Dr Nigam agrees to doubling slick NW6/NW7

[One]

Nigams should just hire a professional who knows all that stuff. He shouldn't be shooting the photo's himself. How much would it cost to have a professional photographer in India come over ? I bet you'd have a great one for $100-$150. Problem solved. If Nigams doesn't even want to do that, it just shows that he has not interest in showing us good photo's.

Yes, but a photographer who knows how the hell do you document a case of doubling of hair? Maybe it will be used to photograph a wedding or beautiful girls I hope

You have to do that at least see photos of cases of Hasson and Wong Rahal or to give you an idea of what to do.

[Arashi]

Nigams should just hire a professional who knows all that stuff. He shouldn't be shooting the photo's himself. How much would it cost to have a professional photographer in India come over ? I bet you'd have a great one for $100-$150. Problem solved. If Nigams doesn't even want to do that, it just shows that he has not interest in showing us good photo's.

[hellouser]

I agree.

Will be interesting to see how the donor area after removing almost all of the hair.
Let's see how it goes.

As for the photos, Dr. Nigam's always wrong He does too blurry photos, or photos with tight composition, photo or too far, or pictures with light / angle / length hair clearly mixed.

He must understand how to make the photos once and for all beginning to use a professional camera, otherwise we can not understand anything!

Ps: Someone in the forum could find or scirvere a small photo guide with the basic rules to make a good photo-report?

I posted before on some basics for photography:

Essentially you just need a studio environment and knowledge of controlled lighting to replicate results months after. A separate room for photography will work great but it shouldn't have windows to change the conditions (morning vs evening shots when light casts through the window).

However, all you need to do is treat the photography as you would with product photography: BALANCED lighting.

Here's a guy setting up a table to take photos of product shots;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrAyekIFfug

If he turned off all the equipment, and turned it back on 6 months later, all the settings should still be in place and the SAME results should happen. Otherwise, just note down what camer settings were used as well as the studios lights power output, their distance from the subject, etc.

Here's my run down of the things required to work the camera itself (lights are a different ball game)


- Lots and LOTS of lighting is required for this purpose
- Use f/5.6 or higher (not lower, we need everything in focus)
- Use a low ISO speed to reduce noise levels in final photograph (800 is absolute max but 100-200 would be ideal, 400 is typically fine)
- Use as fast of a shutter speed as possible to reduce motion blur from hand-shake

General rule of thumb is if your shooting at 100mm, shoot your photographs at 1/100 of a shutter speed, any less and you'll likely encounter blur from handshake. Low aperture settings like f/2.8 or f/4.0 will cause the subject to blur out continually as it extends further back. We need absolutely everything in focus. But when shooting at f/5.6 or f/8.0, the opening of the glass is very small (and continually smaller as you go higher up to f/11 or f/16) which is why you need a LOT of light in the first place in order to achieve the fast shutter speed, otherwise the photographs come out dark. Use soft lighting, don't use an exposed light bulb that casts strong shadows. This is also why taking portrait shots during cloudy days is best, when the sun is behind the clouds and diffuses the light. My bathroom at home has long tube lights which are behind a semi-opaque plastic which gives a very soft shadow; this is the very best kind of lighting you'll want.

Essentially what we want to know is donor and recipient, both regeneration and growth so general shots are the most important.

However for proper and best documentation we'd also require macro shots. Most point and shoots these days have a macro mode which is typically the little flower icon located on the dial in/on the camera settings (some are on screen other using a knob). For the very close macro shots, you'll need a ton of light for this as from my experience with point and shoots.

Make sure to find a spot at home that gives consistent lighting; practice taking some shots and try to recreate the same results every time. You'll need to know all the camera settings for this and shoot in MANUAL mode (if possible, point and shoots dont typically have manual mode) because if you shoot in Auto, the camera will give different results each time. Hence, controlled lighting and manual control will give you and us the desired results.

