I was told by a jewelry sales person that certain shapes/cuts make a diamond look bigger. She told me that princess looks bigger than a round….a round looks bigger than a cushion cut and heart…and a marquise and oval looks bigger than all. Is this true? Or is this just another sales tactic?
If you’re comparing different shapes of the same carat weight, the round will look the biggest. If you’re comparing price, round will also be most expensive. But once it’s the same dimensions, they will be fairly close in price – for example, a round 1 ct faces up is i think 6.5mm, but a cushion that faces up 6.5mm may be something more like 1.25ct, so even though the cushion is more cts, it looks the same and will be priced about the same.
You can GOOGE to see various size charts, try the keyword(s) – diamond carats size charts – some have extensive info… and comparisons (ie http://www.ajediam.com ), far more advanced than the “basic” info
But to get you started, Blue Nile has an excellent chart where you can see on the same page the differents cuts and what the relative sizes are
ok, first a princess never looks bigger than a round. They are usually very deep cut diamonds. compairing, a .71ct round will look similar in size to a .96ct princess.
North to South diamonds such as Pear, Marquis, and Ovals are the best for big bling at low cost. These stones typically spread thinner and sparkle more because of their multi directions. 50-60% depth is ideal to get a really big look, so instead of a round 1ct being ideally clost to 6.5mm, and oval spreads 8x6mm, making the 8mm part appear like a 1.50ct round!
Princess, Cushion, Emerald, Radiant, and Asscher all require being heavier in order for their optics to show. So as a result of their depth being between 63%-74% still ideal, their measurements are not judged as being BIG but they are very beautiful.
But typically rounds spread nicely, with ideal cut depths between 55-63.3% and as a result, you have consistantly pretty stones. – but I’d say look at a pear or oval if you like the rounded look without the huge tag!
I feel like rounds of the same carat and cut qualitylook larger than princess but i keep hearing the opposite lately .. I have seen ideal cut 1 ct rounds look as if there 1.5 ct but I don’t feel like I see that in princess cuts .. Some stones face up better because of there lack of cut ” quality ” but I tend to like them to be top heavy as long as there still sparkle really good
Definately cut is important. But since there is no cut grade on most fancy shapes – all shapes besides rounds, look at diamond certificates online.
IF a cushion cut has a spread of 62.4% for example…That is still and ideal depth for a round, and may be the same mm size! so look at measurements rather than carat weight. I’ve seen a .75ct cushion look bigger than a .88ct cushion just because they are made differently.
Not to compare just cushions, but this video was such a wonderful example of DIAMONDS in general, because it describes what styles of cutting, optics, and dead reflection areas look like in real life vs. what little info you get online.
I totally agree that round cuts look bigger than princess cuts even with a lower carat weight. My e-ring is a 1.01 princess cut and I have a RHR that has a .71 round cut and they look almost identical in size. Round is a great choice to get a classic and timeless stone, and the bonus is that they do face up big even in a lower carat weight – so carats do not equal actual size!
I agree that CUT Is important in how big or small the diamond looks for it’s particular carat weight. My friend has a .70 princess and I have a .70 round and when we compared e-rings (just for fun, a bunch of us did one day at work for kicks) we all thought the round looked bigger. I think finger size can make a diamond look bigger or smaller as well.
The topic ‘Does a particular diamond shape/cut make it look bigger?’ is closed to new replies.