What would you do RE: diamond stud earrings

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

Penelope6

O.G.
Jun 30, 2008
43
0
I'm thinking of purchasing new (bigger stud earrings). Somewhere around 1 1/2 carat total weight. Would you pick (all with an ideal cut):

1. Smaller (~1.30) F color VS2 clarity
2. Smaller (~1.30) G color VVS2 clarity
3. Larger (~1.5) G color VS2 clarity
4. Other

My current pair is 3/4 carat F color and VS2 clarity (and yes, I like them).
Thanks for your help!
 
I imagine I'm definitely in the minority here, but I actually prefer no larger than 1ct per ear. I find it starts to look like the bolts that stick out of Frankenstein's neck when they get too big. So I would say 1.25 or 1.30 tops if you are set on that. I would get the best quality 1ct I could afford and those could be extremely expensive even more perhaps than a larger carat depending on the quality. My mother paid 12k for her D color VS 2cttw studs and they are perfection, I've never seen a nicer pair. In terms of pendants, tennis bracelets and rings, big looks gorgeous, but in terms of studs to me at least bigger is not better. What you have is actually my ideal pair should I ever go for diamond earrings, on me 1ct per ear looks too big for my face/ear proportions.
 
I would go for lower clarity and colour and a larger size - the difference between a VVS and VS are undetectable without serious magnification. I would have no problems with going down to an SI if that meant I got a great size and excellent cut. Same with colour.

Who's ever going to know?

However, what anyone will see - you included - is size.
 
Thanks! I actually agree with you. I'm looking at about 3/4 ct per ear (1.5 total). I've always thought that better color trumps better clarity in overall look but I wanted to get people's opinions.
Thanks again for your feedback.
 
IME, no one gets so close to your face to inspect your ears. Not like they do when they take your hand to admire a ring. Socially, it's just different. I prefer whitest white, so I would choose excellent cut, then color, then clarity...
 
I'd go with H VS2. With ideal cut diamonds, H faces up very white. I'm a little biased as this is what I have but they are fantastic. You might see what you think of an F, G and H against your skin tone. I have slightly olive, Mediterranean skin tone so colors like G and H look really good.
 
Thanks, all. You know, I've never taken into account skin tone. Hmm. I have dark brown skin with yellowish undertones. Maybe I'll consider finding a way to compare an F and H.
 
I'd go with the best cut and color you can afford, but I wouldn't worry too much about clarity--as others have already mentioned, the difference between VS to VVS isn't noticeable on earrings and you could get away with SI, especially if you have great color/cut.
 
Thanks, all. You know, I've never taken into account skin tone. Hmm. I have dark brown skin with yellowish undertones. Maybe I'll consider finding a way to compare an F and H.

I'd definitely try and compare them, just to see what you think. Some people look really good in those super icy white colors (D, E range) and others look better with just the smallest bit of warmth (F,G,H,I). It also may be that you aren't particularly sensitive to the difference between F and H and that can save you a whole lot of money.

Btw, I have 1.5 ctw stud earrings and they are a great size. Not too small, not too much for every day.
 
I would go for lower clarity and colour and a larger size - the difference between a VVS and VS are undetectable without serious magnification. I would have no problems with going down to an SI if that meant I got a great size and excellent cut. Same with colour.

Who's ever going to know?

However, what anyone will see - you included - is size.

I agree on clarity, but you can also see color. I would never buy anything below TW.
 
#3. You will not be able to detect a color difference without turning them over and laying them on white paper, lol! The clarity is more than enough for ears.
 
Top