Also, and equally important are temperature settings (white balance). The camera does a best guess at this as well, but any camera with manual control will allow you to change this. Ie; tungsten lights produce a bit of a yellow tone, but the camera can add a bit of a blue hue to compensate so white walls actually look white rather than yellow. This can play into how dark (or how 'brown') your hair may appear though it shouldn't be a factor if its kept buzzed. I suppose that will depend on you.

Basically, note down:

ISO Speed (ISO 100? ISO 200? ISO 400?)
Shutter Speed (1/100th sec? 1/200th sec? 1/320th sec?)
Aperture f/5.6? f/8.0? f/11?
White Balance See camera setting (click here for chart)

Don't use the same camera settings in different lighting conditions. Photography is *all* about light... hell, it derives from the greek word 'foto' which means light. But if you take your photos in the same place, same lights, etc. you shouldnt have to use different settings. For example, taking pictures at night with no ambient light but only washroom/bedroom/etc lights will give you the same lighting conditions as before (unless a bulb goes out and buy new less/more powerful ones). Use a tripod if youre on your own. If you have a buddy that knows his/her way with manual settings on a camera, ask them to help you out.

If you follow these steps, you should end up with photographs that all look roughly the same except for hair growth/regeneration at which point you should be organizing the pictures by DATE in order to NOT mess up which photographs were taken at which stage post-op.

And there you have it folks, the right way to take consistent pictures.

I would strongly advise anyone thats interesting in photography to buy this DVD: http://zackarias.com/workshop/onelight-dvd/

I've got my copy and learned more about it around 4 years ago. Everything there is explained as if it were said to a child, so its easily understandable.

If Nigam doesn't hire a professional that knows how to document before/after results, he better learn how to use a camera and studio lights. The guy knows how to work with stem cells apparently, learning how to implement studio lighting into his clinic for documentation should be a walk in the park... more importantly it will only help his credibility, if he has any, which of course I hope he does. I want baldness cured and I don't care who or how its done as long as the results are safe and proper (no scars, no botched hairlines, etc)

I think I'd go with Nikon regardless, lol. I just don't trust Samsung from a photography standpoint, theyve got far less experience than Nikon and Canon in terms of producing a solid camera.

Resolution/megapixels means nothing. All it does is determine the size of the photo and how much noise there will be depending on the sensor type (CCD sucks compared to CMOS) and the size of the sensor. Of course, always shoot in the largest size possible. Megapixels has just become a marketing term for the masses to believe that the higher the MP count, the better the photos, which is bullshit because the better the sensor and lens, THEN the better the photos get.

Don't get TOO close to your head with the camera either though, as you will notice that things will go blurry a bit quicker the further back they are. This is called 'Bokeh' which is also affected by the aperture in the lens (the opening of it) which will determine how much is in focous. Basically, it looks like this:



Suppose you took a portrait of someones face in a football field using an aperture setting of f/2.8 (the widest possible opening on that Samsung camera you posted). The wider the opening, the more light comes in, but also the quicker things will get out of focus. You can assume that if focused on the nose that would be in focus but the persons ear would be a little OUT of focus, and the football field would be completely blurry.

BUT, if you use a higher aperture setting of say, f/16 or f/22, then pretty much EVERYTHING is in focus, but the opening of the lens is really small, so not a lot of light comes through it and thus you need LOTS of lighitng. Which would be ideal for the purposes of the documentation of the progress with HASCI's method. We need to be able to count all the hairs with CLARITY in mind.

This kind of work is probably very confusing to a newbie photography which is why I suggested hiring a professional and letting them know EXACTLY what we need and what we DONT want to see in the photos.

You could even make a case that this is not for profit and ask if someone could do it pro-bono. Taking these pics for professionals should be a simple task and wont require much time so who knows, maybe there is someone nice enough to help you out? Perhaps offer them a free meal or something. Its not exhausting work, they wouldnt even need to colour correct or anything, just raw photos.

I wish I was there dude, I'd easily document the progress for you.

