Our living room rug was a housewarming gift from a dear friend. I tried placing the furniture half on it, but I couldn't bear one bit of being unseen. so everything's off, and we actually ended up preferring it that way. I think experimentation is key, to get a good feel for each look.

I don't have pieces of rug like this in my home so I didn't know what the proper etiquette was, I felt like it was a test haha - I guessed half on half off as I think this looks best....that was the polls most chosen answer. ..whew! I feel as though I guessed correctly - note to self in the future :)

Ancillary furniture like tables, side chairs, etc. should be entirely on or off.

Perhaps start with the purpose of the carpet - keeping the feet warm and insulated from the floor. This was driven home to me living in drafty 18th-century houses in New Engand, on stone floors through a Roman winter (I had no rugs, so I wrapped a thick book in brown paper and put my feet on that), and now on tile in the Sonoran desert, where winter nights are 20 degrees and summer days are 120 degrees. So... when I swing my feet out of bed, I want to land on carpet. When I'm seated I want my feet on carpet. It doesn't matter whether the carpet runs under the furniture a little or a lot, just as long as the feet are on it.

And let us not forget the other option; putting the carpet on the furniture.

If the rug is a fine work of art, it can be displayed on wall or table, very old tradition, if a bit alien to our experience:

Depends on the rug. Antique oriental? Machine woven? Navajo rug? An art piece. Only place I can think of furniture on a rug is the dining room. The table and chairs on it and none of the above would apply in this case.

tfswest makes an excellent point. First and foremost, decorating addresses practical issues. Rugs, drapes, and canopied beds were originally about warmth, and keeping drafts to a minimum. Even the tapestries that he refers to as wall rugs were meant to prevent heat loss and gain through solid walls. I once lived in a old house with solid-concrete block walls. Summer's heat would continue to radiate in long after the sun set, but the walls would never warm in the winter causing a big energy drain.

I don't think in your own home you should have to play by the rules. Just do what looks good to you.

Perfect timing for this discussion, because I am going through this very problem right now! I have a small accent rug (about 3'x5') in my living-room, on top of wall to wall carpeting. I brought the rug from our previous home, and don't want to get rid of it, because it has sentimental value. It's a fraction larger than the rectangular coffee table that sits on it. I'm thinking of layering an area rug on the carpet, where only the front furniture legs will sit on the area rug. The purpose of an area rug in this case would be to prevent wear & tear on the wall to wall carpeting from foot traffic in front of the furniture. The accent rug would be simply that - an accent. An area rug that would accommodate the furniture sitting fully on it is out of the question, because it would cover too much of the wall to wall carpeting - which has a pretty embossed texture! I appreciate the comments that there is no hard and fast rule - it really depends on your layout, style, and personal preferences. I know the so-called "rule" for dining-rooms is to have the chairs fully on an area rug. In our former home we had an oval dining-table, and an oval area rug a little smaller than the table, on a tiled floor. The front legs of the dining-chairs sat on the rug only when fully under the table. Since the rug echoed the shape of the table it actually looked really good. I'm debating whether to do the same thing in our current dining-area, where there is even less space for a full-sized area rug. Our floor tile is new, and a standard sized area rug would cover it apart from a border of tile. It simply wouldn't look right! Thanks for all the comments and thoughts shared on the subject of furniture being on or off a rug - it's giving me lots of food for thought!

Klllpcllllbmnhgmnp

E

Ok I'm miss

If a piece of furniture is almost flush to the floor, seems unnecessary to have a decorative rug under 100% of it, and can cause the rug to unevenly fade in light. On the other hand airy leggy furniture or glass tops show off the rug. I enjoy the frame of an attractive floor i.e. hardwood or tile of at least 18". This seems a bit silly as most rooms have some furniture against the wall, and some forming a grouping either conversational or dining or ....

As so many have said, it really does depend on the room. The only situation in which I almost always think no furniture on the rug isn't good is with an area rug at the foot of a bed. Unless the legs "anchor" it--you get that flying carpet look.

Half on half off results in scratched floors.?those darned felt pads always fall off!

Room too wide but not wide enough for easy conversation with furniture not crouching on edge of rug to be closer together.

There are no rules at all. It depends on the size and quality of the rug/carpet, the purpose and traffic in the room, and the type of furniture in that room. For example, a dining room with any large rug usueally has it placed under the dining table and chairs; a long hallway would normally not have any furniture placed on a rug, which is usually a runner, and a large room may or may not have large furniture placed on rugs/carpets, depending on their size.

