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

[Arashi]

Either way, in the study paper ("Donor hair follicle preservation by partial follicular unit extraction") there was no definite statement about how much hair had regenerated after 1 month. I'll see if hairs have grown thick enough that I can photograph them at 3 or 4 months; my current camera (the one I used for shooting the extraction points) is nowhere as good as the one I'm going to rent for documenting the final result.



Of course you did! Which is what you shouldn't use. Look at the comparison below. The first picture version is how the graphics look in the Mac OS viewer, Google's Picasa viewer, Photoshop, Gimp, and probably in all browsers as well. The second version is how it looks in Windows Photo Viewer / Photo Gallery.

Link to image


(I'd bet this happens because of antialiasing. All photoviewers have antialiasing methods for making the picture look pleasant, when you zoom out. This antialiasing is not supposed to be there in a zoomed in image, but the Windows photo viewing software applies it indiscriminately. Or there might be some compression error in Windows.)

Hey, nice find, without anti aliasing it indeed looks a bit clearer, should make the analysis a bit easier ! Yeah I think the 3 month mark is the best to go for, cause they mention the results specifically for 3 months. So 2 more months. Yet you could do the analysis of the surgery already, research on how many hairs were extracted exactly

[AlmostUndone]

Well if you feel 1 month is too soon, you could do the analysis at 3 months. HASCI did do it too at 3 months. But they showed a photo for 1 month and most hair had 'regrown' (LOL) then.

Either way, in the study paper ("Donor hair follicle preservation by partial follicular unit extraction") there was no definite statement about how much hair had regenerated after 1 month. I'll see if hairs have grown thick enough that I can photograph them at 3 or 4 months; my current camera (the one I used for shooting the extraction points) is nowhere as good as the one I'm going to rent for documenting the final result.

About image viewing tool, I just used the normal windows tools (paint, image viewer.

Of course you did! Which is what you shouldn't use. Look at the comparison below. The first picture version is how the graphics look in the Mac OS viewer, Google's Picasa viewer, Photoshop, Gimp, and probably in all browsers as well. The second version is how it looks in Windows Photo Viewer / Photo Gallery.

Link to image


(I'd bet this happens because of antialiasing. All photoviewers have antialiasing methods for making the picture look pleasant, when you zoom out. This antialiasing is not supposed to be there in a zoomed in image, but the Windows photo viewing software applies it indiscriminately. Or there might be some compression error in Windows.)

[Arashi]

By the way Arashi, did you look at the donor area photography? You see, I kept going through the material, and discovered many wonderful "before" -photos, which hadn't caught my attention earlier on. Photos which will be useful in getting a sharper view on a lot of the hairs. I'm pretty far ahead on sewing the photos together. Improvement suggestions are always welcome.

I have a very important question: Which image viewing software did you use for the photos?

Well if you feel 1 month is too soon, you could do the analysis at 3 months. HASCI did do it too at 3 months. But they showed a photo for 1 month and most hair had 'regrown' (LOL) then.

About image viewing tool, I just used the normal windows tools (paint, image viewer). And I think I used some tool to rotate pics, not sure what it was called, I think it was 'irfanview"

[AlmostUndone]

By the way Arashi, did you look at the donor area photography? You see, I kept going through the material, and discovered many wonderful "before" -photos, which hadn't caught my attention earlier on. Photos which will be useful in getting a sharper view on a lot of the hairs. I'm pretty far ahead on sewing the photos together. Improvement suggestions are always welcome.

I have a very important question: Which image viewing software did you use for the photos?

[AlmostUndone]

Arashi, it's way too early for the clippers; the skin of the donor is now somewhat "shiny" (still depigmented?) compared to the surrounding surfaces, and the hair may still look 'patchy'. Please understand, at this time there are eyes on me every day.

I think there is still some regrowth occurring. Sorry I don't have very fresh pictures, but here are some earlier ones:


Regrowth day 7

Regrowth day 7

Regrowth day 17

[Arashi]

How is it going ? In one week you're at your 1 month point, right ? Most hair in donor should have grown back by then, according to HASCI, so we can do the analysis soon !

[AlmostUndone]

I am quite certain there is one piece missing from the file "right part", but ya know..... lots of things to keep track of.

[AlmostUndone]

Have a look. This here is the entire used donor zone, 7 weeks before my visit to Holland.
Left part: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ozpg49kdx7...0side.png?dl=0
Right part: https://www.dropbox.com/s/3c13237n8z...0side.png?dl=0

As you can see, I haven't worked on the extraction holes any more than necessary in order to just get this idea, about how the photos oughta be used, - which ones, where, how much. And it's possible those extraction holes aren't 100% accurate. The red borders which split the images, however, should be very specific and hopefully very accurate, too.

Hmm, there are still a few better quality images, which I have not yet used, and which I would like to use.... But I need a big break right now! It's already taken much time and energy drinks to split the donor area into this many parts so far. (There's also an example there, I think on the right part of the donor, of how even a poor quality image may sometimes be useful only due to fact that it was shot from a completely another perspective. I saved a lot of poor quality images, as well.)

[Arashi]

So how is it going AlmostUndone ? I was just thinking, previously I was talking about a year. That's the term that usually is used for a transplant. It's the time that the transplanted hairs in the *recipient* need to go through the cycle of shedding and regrowing. However I just thought of something. In their thesis, when talking about regrowth in the *donor* hasci isnt talking about a year, they're talking about 1 week to 1 months ! If you see picture 6a - 6d in their thesis, you see that most of the "supposed" regrowth happens in 9 days (!!) already and after a month every hair has 'regrown' in the donor. So, we dont have to wait a year, in 3 weeks we can do the final analysis already !!

[AlmostUndone]

---EDIT: Photo software issues. Problem fixed---

[caddarik79]

Hey Gaz,

How is life? husband and dad, quite another game.
What about your result and update?
And please, tell us straight if you don't want to contribute anymore, so that we don't bother you in different threads asking for updates (and then at least, it's clear for every one and none of us wait and hope for it).

I was really following you case with big interest, found your result very convincing.

Cheers.

[gc83uk]

Congrats AlmostUndone.

Photos are perfect and I agree it should be easier that it ever was in my case to get a more accurate analysis.

Looking forward to seeing some early analysis showing how many total hairs have been extracted would be a good start out of those 800 FU's?

Good luck

[Arashi]

This has been debunked long time ago, its done and dusted.

Dean S ended up transplanting body hair due to depleted donor? It sums it up

LOL yeah after 3 (free) HST's he went to a FUE clinic, who told him his donor was too depleted to do FUE. So they did a body hair transplant. After 3 HST's !! LOL

[ss1980]

This has been debunked long time ago, its done and dusted.

Dean S ended up transplanting body hair due to depleted donor? It sums it up

[AlmostUndone]

If 5% is dormant now and in 1 year, when you will do the comparison, another 5% is dormant, thats 10% difference. And that's only the mean, it might be 10+10=20% if your hair spends 2 years instead of 6 years in Anagen.

Oh yeah... sorry, I was thinking about something else. Must sleep.