Post # 1
I want finger coverage but im worried that a double halo will look like the halo is bigger than the diamond,
i have a size 6 finger and i tried on a 2ct single halo and it looked tiny on me!!!
Anyone have a 1.50ct with a double halo? show me ur rings and specs + finger size 🙂
Post # 2
beefabulous: a 2ct stone with a halo by no means will ever look “small”
Post # 3
I vote single, just because I personally do not like look of double halos.
Post # 4
- Wedding: October 2014 - Cape May
I would say single halo, but perhaps look for a halo with larger mele such as a Daussi inspired halo. This would allow for more finger presence without looking busy or competing with your center stone. Perhaps the halos you’ve tried were very dainty.
Post # 5
Single. Double halos usually look overkill to me.
Post # 7
Finger coverage can be overrated. I think a 1.60 ct diamond is substantial enough on its own, so a double halo would be overkill IMO. To me, the point of a halo is to accentuate the diamond while providing more sparkle, not to overpower it.
Post # 8
I have a hard time believing a 2ct halo looks tiny on anyone.
Post # 9
beefabulous: Single. A double would be too much. A 1.5-2ct is by no means small, even as a solitaire and on the bigger hand. I have a 1.5 Amora gem as a solitaire and have a 8.75 hand so I really can’t see a size 6 hand with a 2ct looking small. A double will look over the top and will take away from the main stone.
Post # 10
My vote is definitely single. However, you should go with whatever makes you feel the best! If finger coverage is what you’re looking for then rock the double with pride. I do have a hard time believing that a 2ct would look tiny on anyone! But it is definitely all about perspective, maybe take some pictures with both on from a distance and see how it looks. Good luck!
Post # 11
I’d veer away from anything halo. It is a very time specific look. Get something classic that doesn’t say, 2000-2016.
Post # 12
- Wedding: August 2016 - Temecula, California
What shape are you getting? I have a 2ct oval in a single halo and I think it gives me lots of coverage for a 4.75 size. A double halo could look really nice too!
Post # 13
Not a fan of halos..I feel they are trendy and time specific like another poster said unless it is super dainty letting the center stone shine. 1.6 alone on a 6 finger is not small in the slightest. If you want a halo, go for a single and veer on the daintier side vs chunky. I can see a double being overkill. I recently tried on a double halo for kicks but the center stone was probably half a carat and holy moly I felt like I was wearing a bauble ring.
Post # 14
Hey – your finger, your ring – not anyone else’s! So if others don’t like halos or double halos don’t let them change your opinion. Go for what you like and what works for you. Definitely try on single and double halo styles and take photos! Then you can think about them and compare later without the store pressure. Also – what about an oval stone? (With or without halo) I find they tend to look bigger because they are longer on the finger. Also, don’t forget about bands too – they add finger coverage too.