Depends on the proportions of the size of the rug to the size of the room and also the size of furniture to the size of the rug and the room. Sometimes we need to move the furniture away from the walls and the rug is too large and we end up putting all furniture or only front legs of the sofa on the rug. Some times the rug is small compared to the size of the room and the furniture look best if they are not on the rug.

Depends on the size of the space. I think front legs on are perfectly acceptable. I also believe a centered rug with all furniture off looks great. furniture all on has its place also, there is not one answer for this. Every space speaks to something different.

This decision is a personal choice. So many variables because each room, each piece of furniture, the lighting, everything is different. I would say arrange the room and if it looks like something is missing, add the rug. The design of the rug plays just as important a part. If your rug has a wide border and your sofa covers the border completely on one side, it make the arrangement look off. The rug has to fit the room, the furniture and your own taste. After reading the other comments it seems many feel the same way. Uniqueness and variety are the spice of life. Make your home in your own daring style and it will truly be your own!

i don't like good wool rugs underneath low lying or skirted furniture. i'm old-world and have seen the damage moth larvae can do to rugs that aren't enough exposed to light and action.

but!~ if you are going to live with not-so-great ... trendy sort of rugs, no problem.

in a modern open floor plan design, rugs effectively define a space.... and look best when furniture is ...for-the-most-part, on the rug.

I shake my wool rugs almost daily, while my roomba does the hardwood floors (they are 4x6 rugs) and this works well for me - the rugs are lovely and define the space without making it harder to keep the floors, and the rugs themselves, clean.

I did some reading on this due to my lack of knowledge about it and what I learned is that many designers say it depends upon the size of the room and the effect you want. In a traditional setting where furniture has walls behind it, it was front legs on. In large open spaces all furniture and legs on the rug was used to anchor the grouping (and show it as a distinct living space). In very small spaces like entrys it was no legs on.

I have seen these rules broken and it still looks great so the article was just a guideline which I felt was quite helpful.

I dislike the look of one of those big graphic modern rugs that is 5x8 and apparently meant to be thrown in front of a sofa. looks cheap. I like the look of a room with hardwood floors, rugs 12-18 inches from walls, furniture on the rugs.

Half on half off!

I prefer the rug on its own especially on a wooden floor. Easier to keep clean this way also, but heh it's not a big deal if it's partially under the furniture for me. Whatever works.

If at all possible the furniture should all be on the rug but we don't live in a perfect world. I voted half off/half on. Some part of the furniture should be on the rug to have a cohesive look. This is fine in any room but the dining room. If you have a rug in the dining room the chairs when pulled out to sit should be on the rug also. The buffet or china closet can be on or half off the rug.

In a room, such as Susan Ms from yesterday, the rug appears way to small. When the sofa is pulled away from the wall and the rug centered more in the room, it may work better, but would ground the space if it was the correct size for the room.

I am a firm believer that area rugs should be touching all fronts of the furniture as this creates an 'oasis' and brings the space together.

When an area rug is too small, it looks like 'postage stamp' in the middle of the floor, floating with no purpose. One of the only exceptions for me would be if you are using an animal hide styled rug, then not every piece of furniture needs to be on it because of their unusual shape.

I just released a video on this very topic to share what I believe to be one of the biggest mistakes homeowners make with area rugs. It's usually that they are too small. I show you in my 3D drawing program, what works best and why.

Not a designer so I don't really get the "rule" that all furniture must have at least front legs on rug. We've had our LR set up w sofa not on rug (chairs are) forever, and it doesn't look too small, unfinished, and no the rug doesn't move, that's why there is a carpet mat under the rug!! Not home so can't post a pic, but so glad that I don't feel tied to a rigorous set of rules !

I prefer tables half on the rug and half off the rug. That way anything spilled on the table will pour off the table and onto the floor instead of on the rug.

I feel at least the front legs, if not all legs, should be ON the rug. I realize budget can be a big factor is the size of rug we purchase :) But a rug that only has the coffee table on it, IMHO, oddly floats and is what some refer to as a "postage stamp" rug. It just doesn't "pull" the furniture into a grounded grouping.

But as many have stated above, rules are meant to be broken, so do what feels best to you!

There is no correct answer----every case is different.

Thats right, ....every case is different.

