695 said:
Autumnovember|1304898548|2915687 said:
Amys Bling|1304898144|2915679 said:
Haven|1304894761|2915658 said:
Autumn--I can see that people may be more careful when talking about small diamonds. However, I really do think small diamonds are beautiful, and while I obviously chose to wear a larger diamond because we could afford it, I wouldn't have a problem wearing a small diamond because for me, there really is not such thing as a "too small" diamond.

I agree that cut matters in smaller diamonds, too. I'm not a big fan of RBs in general, but I do love my eternity band wedding ring, which has 7 point RBs in it, and if we could have only afforded a small stone, say around .25 ct, I might have opted for a bezeled RB. My favorite stones are cushions, but I haven't seen many very small cushions, so I don't think I'd have had the same options in that size.

I will say that I'm not a big fan of very small prong-set diamonds, I much prefer a smaller diamond embedded into the band, or bezeled. I think it's a metal-to-stone ratio for me, and with very small stones the prongs are sometimes overwhelming.
Kenny--I will never tire of looking at your beautiful colored diamonds. I would be tempted to keep them all together in that case, the colors look so amazing grouped like that.

ETA: I think people are more careful when discussing small diamonds because some have budgets that only allow for small stones, and thus it would be in bad taste (in my opinion) to criticize the *size* of the stone in such a case.
That being said, I still like small stones, and I find some of the smaller engagement rings to be so very elegant. One of my favorite rings is AlloAmie's ring, and her stone isn't that large:
https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/my-new-set-does-this-look-ok.115349/

I totally agree with these statements!!

First of all, if my FI and I could only afford a .25 RB stone (which is what my mom has and all they could afford in 1980)...I would wear it proudly, so I guess no diamond is too small if it is representative of the love and commitment, and what we could afford.

If i was wearing a smaller diamond, I too would prefer NOT to set it in prongs, but I would most likely halo a RB stone in a cushion shaped halo, or bezel it, as I think that helps with size and don't overpower the stone in a negative way.

I also agree that many people may hestitate to answer for fear that those with smaller budgets or diamonds will take the responses negatively and personally.

So- let's say that I have unlimited money and was buying MYSELF a diamond for fun... I would look for something in the .50 range and halo it- maybe with a pink sapphire/rose gold halo. But that is me, and if I was buying a stone for fun and looking for a smaller stone, I think .50 is a nice looking size on my hand.

Hmm interesting. Yet people are not afraid of saying a stone is too large and therefore potentially offending the individuals here who DO have large stones. Either way, a person can be easily insulted and take it personally.

I raised this question partly because of the other thread and partly because I remember TWO people saying something about my stone being too big for their taste. How would it be any different if my response back would be "your stone is too small for my taste."

Personally, I would not ever comment on someones stone being too large. I would never tell someone their diamond is too small.

Its so easy for people to bash large stones than small stones. Just interesting.

Totally agree! People always say that X is too big for me! When asked what is the biggest, I said about 2ct because that is all I am comfortable wearing around on a daily basis for numerous reason- don't get me wrong- I would accept a 2.5 ct or 3ct in a heartbeat- but they weren't in the budget for us, and I accepted that. I also at times have to work in areas of poverty in which case I don't wear my ring at all. I would be VERY comfortable wearing a 3ct in the more affluent areas and out at night to dinner and such, and around the house of course!!! lol.

I think people are afraid to comment on smaller diamonds because the assumption is there that the budget was the reason for the smaller stone purchase as opposed to personal taste- but again, that is another assumption.


What about you Autumn November? what are your thoughts on the smallest??

Very true. Definitely not denying that. I too, go to school/clinicals in a very poor area so at times I am not as comfortable. However, I thought about it and wondered how I would feel if my stone was smaller and I STILL don't think I'd be comfortable wearing it there. A friend and I were walking down one of the streets in a poor neighborhood and I twisted my ring around so the diamond was facing my palm...her diamond is smaller than mine and I was just as nervous for her as I was for myself.

A lot of my friends have diamonds in the 1.0 carat range....and they look beautiful. I am not denying the beauty of any diamond, large or small.

If money was no object to me, I would not wear anything smaller than 1.50. I'm sure there are people who may read that and feel a bit offended BUT its that same twinge of offense when someone says "2.5 carats looks gaudy!" It's like me saying "wow! that .50 diamond looks like a spec!" Right? It's so much easier for someone to say the latter and not think twice about it.
 

