(Closed) What do YOU consider too small? Talking about rings of course.. ;)

posted 11 years ago in Rings
Post # 137
Member
227 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: October 2013

I have a 1 ct, I’m a size 4.5 finger. Im not sure if ring size plays a part in how a stone looks or not, personally I would never go less than .75. I’m thinking of going up to 2 ct actually. Yes a 2 ct would be a bit big, but I love big rocks. I don’t mind looking taken from across the street;)

Post # 138
Member
1180 posts
Bumble bee

@LilMsMicro:  a 2ct on a 4.5 is noticably big, but from what my sister and mom say, it doesn’t look ostentatious.

Post # 139
Member
263 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: June 2016

For my personal taste, anyone smaller than a 1 ct. is too small. I am a girl that loves her bling. I think anywhere from a 1-1.5 ct is perfect. Chances are if her ring was that big, it’s fake. Not trying to be rude, but I’m just sayin…

Post # 140
Member
318 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: August 2014

I have a 2 carat diamond and love it! Wouldnt have wanted anything smaller or larger 🙂

Post # 141
Hostess
2203 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: April 2014

I tried on a 1.5 and a 2 ct round.  The 2 ct looked VERY large with my halo setting.  I never thought a diamond could be too big but for my setting it was.  It wasn’t really the size of my finger (6) I was concerned about

Post # 142
Member
20 posts
Newbee
  • Wedding: June 2013

I have very small fingers…size 3.25 and I have a 1.5 ct center. At first I thought it felt large but now I think it’s the perfect size. I think I could’ve gone up to 2 cbrigand been fine. I live in LA. It really is true that size is not only relative to finger size but also relative to where you live and what size rings your friends wear.

Post # 143
Member
1180 posts
Bumble bee

lol double post.

Post # 144
Member
741 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: October 2014 - Vegas baby!

I wear anywhere from a 6.75 – 7.25 depending on how cold or warm it is. I have tried on 1 carat solitaires and they look super tiny to me. My fingers aren’t really chubby, and they are pretty average length, but whenver we get my ring I am definitely going with a 1.5 carat. I want a little more coverage than the 1 carats I tried on. I occasionally wear my grandmother’s antique wedding set. The engagement ring is around .25-.30 carat solitaire, but the round solitaire stone sits in an enhancer which makes it look more like 1 carat. 

I’m from Pittsburgh, and any size ring works here. My dad’s fiance wears a size 4 ring and she has a 2 carat solitaire cushion in a halo setting, and my best friend has a .25 carat solitaire, so it can go in any direction here.

Post # 145
Member
638 posts
Busy bee

For me personally, I had a 0.33 solitaire for my 1st marriage, my ring size is 6.5.  I thought it looked really small on my hand.  But then I’ve seen the same size on others here and it doesn’t look that way at all for some reason.  Surprised

I’ve since reset it in a bezel for a RHR, but that didn’t help much. 

Post # 146
Member
638 posts
Busy bee

I prefer this for myself, it’s 1.03 ct (also not an ering). – but this is the proportion I like for me.  Although I’ve always dreamed of someday owning a 2+ carat!  

Post # 147
Member
113 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: September 2013

Like others have mentioned I think it’s a personal preference. I’m only a size 4 but I’d be ok going up to a 2 carat, with that being said i picked an expensive setting so my fiancé’s budget only allowed me a 1.25 carat. With the tacori bloom it is more the size of a 2 carat tho. I’m from BC Canada.

Post # 148
Member
402 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: February 2013

I’ve got size 5, fairly long and slim fingers. I kind of have to qualify this based on shape. If it were round or square (essentially anything as wide as it is long) I wouldn’t want to go over a carat because my fingers would look comically long next to this large, short rock. However, if it were elongated, say an emerald, radiant, oval marquise etc. I think I could go up to even a 1.5 without it looking (or rather, making my fingers look) ridiculous because it would match them proportionately.

Post # 149
Member
817 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: July 2014

Size 4.25, wearing a 1ct round brilliant moissanite.  I think it’s the perfect size. 

 

We discussed going smaller (my mom has a 0.8ct diamond on a size 7 finger, and I didn’t want to go bigger than hers), but we would have needed to order it custom in the setting, and it didn’t seem worth it.  Fiance had read online that 1.5 is “standard” (which I think is an obnoxious lie for at least 90% of the US), and I’m so glad he asked and didn’t just go with that.

At this point, I think 1ct is the max I feel comfortable wearing.  We’re just out of school, and especially given that people assume any clear stone is a diamond, I wouldn’t want my coworkers thinking that I had spent 10k+ on jewelry.  

Regarding the smallest I’d go…pretty small, conditional upon a vintage (or vintage-styled) setting.  I’ve seen some absolutely stunning .2ct (center) rings from the 20s, and would proudly wear one. 

Post # 150
Member
2453 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2012

anything above 1ct would have weighed my whole hand down lol!

Post # 151
Member
652 posts
Busy bee

My ring size is 7.75 and my simulant is the equivalent of a 1.59 carat princess cut diamond. I think it’s the perfect size for my finger. I wouldn’t want anything smaller than 1 carat equivalent. I think anything below .75 looks too small on my finger.

The topic ‘What do YOU consider too small? Talking about rings of course.. ;)’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors