(Closed) Finger Coverage – Whats it to you?

posted 8 years ago in Rings
Post # 47
Member
846 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: July 2014

I tried not to look at rings before I was engaged, and to be honest I would have expected something smaller than what I got (1.23 RB solitaire). I’ve got small hands (4.25) so while I think my ring is perfect, if it was any bigger I think it would be too big. I do love that my setting is quite delicate. I love my ring so much I almost don’t want to get a wedding ring in case it detracts from the ring, I might just get a very slim plain platinum band as I’ve got plenty if bling for my liking. 

Post # 48
Member
3501 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: November 2012

I wont lie I cared to an extent.  I wasnt looking for “in your face” type but something that worked for me.  With that, my ring is neither pave or halo so it wasnt easy to figure out style.  oh well.

Post # 49
Member
1182 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: October 2014

I had never heard of finger coverage until joining the Bee. It doesn’t matter to me at all. I think my engagement ring is beautiful and perfect and no one is going to tell me otherwise. I’m difficult like that though. 

Post # 50
Member
2635 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: August 2012

I wanted a large setting, with intricate details, but still keep it classy. As I was trying on rings, there was one width that just pleased my eye, about 10mm wide. So I found the perfect floral halo, and I am now stacking it with 2 bands, so I am getting the coverage I love, while still being airy with some gaps. 

Here it is:

Post # 51
Member
7815 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: February 1997

I had never even heard of such a thing nor considered it when we were first married. I chose one of the most inexpensive rings I could find, knowing that neither of us had any money at the time. Being MARRIED mattered to me, not the ring.

DH suggested an upgrade after many years of marriage, and I know he considered size more than I did. He wanted “tasteful” but not OTT. He was interested in the right balance between something that would be noticed, but not commented upon. Again, “finger coverage” never occurred to me. We both knew we wanted one stone, and no additional stones, so any notice of the ring would be due to the center stone and not melee.

Post # 52
Member
738 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: February 2014

No.  Cut was paramount. This is my 5th engagement so I know a thing or two about cut.  An excellent cut .30 SCREAMS fireplay over a ‘good/fair’ cut 1 carat.

Post # 53
Member
401 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: October 2013

I knew from the day I met my DH I wanted a ring that symbolized his eyes – I always said I wanted the size and shape of his beautiful blue eyes – then I googled the average size of irises which was 12-14mm so it sounded a bit too big since I always wanted a halo too.  My favorite number is 10 so we went with a 10mm stone with halo so total width is about 15.5 mm in diameter and I LOVE it because it was everything I imagined – lol sometimes I even look at it and think I could have gone with actual iris size and I am so not a big blingy person but because of what it represents I’ve totally fallen in love with it ๐Ÿ™‚

Post # 54
Member
2336 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: February 2015

I wanted a good bit. Something less than a carat would’ve been too small. A carat in a halo would’ve been okay, but I didn’t want them to blend. I may have changed my mind if I would have known about something like this:

Rose Gold Moissanite Engagement Ring Double Halo 14K Moissanite Ring Conflict Free Diamond Alternative Custom Bridal Jewelry

I don’t usually like double halos but when I googled, this popped up and I love it!

Post # 55
Member
7439 posts
Busy Beekeeper
  • Wedding: December 2012

Finger coverage as a concept when it comes to a Feature Stone.  Wasn’t a big deal for me. 

I was hoping for (knew that I wanted) an ERing that had more of “presence” than the one I had for my First Wedding.

As Mr TTR didn’t talk budget in the beginning of the process… I was thinking that I’d like the “finger coverage” to be more of a Cocktail Style Ring… with lots of little diamonds.  Something vastly different than what I had previously.

