HASCI - -How well does it work? Now we'll be able to find out!

[jamesst11]

This is impressive. Arashi, you should do this for money, through a website or something! I would probably pay a few hundred dollars for you to map my hair counts before, and during different regiments, especially in the MPB zones. Does anyone offer this kind of thing? Certainly you could design some kind of software that is able to make it easier?

[Arashi]

This is impressive. Arashi, you should do this for money, through a website or something! I would probably pay a few hundred dollars for you to map my hair counts before, and during different regiments, especially in the MPB zones. Does anyone offer this kind of thing? Certainly you could design some kind of software that is able to make it easier?

Thanks but one really needs the kind of high quality photo's that AlmostUndone shot, most people are not able to shoot them like that. And doing it manually, it's tons of work. And I just built upon what AlmostUndone did first, the linking of the photo's and then the marking of the grafts with circles, he must have spent at least the amount of time that I've spent, so doing it manually, that's a LOT of work.

Writing a computer program for it, thats an interesting thought though

[Arashi]

@Almostundone, is there any way I can help you out with recipient already ? Basically I'm just waiting for you, I have some free time and I'd love to dedicate it to this project. If you can think of any way I can help you at this stage, maybe linking photo's, maybe circling grafts, just let me know mate !

[AlmostUndone]

@Almostundone, is there any way I can help you out with recipient already ? Basically I'm just waiting for you, I have some free time and I'd love to dedicate it to this project. If you can think of any way I can help you at this stage, maybe linking photo's, maybe circling grafts, just let me know mate !

I felt it necessary to begin my own analysis of the donor area. It's quite almost ready, but cost me those few days which I could have spent linking recipient photos. But I wouldn't mind linking them, so I won't need to upload 60 large-sized photographs for you?

You can't circle any grafts before I've taken the final photographs. No I can't promise it'll be done this month. It depends a bit on the sun's angle into my apartment; I rented huge electric lights for the "before" pictures, but it was more convenient to rely on daylight as I did in the rest of the photos.

[Arashi]

I felt it necessary to begin my own analysis of the donor area. It's quite almost ready, but cost me those few days which I could have spent linking recipient photos. But I wouldn't mind linking them, so I won't need to upload 60 large-sized photographs for you?

You can't circle any grafts before I've taken the final photographs. No I can't promise it'll be done this month. It depends a bit on the sun's angle into my apartment; I rented huge electric lights for the "before" pictures, but it was more convenient to rely on daylight as I did in the rest of the photos.

Hmmm not even this month, that's quite a disappointment. But then again, it's your project man and I'm grateful you're doing all this.

Again, if there's any way I can help out to speed things up, take some work of your table, just let me know.

Good luck !

[AlmostUndone]

Arashi eh, I'm working my ass off even when I'm not engaged to this project. My own analysis killed off a week at least, but I really wanted to make an easy way for anyone to see how many hairs were lost.

Verifying the analysis you made is slow work, as it's difficult to look up numbers, and with the need to compare before/after images side by side. In my analysis you don't always need to compare the images side by side. I composed a rectangular grid where all the circled extraction sites fall into groups of four. You can just look up any arbitrary group from the excel sheet to see if everything adds up, and circling errors are also easy to detect in this way.

I counted exactly the same result as you previously did in the first area. You counted 91 hairs lost in 104 extraction points. I counted 89 hairs lost in 105 extraction points plus 2 sites, where we saw more hair in the "after" photo than in the "before photos.
Meaning this: 216 out of 305 + 2 hairs grew back. The rest, 91 hairs, were lost.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/81057175/CTEST_march.jpg

[Arashi]

Arashi eh, I'm working my ass off even when I'm not engaged to this project. My own analysis killed off a week at least, but I really wanted to make an easy way for anyone to see how many hairs were lost.

Dont get me wrong mate, I know you do. It's a shitload of work. It's just the suspense man, we're so close to the final conclusion, can't wait But again, I'm not complaining at all, in fact, I'm really grateful for all you're doing ! And I'm sure others are too. Without you we would never have had this analysis !

I counted exactly the same result as you previously did in the first area

Awesome !

[AlmostUndone]

I counted 1243 lost hairs in my donor.

In the "before" images, I can confirm a total of 4354 hairs which existed in the extraction sites. In the "after" images, using all the multiple viewpoints available, I could verify no more than 3248 hairs left. This simple calculation reveals 1106 lost hairs.

However, I observed a bunch of extraction sites, where we could see more hairs in the "after"-image than in the "before"-image. That totals up to 137 hairs (named in the excel sheet as "reduntant hairs"). This comparison shows that there were 4354+137-3248 = 1243 lost hairs in total.