You need to see where you put the rug, which kind of dimension has the house or appatment,.... There is a special energy you are aiming to reach for your home and yourself ....by choosing the correct size of the carpet. Sometimes its even a matter of inches...

We prefer having our couch and hubby's "leisure" chair on the tile not the area rug. Thusly avoiding constant foot traffic to wear out the rug. Our occasional chairs barely touch the edge.

Our client's living room and foyer are adjacent to one another. In their living room we have their main furniture pieces on the rug, but the back sofa legs are 2" or so in from the edge. In their foyer we have only the accent chair's front legs on the rug. Truly it's all about preference, dimensions, and functionality.

We went with all on, at least for the couch area...

Depends upon how you want it to function. If the rug is a rug, the furniture can go on it. If the rug is a sculpture, keep the furniture, pets, shoes, feet, and kids off it.

I like all on, all off or all with front legs on.

With respect to a dining room, our table is 124" long. If you follow the "rules," this means that I HAVE to have a rug that is anywhere from a full 14-15 feet. I was finally able to find a rug that I love that is 13 feet 5 inches. All of the chairs are fully on the rug when no one is using the table/chairs, but the end chairs are going to go onto the wood floor when someone is using them, and perhaps be on the carpet only an inch or two when in use. Because of the set "rules," I am thinking of returning the rug, but know that I am not going to be able to easily find a vintage rug in 10 x 14-15 feet. Driving me nuts about what to do.

@Passionate Home:

Hi, it´s not totaly impossible to get that size 10 x 14-15 in Vintage. It´s difficult, because its a very unusal size, but there is a chance to create it. Means it would be a custom made Vintage rug, especially for you, or for your customer. Here you have also the chance to determinate the ground colours. And probably you are right, the end chairs should be better within (on) the rug. If you have any interest for following up this special Vintage size, just send a message with your ideas, we are able to the possiblities.

Passionate Home, i would definitely get a larger sized rug. Those rear legs bumping off and on the rug make it very difficult for guests to move their chairs to the table. I'd return it and try a wide enough rug.....for the comfort of guests.

regarding open-space areas, (as opposed to walled rooms), i prefer not to define little grouped areas by placing all legs on the rug(s). When you allow the legs to be on the floor the look is more unifying to the whole. To me, it's too.....'island-ish' and looks weird when separate seating areas are all mounted ontop of separate rugs.

I'm interested in opinions on the size of this rug. Lots of "rules" about furniture on or off but we really like this particular hand-knotted 8x10' wool and silk rug and are trying it from the dealer for a couple of days. It is available larger. We recently redid the home by knocking down walls and this room is now connected to the kitchen and entry way. Behind the overstuffed chair is a large island and the kitchen and behind the couch are approx 4-5' more feet of a walkway to the kitchen. Also interested in color comments; more color or is this about right?

I would suggest adding more of the orange in pillows or artistic items in the bookcase -- not a lot, however. I think the color of the carpet looks nice, but believe you should go larger and have some under the chair. I can see a rug with more color, inclusive of some of that orange, but there is not a science to this. If you love the rug, go with it but consider sizing up. Your art above the fireplace is so striking, that I'd love to see you pull out some of the orange...again, not a lot.

I love the rug! works really well with sofa and side chair, overall an elegant pulled together look. Agree with adding some color by the way of orange cushions. the size looks fine based on 2 picture. I like that there is a border of the wood floor that frames the rug. I Pattern rug is a great choice. Recently I came across this Rug grippers that I now use under all my rugs to keep the corners in place. especially works on a hardwood floor. Available on Amazon

How would you size and place an area rug under a couch where one end of the couch is up against a wall and the other is opened? The couch is 160 inches in lengths and 41 inches deep. It is off center for better tv viewing.
The room is 201 inches long. ( couch wall) and 178 inches wide. Any help is appreciated.

I think you missed my comment on your other post. This one is 5 years old and unlikely to get anyone's attention.

Thank you decoenthusiaste. I posted here first. I did see your comment. Thank you. I may wind up centering the couch on the long wall since that gives me more options for an area rug.

We offer you a diverse collection of one-of-a-kind rugs individually handmade in the Atlas Mountains. Each rug from knotted to flatwoven features seductive designs with infinite symbols passed down from generation to generation. On our website, you will find anything from minimalist to maximalist Moroccan rugs and everything in between with sustainability top of mind. Right from the loom to your room!
https://www.babakech.com