Women are familiar with all the guides and suggestions available on anything that has to do with their general appearance: from the most flattering bathing suit for their body shape to the best shade of shadow for their eye color to the most complementary cut for their face shape and hair type.
There even are websites that can give you a virtual preview of what you will look like with a certain hairstyle and makeup. (I gave myself a bob here.)
So, naturally, I was intrigued when I received an email from online retailer James Allen about its guide to “Choosing the Best Ring for Your Hand Shape.”
I was disappointed to learn, however, that there is no actual feature on JamesAllen.com where you upload a photo of your hand and it virtually matches you with your best ring. Note to retailers looking to enhance their websites: though I am sure it already exists on other sites and/or apps, this would be a really, really cool feature to add to your site.
The guide itself was interesting, though, and something the online retailer’s customer service staff can offer in a consultation, a company spokeswoman told me.
With no definitive measurements to go on–are my fingers considered wide and short, narrow or are they in between?–I simply guessed and placed myself in the category of being “small handed.” It runs in the family; see my previous post about my grandmother’s engagement ring.
According to the James Allen guide, “large, muscular hands” with wider knuckles look best with bigger rings and bolder cuts, such as the radiant, princess, Asscher and emerald while women with long, slender fingers “can pull off almost anything,” but should try round, cushion and princess cuts or, for something different, an emerald-cut diamond.
For the small-handed woman, the guide recommended oval-shaped diamonds, which I happen to love, because they elongate the hands and fingers without “overwhelming the petite hand.”
That all sounds good to me.