Don't zoom in too much with your camera (phone?). All lenses (other than primes and constant-apertures) suffer from higher aperture settings when zoomed in. Ie;

If your lens is a regular 18-55mm f/3.5-f/5.6 this means it is f/3.5 at 18mm, but the more you zoom in, the higher the aperture is thus at 55mm you're at f/5.6 which a LOT less light goes through it.

Aperture increments are counted in full stops; f/2.8, f/4.0, f/5.6, etc. Everything inbetween (ie; f/3.5) is incremental. With each full stop you lose HALF the amount of light since the opening of the glass is half the size. To compensate, you'd need to have a shutter speed that is twice as long (1/50th second instead of 1/100th second) but this gives the problem with blurry images from your hands not being still.

Bumping up the ISO will allow you to shoot at faster shutter speeds, but if you go too high (ISO 1600 or more) you'll see plenty of noise, like this:

Photography is as much of a skill as it is a talent.... I've posted a lot about how to take proper photos but the best situation would be to hire someone that can take both macro shots of the donor area and a high resolution shot of the entire area as well.

[Arashi]

Remind me, when is he taking these better pictures?

Despite what you said above, why take the risk, just send Hellouser over lol (sorry hellouser, go pack your bag) Yes their are plenty of photographers in India, but good luck telling them exactly what we want!

I agree with what jjjjrs just said. The photographer just needs to have some basic photography knowledge. And they all have, otherwise they wouldn't be photographers, lol. Of course there's a difference between a good and a perfect photo, but as long as the photo's are sharp, in focus, not too far away, shot with a modern DSLR cam with decent lense, in high resolution and shot in normal daylight, then I'm happy. Any (professional) photographer can do that.

I think Nigams said he's going to get us better photo's within a week.

[gc83uk]

I don't think the problem is that Nigam's can't find anybody with a decent camera and basic photography knowledge. That's just impossible. There are photographers in India, lol, and they do have DSLR cams there too. If Nigam's doesn't start shooting good photo's, then that's because he does not WANT to show us good photo's. Which means he's a fraud. Sorry, I don't think there's any another explanation. If Nigam's is not serious about proving his techniques, there's only that explanation.

He promised us better pictures though, so let's see what he comes up with.

Remind me, when is he taking these better pictures?

Despite what you said above, why take the risk, just send Hellouser over lol (sorry hellouser, go pack your bag) Yes their are plenty of photographers in India, but good luck telling them exactly what we want!

[Arashi]

Yes, but I do not trust, that is, I think Nigam has something but does not know how to document!

He does not know how to take good photos, and sends him seem Ok. But it's always wrong.

I think we should explain as it gets, because after a year we are still talking about the same things!

Come on, this guy is not an idiot, he claims he solved hairloss !! How difficult is it to get a photographer to take some professional pictures ?

[One]

In this case, as long as he has a reasonable camera, it really shouldn't be hard to take the pictures. We don't even need to count hairs or anything like that. As long as the photos are sharp, consistent and taken with good lighting, they should be perfectly fine.

But the point does need to be stressed. Dr. Nigam, we need clear, consistent photos!

Yes, but I do not trust, that is, I think Nigam has something but does not know how to document!

He does not know how to take good photos, and sends him seem Ok. But it's always wrong.

I think we should explain as it gets, because after a year we are still talking about the same things!

[Arashi]

Arashi, let me make a suggestion.

I love this 10k idea, but you could also or instead of do the following:
Fly out there yourself and take the photos, which I don't think you're that keen on doing from memory.

But how about you hire a photographer to go over to India and take the photos to the standard we all would like to see. It wouldn't cost anywhere near $10,000. I wonder if Hellouser would offer his services.

Your criteria was spot on and difficult to find:
1) someone who obviously knows how to take the perfect photo
2) someone who knows all about hair transplants, doubling etc a rare combination!

I don't think the problem is that Nigam's can't find anybody with a decent camera and basic photography knowledge. That's just impossible. There are photographers in India, lol, and they do have DSLR cams there too. If Nigam's doesn't start shooting good photo's, then that's because he does not WANT to show us good photo's. Which means he's a fraud. Sorry, I don't think there's any another explanation. If Nigam's is not serious about proving his techniques, there's only that explanation.

