piloxll:new israeli method combines wounding+ zi/cu ions to destroy dht in the scalp

[hellouser]

So you are basically a webdesigner, you sounded like a professional photographer by the way you talk about manipulation. Try harder next time

Looks like you read only one sentence of my reply. Please read again; everything next time.

[bigentries]

So you are basically a webdesigner, you sounded like a professional photographer by the way you talk about manipulation. Try harder next time

[hellouser]

Yes, I don't know the PPI of the original pic. That has nothing to do with it, the PPI of the printed material is small (it's printing a whole computer screen in a paper sheet) and the PPI of the picture you posted is even worst. Any signs of manipulation are completely obscured by this
Think about the "broken phone" game

I edited my response. The original printed photograph looks to be of a VERY high PPI (more than 5000x3000 pixels). That translates to more than 15mp, which you could print at 11x17 at around 300dpi, past what the human eye can see in pixel density. File size is 5mb, right on target for an image of that size (I'd know since I've owned a number of dSLR cameras and currently have THREE on hand).

I don't see how being a graphic designer has anything to do with it. Do you manipulate pictures for a living? graphic design is very diverse.

I'm going to assume you're NOT trolling with these questions, so I'll give you a serious answer (the questions are pretty laughable for people in my industry and actually borderline insult). But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your ignorance on the matter (no offense).

At my current job I am more or less the digital product manager. I fill a lot of roles for my position, anything from front end/back end development in HTML, CSS, Javascript, to video producting, editing in After Effects, studio photography, print materials, as well as design and illustration across the entire Adobe Creative Suite. I've got about 14 years under my belt, 3 years of college for design and my last three years in highschool focusing lots on fine art, media arts and communications technology, winning a number of awards in young talent competitions across, going as far being top 10 in my province. It's taken an incredible number of projects to get to where I am, and yes, a lot of it has included professional photography along with colour correction and photo editing both with Lightroom and Photoshop. I've posted a number of times on proper photography here in the forums, both in terms of subject lighting and camera settings. These things WILL affect how a photograph can be manipulated, there are a number of variables and its typically whats in focus and how much of an area you have to play with. Images with a strong bokeh (google the term) with a quick focus fall off will limit what you can do. But this is just ONE variable. Again, 10+ years in the industry, I can tell. I edit photographs all the time; colour corrections, cropping, removing blemishes, removing text, etc. I enjoy my field... a lot. I love everything that has to do with digital media, this is as much of a hobby as it is a job for me.

So, questioning my expertise with Photoshop after investing so much time in my field and helping people here with photography is a slap to the face.

You were clearly in the dermarolling bandwagon, I remember you were among the people that silenced any sort of skepticism, you have a tendency of doing that

I asked to do a community trial to validate the indian study and see if we can replicate the results, a la 'poor mans follica method'. Again, you're spreading lies about me. I never made any sure claims about dermarolling. Youre reaching pretty hard dude.

[bigentries]

You have no idea what the PPI of the original photo is. In regards to the image displayed HERE in the forum, the PPI of that isn't really important. I can spot fakes from a mile away, and the pictures in the book are outstanding and like I said, there are many. Going by that alone, the results look legit. But by that ALONE.

Yes, I don't know the PPI of the original pic. That has nothing to do with it, the PPI of the printed material is small (it's printing a whole computer screen in a paper sheet) and the PPI of the picture you posted is even worst. Any signs of manipulation are completely obscured by this
Think about the "broken phone" game

Again, I can spot fakery from a mile away. I exposed Nigam's pictures in detail. Graphic design and use of photoshop has been part of my daily life for more than 10 years... every, single, day.

I don't see how being a graphic designer has anything to do with it. Do you manipulate pictures for a living? graphic design is very diverse.

Please don't spread lies like this. I never fell for anything and am not falling for Pilox either. I'm keeping a close on development but have no input on its validity as nobody knows. I am ONLY judging the photographs. In regards to the things you claim I fell for last year... what would those things be? Nigam? Because that's basically all that was ever hyped up.. and I was *never* on the bandwagon.

You were clearly in the dermarolling bandwagon, I remember you were among the people that silenced any sort of skepticism, you have a tendency of doing that

[hellouser]

Again, the PPI resolution is ridicolously low, it's a compressed JPG, and worst, it's not even the original pic, it's a picture of a printed material!

In regards to the image displayed HERE in the forum, the PPI of that isn't really important. I can spot fakes from a mile away, and the pictures in the book are outstanding and like I said, there are many. Going by that alone, the results look legit. But by that ALONE.

Also, the filename of the original photo (as is presented in the book) is in the IMG_1234.JPG format. This is the default name of all JPEGS used on many cameras. Also notice the resolution on the photos, it is about 5000px x 3400px (can't make it out). File size is over 5mb. Looks like original untouched photos, but its still possible they could be edited, but thats not likely the case.

Of course you can't see any signs of a cloning tool. It would be like me taking a picture of a Playboy magazine and ask you to point clear signs of photoshop use

Again, I can spot fakery from a mile away. I exposed Nigam's pictures in detail. Graphic design and use of photoshop has been part of my daily life for more than 10 years... every, single, day.

You are getting to emotionally attached again hellouser, remember how many things you fell for last year

Please don't spread lies like this. I never fell for anything and am not falling for Pilox either. I'm keeping a close on development but have no input on its validity as nobody knows. I am ONLY judging the photographs. In regards to the things you claim I fell for last year... what would those things be? Nigam? Because that's basically all that was ever hyped up.. and I was *never* on the bandwagon.

