Post # 16
Wearing a 33pt diamond is fine on any finger, imo, but I wanted to point out that the setting makes a difference, too. Here I have two stacked: Mom’s 33pt and my 60pt. They look very similar in size (finger coverage) because the 33pt is in an illusion setting while the 60pt is a simple 4prong.
Post # 17
I guess I’m an asshole… or maybe its the New England talking, but I would be disapppointed with such a small stone. I guess it just goes to show, OP, everyone’s taste is diffeent. Whatever you like is what you should have.
Post # 18
+1 on this, I guess I am an asshole too lol, I personally consider anything below .50 “small” – like you said, personal preference!
Post # 19
FutureMrsKuncho: Same. I live in DC though, so the norm in my social circle is 1.5 or more.
OP, my sister has a 1/4 c and it’s perfect for her, exactly what she wanted. It really is about personal preference.
Post # 20
Op, I started out with a small stone then went up in size to a 7mm stone. A larger stone just was not “me.” Now I have a ring that is smaller than the orginal and am totally in love. Find a ring you love and do not worry about what other people think.
Post # 21
mines exactly 0.33! This is mine on a size J (uk) which I thinkkkk is about 5.25 USA sizing
Hope that helps!
Post # 22
‘Small’ is relative. To ME, it’s small and my preference would be different. However, ‘small’ is not a bad thing. It’s just whatever floats your boat.
Post # 23
Thank you! I love it so much, it was exactly what I wanted 😀
I adore smaller stones in e-rings because I think they’re so dainty and sweet. My fiance knew exactly what I wanted early on (simple, sweet solitaire on a thin band) and it just so happened that the perfect diamond was a family heirloom! He picked out the setting all on his own and it turned out so beautiful, I can’t stop looking at it!!
Post # 24
Most of the huge stones on this sight aren’t diamonds. They’re synthetics (no judgement, just fact), so don’t judge the size of your diamond based off what you see here. I, personally, love the tradition & stateliness of diamonds, even knowing we’d have to pay more & have a smaller ring. Totally worth it to me.
Post # 25
My center stone is .28, so even less than .33, but I love it and would never want larger. We picked it out together.
Post # 26
In the UK it wouldn’t be small but does small = less good anyway? It depends on settings and your hands, but while I love big diamonds, I have also seen heart-stoppingly gorgeous rings with small diamonds. In De Beers recently and in the Bangkok Airport Tiffany concession last year, I was really drawn to the 0.25 – 0.50 bezel and prong set solitaires, they were so twinkly, delicate and elegant. I was also biting my tongue and sitting on my hands last year at a wheelchair appointment with an Occupational Therapist for my daughter. She had the most beautiful solitaire, probably around 0.33 on a simple white metal band that was perfectly proportioned and looked amazing on her. I had never met her before and didn’t feel able to ask or comment about it.
My hands are small but broad with bent and short knobbly fingers. Very delicate rings seem to accentuate their stumpiness. Too chunky is equally unflattering on me.
If I had the hands of a nun, I’d think I’d be hot-footing it to Tiffany to buy one of their bezel solitaires with a 0.25 – 0.33 triple Ex MRB. Hell, if I could switch skin-tones too I might even get it in rose gold!
It’s wrong to assume that everyone would go bigger if they could afford it, they may prefer a setting with a smaller, high quality stone on purely aesthetic grounds.
Post # 27
Gotta love illusion settings! You are right, they do look very similar at a distance.
I agree with you that smaller stones have a certain sweet charm. The rings I like most on my friends and such in real life, truthfully, are ones with smaller stones – either solitaires or in more intricate settings. They just seem so classy and elegant.
Post # 28
Look! How gorgeous?! This is the Tiffany bezel:
Post # 29
1. I think a .33 would work very well with a sz6 finger
2. Depends on the shape some shapes face up bigger than others. (Like PP said)
3. I dont agree with PP Stating .33 is small or someone with a smaller stone couldn’t afford a larger one, this is circumstantial…. Clarity, color … Come into play… Also i know many people whom got huge ass stones but couldn’t afford them … It’s called credit, so no they can’t “afford” them either.
4. I think sizes also depend on your lifestyle with how axtive you might be aswell as your dress style… Are you more of a simple person or are you more flashy?
Post # 30
soo pretty! The size looks. Perfect