He promised us better pictures though, so let's see what he comes up with.

[JJJJrS]

As for the photos, Dr. Nigam's always wrong Or does too blurry photos, or photos with tight composition, photo or too far, or pictures with light / angle / length hair clearly mixed.

He must understand how to make the photos once and for all beginning to use a professional camera, otherwise we can not understand anything!

Ps: Someone in the forum could find or scirvere a small photo guide with the basic rules to make a good photo-report?

In this case, as long as he has a reasonable camera, it really shouldn't be hard to take the pictures. We don't even need to count hairs or anything like that. As long as the photos are sharp, consistent and taken with good lighting, they should be perfectly fine.

But the point does need to be stressed. Dr. Nigam, we need clear, consistent photos!

[gc83uk]

Arashi, let me make a suggestion.

I love this 10k idea, but you could also or instead of do the following:
Fly out there yourself and take the photos, which I don't think you're that keen on doing from memory.

But how about you hire a photographer to go over to India and take the photos to the standard we all would like to see. It wouldn't cost anywhere near $10,000. I wonder if Hellouser would offer his services.

Your criteria was spot on and difficult to find:
1) someone who obviously knows how to take the perfect photo
2) someone who knows all about hair transplants, doubling etc a rare combination!

[One]

It sounds pretty traumatic, to extract 80-90% of the donor area of a NW7... But if Dr. Nigam can do that, you basically have the test right there.

All he has to do is take clear pictures which:
a) show the donor and recipient prior to extraction. There should be no doubt about the extent of the patients hair loss.
b) pictures of the donor right after extraction. This should prove that the majority of the patient's donor has been extracted and implanted into the recipient.
c) pictures of the donor and recipient in the months after. These should show clear regrowth in the donor and growth in the recipient.

A test like this would speak for itself and be almost impossible to fake too.

I agree.

Will be interesting to see how the donor area after removing almost all of the hair.
Let's see how it goes.

As for the photos, Dr. Nigam's always wrong He does too blurry photos, or photos with tight composition, photo or too far, or pictures with light / angle / length hair clearly mixed.

He must understand how to make the photos once and for all beginning to use a professional camera, otherwise we can not understand anything!

Ps: Someone in the forum could find or scirvere a small photo guide with the basic rules to make a good photo-report?

[JJJJrS]

By Dr Nigam from HS:

[div][postedby]Originally Posted by drnigam[/postedby]

2) day 1 - (5th November 2013) ,day 2 (6th November ), day 3 ( 7th November ), day 4 ( 8th November )
On day 1 to day 4 we intend to extract 80- 90 % of his donor hair .
Do an in-vitro doubling , where in we bisect the follicle under magnification and implant one bisected part and the recipient and the other at the donor scalp .
At the same time , we will inject growth factors , multiply progenitor stem cells , 3D spheroidal multiplied dermal papilla cells , extra cellular matrix and concentrated PRP .[/div]

It sounds pretty traumatic, to extract 80-90% of the donor area of a NW7... But if Dr. Nigam can do that, you basically have the test right there.

All he has to do is take clear pictures which:
a) show the donor and recipient prior to extraction. There should be no doubt about the extent of the patients hair loss.
b) pictures of the donor right after extraction. This should prove that the majority of the patient's donor has been extracted and implanted into the recipient.
c) pictures of the donor and recipient in the months after. These should show clear regrowth in the donor and growth in the recipient.

A test like this would speak for itself and be almost impossible to fake too.

[Arashi]

dr.rahul1970@gmail.com

Thanks ! Just mailed him.

[garethbale]

Does anyone have Dr Nigams his email ? I asked him for that on that other forum but he hasn't replied yet.

dr.rahul1970@gmail.com

[Arashi]

Does anyone have Dr Nigams his email ? I asked him for that on that other forum but he hasn't replied yet.