AmeliaG

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
880
I don't think it's an awkward question. My sister faced this problem when she got engaged. Their money was tight and her hands are really big. She told her husband when they got engaged that if he didn't feel comfortable buying a 1/2 carat diamond then a sapphire would work for her just as well. Its her birthstone and blue is her favorite color. The sapphire turned out to be the wiser choice for them and she loves the ring. If she hadn't spoken up, he probably would have spent a lot of money on a diamond that was really too small to look good on her size 9 hands. Instead she has a beautiful ring that looks gorgeous on her and he didn't have to break the bank to do it. So 1/2 carat was as small as she would go with her size 9 hands.

I've got much smaller hands so I don't have that problem. :wink2:

I did try on a 16 pointer at Tiffany's in their Bezet setting and it was one of the most attractive small diamond rings I have ever seen. Of course, you don't go to Tiffany's to save money, but I could easily wear that ring.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
Autumnovember|1304898817|2915693 said:
Lady_Disdain|1304898532|2915686 said:
People tend to be more careful when talking about small diamonds because it often isn't a matter of choice. If you can afford a 3ct diamond, you can choose a 2ct if you think it looks better. If you love a 1ct but can only afford a 0.5ct, then you are out of luck.
Great point! Except judging from the other threads here, to many it HAS been a choice. Real world? Not as much of a choice for people as PS probably. It still boggles my mind though, that people find it okay to tell someone directly to their face that a stone is too large for their taste. THAT is distasteful to me.

In the other thread, people voiced certain sizes being TOO large. While I too, have my own preferences I still think people need to be careful when talking about ANY diamond size big or small.

I expected this thread not to be as popular as the other because as I said before, people find it much easier to say things about large stones than small ones.
I completely agree that it is distasteful to tell someone that their diamond is too *anything*, absolutely.

There is a big difference between insulting someone diamond by sharing an unsolicited opinion *versus* posting your own real opinions about diamond size (or color or clarity or shape . . . ) in general in a thread explicitly *asking* for people to share their opinions. The latter is a situation where people are asking for input, the former is not. In my opinion, people need to approach threads that discuss preferences with an open mind and confidence that nobody is talking about *them* or *their stones* in particular, rather we are all engaging in a discussion about our mutual interest--diamonds. If someone with a large stone is going to be offended by others' opinions that large stones aren't their cup of tea, then I think that someone just shouldn't hang out in threads asking for opinions about large diamonds. (The same could be said of small diamonds, or diamonds of a certain color, or certain settings, etc.)

I think it's no secret that everyone here has opinions and personal preferences about all aspects of diamonds and jewelry, and that our opinions and preferences are likely to differ. The wonderful thing about PS is that people generally know when it is and isn't offensive to discuss personal preferences. You don't see many (or any) negative comments about people's rings in SMTB threads, for example.

Edited for clarity. (Don't get excited, I'm sure it's still fairly unclear, just less so. :cheeky: )
 

jewelerman

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
3,101
for me its the personality of the stone that matters most.The smallest diamond in my collection of jewelry is a 3 point princess cut that is just as cool for me to wear and enjoy looking at as my largest diamond(2.54 round brilliant).In the years Ive been in the jewelry trade Ive handled thousands of stones which go anywhere from 1/2 point on up to 11 plus carats. larger size is nice but at the end of the day its color,sparkle and personality that sells the diamond to me.
 

Autumnovember

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
4,384
Haven|1304899267|2915704 said:
Autumnovember|1304898817|2915693 said:
Lady_Disdain|1304898532|2915686 said:
There is a big difference between insulting someone diamond by sharing an unsolicited opinion and posting your own real opinions about diamond size (or color or clarity or shape . . . ) in general in a thread explicitly *asking* for people to share their opinions. The latter is a situation where people are asking for input, the former is not. In my opinion, people need to approach threads that discuss preferences with an open mind and confidence that nobody is talking about *them* or *their stones* in particular, rather we are all engaging in a discussion about our mutual interest--diamonds. If someone with a large stone is going to be offended by others' opinions that large stones aren't their cup of tea, then I think that someone just shouldn't hang out in threads asking for opinions about large diamonds. (The same could be said of small diamonds, or diamonds of a certain color, or certain settings, etc.)
That is part of the reason I posted this thread :) Since we all *should* have that understanding as you pointed out and very much makes sense, I wanted to see a thread about what some people would consider -too small- for them without money being an object because ultimately, I'm asking the exact same question.
 