I should be able to justify every hair count in the images by looking at the extraction sites from all the viewpoints we have. My analysis has the advantage over Arashi's in being relatively easy for anyone to verify. Instead of individual extraction points, the basic unit of my analysis is a group of 4 extraction points. Now hopefully I remembered to include everything:

EXCEL COUNT SHEET: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ount_march.xls



Left side, before: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/..._before_98.jpg
Right side, before: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/..._before_98.jpg

Left side, after: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...t_after_98.jpg
Right side, after: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...t_after_98.jpg

Left side, extractions: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ractions97.jpg
Left side, extractions (AN ADDITIONAL VIEWPOINT): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...%20PICTURE.jpg
Right side, extractions: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ractions97.jpg
Right side, extractions (AN ADDITIONAL VIEWPOINT): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...%20PICTURE.jpg

[AlmostUndone]

Is everything here correct, I'll need to inquire.

[Arashi]

I counted 1243 lost hairs in my donor.

That's 12% more lost hairs than I counted. But that's pretty acceptable to me (I think I've been quite conservative indeed in my counting). If the amount of hair in your recipient is anywhere between 1106-1243 hairs, then we're just looking at a normal FUE. And I'm betting money on it that that's what we're going to see

Remember: 80% regrowth means that we'll need to see 5x more hair than that

[JJJJrS]

Nice work guys! It's great to finally see a definitive analysis of the HST procedure. I thought it wouldn't be feasible beyond a 50 graft test procedure but the effort and dedication shown here is very impressive!

That's 12% more lost hairs than I counted. But that's pretty acceptable to me (I think I've been quite conservative indeed in my counting). If the amount of hair in your recipient is anywhere between 1106-1243 hairs, then we're just looking at a normal FUE. And I'm betting money on it that that's what we're going to see

Remember: 80% regrowth means that we'll need to see 5x more hair than that

That was the conclusion I came to after the last analysis I did. Nice to finally be able to prove it though.

[AlmostUndone]

That's 12% more lost hairs than I counted. But that's pretty acceptable to me (I think I've been quite conservative indeed in my counting). If the amount of hair in your recipient is anywhere between 1106-1243 hairs, then we're just looking at a normal FUE. And I'm betting money on it that that's what we're going to see

The truth is apparently somewhere between your analysis and mine. I counted in the "before" images some bunch of hairs which you missed. And there lay a couple of small mistakes still intact in my work.

Some examples. "Area H" in your analysis: 16 and 65, both easy to see why they are incorrect, and 2, 14, which can be better seen from alternative viewpoints within the same image file. Secondary viewpoints in the same image may reveal some which you missed.
"Area I" in your analysis: 6 (the third hair can be seen from 2 or 3 different viewpoints in the image), 9 and 8.
"Area 9" in your analysis: 76, 148, 141, and 139 (The secondary angle in the before-image reveals 2 hairs you must have missed).
"Area 10" in your analysis: 24 and so on and so on.

There must be similar issues especially in "Area 9/9A" and maybe "Area K", or there are more mistakes in my analysis than what I can presently see.

[Arashi]

Some examples. "Area H" in your analysis: 16 and 65, both easy to see why they are incorrect

I double checked each of the extraction points and there are of course several extraction points up for debate. H65 indeed was clearly incorrect though, should be -2, I corrected it in my sheet (will upload the changes later). H16 I'm not sure I agree with you there though, here it is: http://www.hasci-exposed.com/images/H16.jpg In the before I see 2 hairs and in the after I see 2 too (the left one is a lot thinner/lighter but in the after photo but it's there). Maybe your point is though that it was a 3 hair graft and the hair to the right of H16 in the before photo is part of the same graft ? Yeah that's up for debate, it might indeed be but I figured it was too far away from the other 2 hairs. So I figured that's a one hair graft that's gone into sleeping mode. But I'm 50/50 on that one actually, it indeed also might be the same graft. In fact, now I'm looking at it some more, I'm indeed starting to think the most probable is that it was a 3 hair graft indeed.

Will look at your other points too now. But I didnt check alternative viewpoints so it's very well possible that some corrections indeed need to be made because of evidence shown in the alternative view.

Anyway good work mate !

[Arashi]

Nice work guys! It's great to finally see a definitive analysis of the HST procedure. I thought it wouldn't be feasible beyond a 50 graft test procedure but the effort and dedication shown here is very impressive!



That was the conclusion I came to after the last analysis I did. Nice to finally be able to prove it though.

Hey JJJJrS, good to see you back man ! Yeah exciting times eh, I too figured it would be inpossible/infeasible to do this, but here we are Exciting stuff !

[Arashi]

BTW, I hadnt posted the results of my 2nd analysis yet (my double check), the number I'm currently at is 1168 lost hairs, so that's only 6% difference from your number !