Just wanted some opinions. What size do you think is good for an engagement ring center stone? Of course we all want to say 2 carats and up but considering a quality 2 carat stone may cost in the $20K range! But anyways what looks good without looking too small?? Thanks.
Engagement Rings
- Thread starter laurens714
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
Whatever your bf is willing to pay...if he can only buy a small stone then so be it, if he can get a bigger one then great. It all comes down to wanting either the bf or the stone...
That being said I would prefer at least half a carat, ideally 1 carat or 3/4 but if my bf proposed with something smaller I would be happy with what it symbolised. Plus in a few years there is always the option of a reset and an upgrade!
Btw..I think I read that if a stone was mounted higher it looked bigger, and if you get a great cut and setting then a smaller one would be better than a bigger stone but less than ideal cut etc.
That being said I would prefer at least half a carat, ideally 1 carat or 3/4 but if my bf proposed with something smaller I would be happy with what it symbolised. Plus in a few years there is always the option of a reset and an upgrade!
Btw..I think I read that if a stone was mounted higher it looked bigger, and if you get a great cut and setting then a smaller one would be better than a bigger stone but less than ideal cut etc.
It all depends on the individual. Some ladies have tiny fingers and 2 carats might look unproportionally HUGE, but it all depends on that ladies taste and finger size. There is a wealth of information here. Even a thread discussing proportionality versus size. Put your feet up and browse around and I am sure you will find some answers, but it all really boils down to personal preference. Welcome to TPF!
I agree that it depends on the size of your finger. You will also need to decide whether a name brand or high color are things you want. You will pay much more for some brands, and you will pay much more for a very white diamond and a very clear one. Most people are pleased with an I diamond with an excellent cut; others are hypersensitive to color. Most people are pleased with a visually flawless diamond; others are willing to pay for a difference in clarity grade even if they cannot see the difference.
These are all things you need to decide. Look at diamonds and decide what speaks to you and what you like best on your finger. While many people DO have large stones, many other people are quite happy with much, much smaller diamonds - the area you live in and your personal views will affect how you feel about the size. Just remember, your diamond is about YOU and not about what others think.
These are all things you need to decide. Look at diamonds and decide what speaks to you and what you like best on your finger. While many people DO have large stones, many other people are quite happy with much, much smaller diamonds - the area you live in and your personal views will affect how you feel about the size. Just remember, your diamond is about YOU and not about what others think.
Thanks. I am definitely thinking about what the ring symbolizes as well. I have a small ring finger, actually size 4. So I think even a 1 carat stone would work for me. And I think I would prefer higher quality - over just having a bigger stone, and lower quality, in terms of color/ cut, etc...Yes but living in Los Angeles can affect your views/ expectations on diamond size, lol! Thanks for the input...
This forum is pretty high end!! There are some insane rings here - like rock star rings. My sister's ring is 0.66 and my original one was .79 (very good stones) and we were both over the moon happy!! Don't get caught up in how big it "should" be to make you happy... I mean of course we would all love lovely big rings, but it's so easy to get caught up in wanting what other people have and then you'll never be happy.
Apparently only 10 % of women in the world (I forget where I read this!) have a ring 1 carat and over, so consider this forum a group of very lucky girls! I think anything close to 1 carat is just amazing but like I said, mine was under .8 and I was very proud to have it!
Apparently only 10 % of women in the world (I forget where I read this!) have a ring 1 carat and over, so consider this forum a group of very lucky girls! I think anything close to 1 carat is just amazing but like I said, mine was under .8 and I was very proud to have it!
When it comes to shape, a one carat round brillant looks the largest. So, if you want a bigger presence, no matter what size you get, go for an ideal cut round.
As for the question pertaining to size, I read somewhere that the average size engagement ring throughtout most of the US is a .38. In major cities (e.g. New York) the average size is a 1.6 carat stone. (IMHO that seems a bit large for NY to me. There are many different economics levels living in NYC, so again, it seems large.)
As for your ring personally, get the stone that is the best cut and best color you can afford. If you feel it is a little small, then set it in a Halo Setting. Trust me, you will not be disappointed. Enjoy your search and good luck!
As for the question pertaining to size, I read somewhere that the average size engagement ring throughtout most of the US is a .38. In major cities (e.g. New York) the average size is a 1.6 carat stone. (IMHO that seems a bit large for NY to me. There are many different economics levels living in NYC, so again, it seems large.)
As for your ring personally, get the stone that is the best cut and best color you can afford. If you feel it is a little small, then set it in a Halo Setting. Trust me, you will not be disappointed. Enjoy your search and good luck!
Here is a chart, not totally accurate, b/c it depends on the cut of the stone.
http://www.reisnichols.com/diamond-size-chart.pdf
Actually, an oval, pear or marquise cut can look larger than a round brilliant. Emerald cuts are actually a bit larger overall than a round sometimes in a similar size, but because there is less sparkle due to faceting, might not look bigger.
Antique illusion settings are a great way to make a stone look larger too. If you like the look of antique settings, here are some good examples on this site:
http://www.jewelsbyericagrace.com/antique_vintage_and_reproductions_rings
http://www.reisnichols.com/diamond-size-chart.pdf
Actually, an oval, pear or marquise cut can look larger than a round brilliant. Emerald cuts are actually a bit larger overall than a round sometimes in a similar size, but because there is less sparkle due to faceting, might not look bigger.
Antique illusion settings are a great way to make a stone look larger too. If you like the look of antique settings, here are some good examples on this site:
http://www.jewelsbyericagrace.com/antique_vintage_and_reproductions_rings
Tiffany also has carat guides:
Round- http://www.tiffany.com/Local/en-US/PDF/Diamond_Diagram_Tiffany_Setting.pdf
Pear- http://www.tiffany.com/Engagement/Item.aspx?GroupSKU=GRP10048#f+1/0/0/0/0/0
Princess- http://www.tiffany.com/Engagement/Item.aspx?GroupSKU=GRP10047#f+1/0/0/0/0/0
Emerald- http://www.tiffany.com/Engagement/Item.aspx?GroupSKU=GRP10029#f+3/0/0/0/0/0
Round- http://www.tiffany.com/Local/en-US/PDF/Diamond_Diagram_Tiffany_Setting.pdf
Pear- http://www.tiffany.com/Engagement/Item.aspx?GroupSKU=GRP10048#f+1/0/0/0/0/0
Princess- http://www.tiffany.com/Engagement/Item.aspx?GroupSKU=GRP10047#f+1/0/0/0/0/0
Emerald- http://www.tiffany.com/Engagement/Item.aspx?GroupSKU=GRP10029#f+3/0/0/0/0/0
Not to bring up the oldest argument on the jewelry forum, but if you want the biggest ring for your dollar, Tiffany's will not be your best bet.
I was using the site to show her different sizing charts. I would only recommend a Tiffany diamond if the purchaser loves the store.
The good thing about using a sizing chart is that you can print the image, cut out the stone, and place it on your finger. It will give you a good sense of size. I know the Tiffany charts are accurate and printable. I put my 1 carat on top of the image, and it lined up perfectly.