[bigentries]

You're negating the words of a graphic designer with your assumption that the photos are low resolution only to ask how they are not photoshopped?

Thats a new one.



Because of the extreme complexity and consistency of hair in the photographs. To photoshop SO many pictures would require a ridiculous amount of work to get THAT kind of perfection. I can't see any use of tools used with photoshop from those pictures. Typically the clone tool is used to patch areas, but thats done only by taking areas from other parts of the photograph... but this would be next to impossible with the results in the after photos.

This is exactly why I said that these are easily the BEST photographs I've ever seen and with those kind of results too.

There may be a larger version of this photograph, but this is definitely NOT photoshopped:

Again, the PPI resolution is ridicolously low, it's a compressed JPG, and worst, it's not even the original pic, it's a picture of a printed material!

Of course you can't see any signs of a cloning tool. It would be like me taking a picture of a Playboy magazine and ask you to point clear signs of photoshop use

You are getting to emotionally attached again hellouser, remember how many things you fell for last year

[bananana]

I'm a graphic designer of over 10 years as well and I'm going to VALIDATE your claim.

These photographs are NOT photoshop, and I'll say that with the same 99.9% certainty.

Nice to see another designer on the forums!

Cheers mate, vice versa!

@bigentries,
photos look quite good, they're not overcompressed or anything, they're actually bigger and better than most of MPB related photos anywhere, they have exif data, which no MPB photo I've seen ever had!

I've carefully looked at pattern in which the hair grows, I WOULD see any traces of photoshop, my eye is very trained for that, because I'm usually the one doing all sorts of clone stamps, healing brush, liquify and various other effects in a professional manner.

Long story shot - 99.9% sure there is not any kind of photo manipulation in effect here.

End of discussion (about this) for me.

Thank you

[hellouser]

Seriously? The only pics are low resolution compressed JPGs, some of them from a second take (pictures of low resolution printed material).

You're negating the words of a graphic designer with your assumption that the photos are low resolution only to ask how they are not photoshopped?

Thats a new one.

How can you judge then they are not photoshopped?

Because of the extreme complexity and consistency of hair in the photographs. To photoshop SO many pictures would require a ridiculous amount of work to get THAT kind of perfection. I can't see any use of tools used with photoshop from those pictures. Typically the clone tool is used to patch areas, but thats done only by taking areas from other parts of the photograph... but this would be next to impossible with the results in the after photos.

This is exactly why I said that these are easily the BEST photographs I've ever seen and with those kind of results too.

There may be a larger version of this photograph, but this is definitely NOT photoshopped:

[hellouser]

As I stated before, I'm a professional graphic designer with almost 10 year experience in the field and I can say I'm 99.9% these photos are NOT photoshopped or manipulated in any other way. I've manipulated probably over 10000 photos in my career, so I'd say I'm pretty much an expert in the field.
Can you all now please drop the "fake images" false allegations?

As said before - the kind of results cant be HT, cant be photoshop or manipulation

I'm a graphic designer of over 10 years as well and I'm going to VALIDATE your claim.

These photographs are NOT photoshop, and I'll say that with the same 99.9% certainty.

Nice to see another designer on the forums!

[bigentries]

As I stated before, I'm a professional graphic designer with almost 10 year experience in the field and I can say I'm 99.9% these photos are NOT photoshopped or manipulated in any other way. I've manipulated probably over 10000 photos in my career, so I'd say I'm pretty much an expert in the field.
Can you all now please drop the "fake images" false allegations?

As said before - the kind of results cant be HT, cant be photoshop or manipulation

Seriously? The only pics are low resolution compressed JPGs, some of them from a second take (pictures of low resolution printed material).
How can you judge then they are not photoshopped?

[bananana]

Yes perfect marketing plan, keep pumping the product for a year or twp and get every balding guy in the world interested and when the product is finally up for sale, they sell to everyone for roughly 8 months and are rich.
While the patents are curious, pics can be manipulated. I would not get too excited about this product. An apparatus they are selling? I am smelling something.

As I stated before, I'm a professional graphic designer with almost 10 year experience in the field and I can say I'm 99.9% these photos are NOT photoshopped or manipulated in any other way. I've manipulated probably over 10000 photos in my career, so I'd say I'm pretty much an expert in the field.
Can you all now please drop the "fake images" false allegations?

As said before - the kind of results cant be HT, cant be photoshop or manipulation

[robodoc]

Everything has been speculation. Take the forum members' claims with a fine grain of salt.

If they really want to promote their device, give it to someone we know in the forum. Let that person report the results instead of giving away these devices to "other" people. If it worked by the use of one of OUR people, they would become multi millionaires and have a very long line of orders I would think.

Who do you trust?

[Atum]

I think they meant it's not traditional wounding. As in u probably won't draw blood like people do when derma-rolling. I believe it's still wounding though. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Maybe they mean nano wounding?

[hellouser]

I was interested because this was supposed to work through wounding... but now they say it is not wounding, but works "in a similar way" to wounding... I wonder what the hell is that supposed to mean...

Everything has been speculation. Take the forum members' claims with a fine grain of salt.

[BDDFreak]

I was interested because this was supposed to work through wounding... but now they say it is not wounding, but works "in a similar way" to wounding... I wonder what the hell is that supposed to mean...

I think they meant it's not traditional wounding. As in u probably won't draw blood like people do when derma-rolling. I believe it's still wounding though. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.