ElanoryaWeight and scale
The weight you write and the size your picture shows are the same kind of statement
Weight and size sit next to each other in the list of things a jewelry description may not misrepresent, and one United States source addresses both: how a weight figure may be written, and what happens when a picture shows a stone larger than it is. Neither half settles the other.
The figure and the frame describe the same thing
Section 23.1 of the United States FTC Jewelry Guides lists what may not be misrepresented about an industry product. Size and weight are two entries on that list, sitting alongside type, kind, grade, quality, quantity, metallic content, cut, color, character, treatment, substance, durability, serviceability and origin.
A weight figure and a photograph are two ways of stating the same physical fact about one stone, and the source treats them in two places: the weight provisions describe how the figure may be written, and a note to §23.1 describes a picture that portrays a gemstone in greater than its actual size. That is why both halves stay on this page instead of being split between a copy guide and a photography guide.
This is a reading of the source dated 19 August 2026, and it covers the United States only. The Guides state of themselves that they "do not confer any rights on any person and do not operate to bind the FTC or the public". Nothing here is legal advice, and nothing here judges a particular listing.
What the weight provisions attach to a figure
Section 23.18 is written about the form of the statement, not about the weighing. The examples below are the ones the source itself gives.
- The word "point" appears only where a decimal appears too.
- Using the word "point", or any abbreviation of it, in any representation, advertising, marking or labeling to describe the weight of a diamond is stated to be unfair or deceptive unless the weight is also stated as a decimal part of a carat. The source pairs the forms directly: 25 points, .25 carat.
- A fractional representation comes with a stated imprecision.
- Where fractional carat representations are used, the provision describes disclosing that the weight is not exact and giving a reasonable range of weight for the fraction, in close proximity to it. Both parts are described together; neither is presented as sufficient on its own.
- No range is named anywhere in the passage.
- The provision requires the range to be reasonable and disclosed. It does not state what range is reasonable, and no percentage, ratio or tolerance appears in the text recorded here. Any figure offered as the permitted range would not be coming from this source.
- A correct figure does not answer the question a picture raises.
- Because §23.1 treats size and weight as separate entries, a weight stated in a permitted form still leaves the depiction to be considered on its own terms, and Note 3 is written about the depiction.
The sentence about a stone shown larger than it is
Note 3 to §23.1 reads in full: "An illustration or depiction of a diamond or other gemstone that portrays it in greater than its actual size may mislead consumers, unless a disclosure is made about the item's true size."
Two things about how that sentence is built are worth keeping. It is conditional — may mislead — and it carries its own exception, a disclosure about the item's true size. It is not written as a prohibition on enlargement, and it is not presented as one here.
The exception points at a measurement rather than at a wording. What is described as disclosed is the item's true size, which is a fact about the object and has to come from the object.
Note 2 to §23.1 is the passage that describes how such a disclosure is assessed: sufficiently clear and prominent, measured by clarity of language, relative type size, proximity to the claim it qualifies, and the absence of contrary claims that could undercut its effectiveness.
Places a size claim is made without being written
Each entry below pairs a situation with what the recorded source actually states about it. None of them is a ruling on a listing.
The weight is written as points with no decimal beside it.
Section 23.18(b) conditions the word on the weight also being stated as a decimal part of a carat, and shows the two forms together: 25 points, .25 carat.
A fraction is used and the range is left to the buyer to assume.
The provision describes two disclosures next to the fraction — that the weight is not exact, and a reasonable range for it. The source names no range, and none is supplied here.
A single tight frame is the only view, and nothing else on the listing indicates scale.
Note 3 attaches its exception to a disclosure about the item's true size. A measured dimension recorded beside the weight is the kind of statement that exception describes.
The qualification exists but sits far from the figure, in smaller type.
Note 2 names proximity to the claim, relative type size and clarity of language as the measures by which a disclosure is judged sufficiently clear and prominent.
A generated image is read as a record of how large the stone is.
No claim is made here that the app measures, preserves or reports true scale. The true-size figure in a listing is a measurement the seller holds.
Where this page stops
- It names no permitted tolerance. The source asks for a reasonable range to be disclosed and states no number; supplying one here would be an invention.
- It does not harden the depiction note into a ban. The sentence is conditional and carries its own exception, and it is quoted in that form.
- It is United States material, read on 19 August 2026, and the Guides state that they do not bind the FTC or the public. Nothing here reaches any other market, and no other market's material was read for it.
- It does not cover cropping and padding to platform dimensions, or macro and focus technique; those belong to the published photography guides and are not repeated.
- It does not define a grading scale. The source recorded here sets out no color, clarity or cut scale, and no certificate or grading report requirement appears in it.
- It does not settle whether any particular figure or image misleads anyone. That judgment is not made on this page.
Questions
How do I state carat weight correctly, and can a close-up make a stone look bigger than it is?
The weight provisions in §23.18 condition the word "point" on the weight also being stated as a decimal part of a carat, and attach to a fractional representation a disclosure that the weight is not exact together with a reasonable range, in close proximity to the fraction. The picture is addressed separately: Note 3 to §23.1 states that a depiction portraying a gemstone in greater than its actual size may mislead consumers unless a disclosure is made about the item's true size. This page reports both; it does not assess a particular listing.
Can I write 25 points instead of .25 carat?
Section 23.18(b) states that using the word "point", or any abbreviation of it, to describe the weight of a diamond is unfair or deceptive unless the weight is also stated as a decimal part of a carat. The source gives the two forms as a pair — 25 points, .25 carat — rather than as alternatives.
What range am I allowed to give alongside a fraction?
The source does not name one. It describes disclosing that the weight is not exact and a reasonable range of weight for the fraction, in close proximity to it, and gives no percentage, ratio or tolerance. Any specific range would have to come from somewhere other than this source.
Is a zoomed-in photograph not allowed?
That is not what the passage says. Note 3 to §23.1 is conditional: such a depiction may mislead consumers, unless a disclosure is made about the item's true size. It is not written as a prohibition, and this page does not present it as one.