Help choosing round diamond

[Menzies547]

Hello, looking for help finding a >1.6ct, G colour or better, VS2 or better, round diamond, triple X, ideal cut that is GIA or AGS certified. I found the following stone for US$11k, but am unsure on the med fluorescence. Would appreciate any advice, or recommendations, including better stones for a similar price.

I am not in the US so would be shipping the stone internationally, making it harder to return with tax and duties implications.

Video link: https://www.ritani.com/products/1-6...cut-g-color-vvs1-clarity-gia-sku-d-5meigk8081

 

[TXwidow]

is there a video of this stone?

 

[MissGotRocks]

The diamond says sold. Did you purchase it?

 

[Dreamer_D]

Cut looks nice.

 

[Menzies547]

The diamond was on hold, but hasn't been purchased and should show as available in the next day or so. Main concern is the med fluorescence.

 

[freddyboston]

Fluorescence is a plus with this stone - too bad it's only Medium .... If you're worried about "hazy,milky,cloudy" issue that won't be a problem. All this VVS1 has is a pinpoint (no graining - no clouds - no twin wisps etc..) FL exposes pre-exisiting hazy clarity problems - it doesnt cause them.... That's a nice 1.6ct G Natural

 

[freddyboston]

lovely in uv black light

Diamond DNA

DNA View

views.diadna.com

 

[Menzies547]

Thanks very much, thats really helpful. What are your thoughts on this one which is cheaper than the 1.6 at ~USD $9k to $10k, but I would need to get it reset. It is second hand. Unfortunately, these are the only images at this stage and I would need to get it inspected by a jeweller. I am wondering if its worth it based on the photos, price and GIA certificate given you're getting a bit more carat weight for a lower price. It has an HCA score of 2.6, whilst the 1.6ct is a 1.6 HCA score.

See link for cert details: https://www.stonealgo.com/diamond-details/GIA-number-2161615484

 

[TXwidow]

https://www.stonealgo.com/diamond-details/GIA-number-2161615484 deeper than we recommend; cloud/pinpoints/needle, angles are not the most complementary