Amys Bling

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
11,025
Autumnovember|1304899535|2915710 said:
Haven|1304899267|2915704 said:
Autumnovember|1304898817|2915693 said:
Lady_Disdain|1304898532|2915686 said:
There is a big difference between insulting someone diamond by sharing an unsolicited opinion and posting your own real opinions about diamond size (or color or clarity or shape . . . ) in general in a thread explicitly *asking* for people to share their opinions. The latter is a situation where people are asking for input, the former is not. In my opinion, people need to approach threads that discuss preferences with an open mind and confidence that nobody is talking about *them* or *their stones* in particular, rather we are all engaging in a discussion about our mutual interest--diamonds. If someone with a large stone is going to be offended by others' opinions that large stones aren't their cup of tea, then I think that someone just shouldn't hang out in threads asking for opinions about large diamonds. (The same could be said of small diamonds, or diamonds of a certain color, or certain settings, etc.)
That is part of the reason I posted this thread :) Since we all *should* have that understanding as you pointed out and very much makes sense, I wanted to see a thread about what some people would consider -too small- for them without money being an object because ultimately, I'm asking the exact same question.

True. :bigsmile:

so I think .5 in RB for me.... as they face up the largest for the shapes...
If we are talking fancy shapes then I would *prefer* a tad bigger than a .5ct --- no offense taken to other posters, please! :halo: ---
 

luv2sparkle

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
7,741
kenny|1304898325|2915682 said:
Thanks.
Here's a newer pic of all 10 in the current Kennyllection.
It still qualifies for this small-diamond thread since the average weight is only 0.22 ct.

We all know that size isn't everything. :Up_to_something:
How it makes you feel is the main thing.

Small diamonds can inspire your heart too.
I never never never get tired of seeing your collection. It makes my heart sing, I can't imagine what it does to yours. Someday
I want a collection like that. Amazing, stunning, gorgeous. I think it would make a fantastic pendant I would never take off, or
maybe a ring. But I would have to look at it and wear it every day. Wow.
 

Haven

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
13,166
Autumnovember|1304895260|2915668 said:
ETA: Isn't it distasteful either way?
Sorry, I just saw this question.

I think it's distasteful for people to share unsolicited opinions about diamond size (or color, clarity, etc.) about ANY aspect--too big, too small, too white, too warm, etc.

However, I do not think it's distasteful for people to engage in a discussion about an aspect of diamonds when they are explicitly *asked* to engage in that discussion.

It's the difference between telling a friend or acquaintance "Oh, you're stone is too big. I'd never wear a diamond that large" after she excitedly shows you her engagement ring. (Distasteful.)
*vs*
Telling a friend or acquaintance "I think diamonds over XXX size are too large" after she explicitly asks you for your opinion. (Tasteful.)

I think our ability to engage in rational discussions without taking offense when people's ideas or beliefs oppose your own is the very quality that makes this particular community (PS) so engaging. I also believe this ability is one major element that distinguishes adult discussion from adolescent discussion.

ETA:

Kenny-- :love: :appl: :lickout:

Autumn--I understand what you're asking, and I think it's a valid question. If money were no object I would wear the same stone I'm wearing right now, I wouldn't choose to go smaller for my e-ring. However, I would happily wear a small stone. I was once engaged to a bad man :cheeky: and he proposed with a .22 ct RB set in a fake tension setting which was so not my style, but boy how I loved that stone.
 

Izzy03

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
613
Oh man, I could go for tiny little diamonds, as long as there are lots of them arranged to make a beautiful band :naughty:

My probably soon-to-be-ex-husband bought me a GORGEOUS ring. It is 2.42 carat cushion stone with six 0.2 carat stones on each side side (it was inspired by the Tiffany Novo). While I LOVE the ring (and plan to remain the owner of the ring), the attention I received for it sometimes made me a little uncomfortable. It kinda made me feel like a walking stereotype.

I sometimes thought about downgrading to 1.5 carats so I would comfortable wearing it on a daily basis, but feared I would regret it.
 

luv2sparkle

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
7,741
I thought .25 in my ears was too small. My first awful engagement ring was .25. I picked it and it was awful.

Not that I wouldn't wear it but it did feel too small for me. My daughter wanted that size and they look gorgeous on her.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!
    August Birthstones: Peridot And Sardonyx
    August Birthstones: Peridot And Sardonyx
    The Original: Princess Raiyah Of Jordan
    The Original: Princess Raiyah Of Jordan
    Celebratory Engagement Ring Upgrade And Bracelet
    Celebratory Engagement Ring Upgrade And Bracelet

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top