When Mr TTR said he didn’t see it being an ERing without having a Feature Stone… I was more than happy with something in the 0.50 range (way more than what I had the first time round)

In the end, Mr TTR exceeded that with a 0.80 Feature Diamond (more than enough for me).  I could honestly never see myself with anything bigger than this… I like the fact that the Diamond makes us both happy, and size wise, it isn’t much of a bother (gets caught, in the way, attracts too much attention, etc)

And we were both QUALITY over Quantity people… CUT – COLOUR – CLARITY even CERTIFIED – CANADIAN and STYLE & SETTING… were up the list a lot farther than CARAT SIZE

 

Post # 56
Member
2186 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: July 2014

I never used the term “finger coverage” to describe the size diamond I wanted, but I definitely had an idea of what size I liked.  I knew I wanted a 1 ct, but also had my heart set on an intricate setting.  FI had the setting custom made which took up a lot of our budget, so we originally got a .75.  I recently upgraded to a 1 ct, and I much prefer the look of the new diamond in the setting than the original.  I also got a wrap custom made for my ring that drastically adds finger coverage and draws attention to the centre stone more.

Post # 57
Member
343 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: September 2014

Finger coverage was very important to me because I have large hands and long fingers. That is a major reason why I wanted a halo. A larger piece of jewelry looks better on my hand and doesn’t get lost. 

Post # 58
Member
465 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: January 2014 - Monte Carlo inn

im not gonna lie, I wanted a big ring. Not tooooo big, just a little over a carat. I just love the look of big rings, made me feel glamorous. I love dainty rings too but I don’t think it was for me. Originally, we were going to buy from a jewller and I was going to give up clarity and color for size. But then recently my cousin decided to sell me her ring that was brand new for only $4000. $4000 for a 1.39ct center stone and 0.45ct halo with excellent specs was a complete steal!! That would’ve cost over $8000 retail. So in the end I got what I wanted without breaking FI’s bank ๐Ÿ™‚ 

 

But yes, I would give up quality for quantity. Do I feel superficial? Nope ๐Ÿ™‚ This is my engagement ring and I want it to be perfect for me. I’m wearing it for the rest of my life so it was important that I got what I truly loved. 

Annndd Fiance absolutely LOVES the ring so that’s a bonus for me ๐Ÿ™‚ 

 

Post # 59
Member
131 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: October 2005

My ring size is 9.5 so I feel as though I am at a disadvantage because a “normal” sized stone already doesn’t look as large on me!  I have a 3 stone ring with side stones and a 3/4 eternity band.  Together they look to scale on my finger.  I wanted something around a carat and of good quality.  I picked a radiant cut but I knew they faced up smaller than a round or other cut so while my ring is a nice size I don’t think it is massive by any means.

Post # 60
Member
2842 posts
Sugar bee

@DaniDev143:  

Was finger coverage important to you when it came time to receive or pick out your e-ring? Yes.

If money was an issue, were you willing to give up quality for quanity? Yes, in a sense. I decided to get a gemstone because I’d rather have a big gemstone than a tiny, good quality diamond or a slightly larger, poor quality diamond (which honestly still wouldn’t have been the size I wanted). My gemstone was by far cheaper than a diamond. Thus allowing me the size I wanted for a very low price tag.

Be honest and if the answer is yes, did you feel superficial for wanting a big ring? No. I have huge hands (size 9.5 fingers) and I would have felt silly with a teensy diamond on my gigantic finger.

Post # 61
Member
5521 posts
Bee Keeper

@DaniDev143:  I’m kind of weird. I love the size and coverage of my ring, and wouldn’t like my specific ring to be smaller, but, it’s a cluster.

When it comes to solitaires I prefer the look of smaller ones that give less coverage; I’m helping my friend choose a ring for his girlfriend so have been trying some on, and for me, a 0.50-0.65ct solitaire is perfect (5.5 finger).

NB: my cluster measures 12mm, giving what I estimate at over 70% coverage (the charts I’ve foubd only go up to 10.4mm, giving 65%).

An RB solitaire of 0.50ct, which for me is a perfect size, gives 32% coverage.

So, a massive difference, but my preference varies based on the style. I like my solitaires dainty, but not my clusters.

The topic ‘Finger Coverage – Whats it to you?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors