gc83uk's september '13 procedure.

[Arashi]

I still think 50 graft test or NW6/7->NW1/2 transformation are the best proofs.

Of course. But HASCI tried two times and they messed up. We can just sit back and mock, or we can take things into our own hands and at least try !

Gc83uk's case is perfect for analysis since his hair density is relatively low, both in donor and recipient, which makes it a lot easier to pinpoint grafts. I think this is THE chance and we need to at least try it !

[gc83uk]

Thanks for starting this thread Arashi.

How about if I upload a couple of photos as test shots, just to see the quality and come to some agreement on what is expected.

The things that always concern me with taking photos are the following:

1) Adequate lighting
2) Taking photos in the same place every time.
3) Length of the hair. I have a feeling the length at the moment is slightly too long, but a few test shots can easily sort that one.
4) I've noticed on some photos a shadow from 1 hair can appear as 2 hairs. The shadow hair looks like a thinner hair, which can obviously confuse matters.

Might take a couple now perhaps.

And yes JJJJrS the recipient will have to be snapped too. That's a given!

[Arashi]

All very valid points Gaz. A few test photo's would be nice indeed.

I'm also thinking about how we can link the different photo's. I think it might be an idea to use a marker and put some ink dots on several places of your scalp. This would at least make it a lot easier to link all pre-op photo's together.

[hellouser]

4) I've noticed on some photos a shadow from 1 hair can appear as 2 hairs. The shadow hair looks like a thinner hair, which can obviously confuse matters.

This is usually from hard lighting, like putting a lamp next to your head. What you need to do is diffuse the lighting, as in, soften in. This is what softboxes and umbrellas do. This is also the very same problem you see in portrait shots outside in sunny vs. cloudy days. The difference is exactly this:



So outside its like this:



From my RU, CB Minox log I've been taking photos in my bathroom which has lights that are long flourescent bulbs but are behind a frosted white plastic. Without the camera's built-in flash, I get soft light *every single time* and I usually take photos at night so that I get the same light each time as well. A similar approach would be best incorporated in future pictures.

BOTTOM LINE: you need a LARGE light source but with some sort of a transparent screen to diffuse it all to cast that soft shadow. You can use large flood lights behind white bed sheets and get the same result, kind of like this:



Notice how the shadow behind the baby is soft? If there was no screen, that shadow would have hard straight lined edges.

This same practice is used for taking simple product shots that are relatively small, its very easy, look at the setup:

[gc83uk]

Hellouser, thanks!

All noted. Quick question for you. The camera I have been using for the past couple of years is just a bog-standard Nikon coolpix.

However in the office I have a samsung camera, I think this is the model

Can you tell me would there be any benefit using the £400 camera over the cheaper Nikon?

I've just took about 20 pics, so I'll upload a couple of the best to the dropbox account in a few mins.

[hellouser]

Hellouser, thanks!

All noted. Quick question for you. The camera I have been using for the past couple of years is just a bog-standard Nikon coolpix.

However in the office I have a samsung camera, I think this is the model

Can you tell me would there be any benefit using the £400 camera over the cheaper Nikon?

I've just took about 20 pics, so I'll upload a couple of the best to the dropbox account in a few mins.

Well specs on paper and actual results with cameras differ greatly. Prime example: Take a Canon 5D MkIII and compare ISO 3200 to that of my Canon 50D at ISO 1600. Even though the 5D MkIII uses a higher ISO level, and should show more noise, the case isnt true and the camera performs significantly better. Its a different sensor altogether. Noise has everything to do with sensor size and how many sensors are crammed into the area. A small camera sensor with 16 megapixels will have 16 million sensors crammed in. when the photo is taken, the sensor heats up and is exposed to light. The more sensors, the more heat and thus the more noise. Thats exactly why camera phones are absolute GARBAGE.

I can't say how that samsung will compare to you Nikon wihtout knowing both exact models, but I would stick to the Nikon: they and Canon have the best cameras hands down. Also, don't rely on the samsung either, you may not always have access to it since its from work.