Post # 1
hey eveeyone! my center stone is 3.41 and i had someone tell me “wow that’s gotta be at least 2.5!”
– i don’t want to sound like a crazy ungrateful b*tch but i did lower the color and clarity a bit to be able to get a bigger stone…
the ring is a size 6 on a 5.75 finger – does the center stone look like the size it is?
or does the chunky band just throw it off?
Post # 3
I think it looks like a nice size, but I believe radiants are like cushions in that they face up smaller than a round.
What are the dimensions of the stone?
I was doing some comparisons of the dimensions of my 2.2 ct cushion cut and it’s roughly 7mm x 7.65mm, which faces up closer to a 1.85ct round brilliant.
Post # 4
I think it’s just the shape that may make it look smaller than it is.
Post # 5
I think it looks fine.
Why are you so concerned that other people can’t correctly guess the size of it? Most people can’t eyeball carat size, especially if they have little to no knowledge in diamonds.
Focus on finding joy with the person who gifted you the ring and wants to spend a lifetime with you instead of someone’s comments on it…
Post # 6
- Wedding: April 2016 - Manhattan, NY
Your fingers remind me a lot of my own! With that said, you have a ton of finger coverage and I don’t think your diamond looks small at all. Some stones have more depth so they don’t face up as large as you would think just by going off of the carat size.
Post # 7
Yeah I wouldn’t have guessed it was over 3 carats either, so it does look smaller to me. But it’s still huge and it’s still beautiful. Why do you care whether everyone knows you have a 3.5 carat stone? Hopefully you picked the size because you like the way it looks, not because you needed it to be over a certain carat weight.
Post # 8
It’s a stunning ring! I think combined with the shape and the large stones on the band, it may give the illusion of being smaller than if it were a solitaire on a simple band, but I wouldn’t worry about it.
Post # 9
I wouldn’t have thought this was nearly 3.5cts. As other Bees have said, a lot of that is down to the cut. For example, if you compare a 1ct asscher to a 1ct round brilliant, or a pear, the asscher is going to look smaller because it’s a deeper cut. What size pointers do you have in the band?
Post # 10
- Wedding: August 2020 - Hampton, VA
I think it’s gorgeous and don’t really understand why there are snarky comments in response to an innocent question. I don’t think OP was posting to be a humblebrag.
Radiants and cushions face up differently than round brilliants, which are most common, and like PP said, the beautiful chunky band might change the way the main stone is perceived. I personally love a chunky, sparkly band over the super thin ones, and I think your ring is amazing. It also depends on your ring size. If you have a ring size 6, it obviously has less finger coverage than a size 4 or a 5, so maybe the person you mentioned was used to viewing stones on a smaller finger? Or they just have no idea! Lol
I would have guessed it was at least 3ct.
Plus most people that we interact with on a regular basis aren’t as good at guessing carat weight based on the shape of the stone as a lot of the bees on here are.
Post more pictures! haha
Post # 11
Check your stone against the carat weight in diamdb.com
Post # 12
Looks like a big stone to me. They probably suck at guessing sizes.
Post # 13
Carat sizes do not increase linearly (or is it proportionally?). So while a half carat stone is noticeably smaller than 1 carat, the difference between a 1.5 to a 2.0 carat is much less noticeable, and diminishes further as you compare even larger diamonds.
Post # 14
It does look a lot smaller than what you’re saying it is. I would have thought 2.5 too.
Post # 15
Radiants face up pretty small for their size. It still looks large, but for people unfamiliar with diamonds, they probably just dont know.
I agree with PPs about using smaller pt pave in the band, it will make the center stand out more.