+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arashi View Post
    Looking forward to them !


    That's odd. My count of your recipient, which I documented here came in at 1.28
    Yes I had already seen that. I don't think there is anything odd to be honest. different samples will yield different result for sure, especially when relatively small. I will upload the results when next on my laptop.

    Also I've noticed that doing a hair count from that angle which you have analysed is much harder and less accurate than when the camera is behind the grafts rather than shooting from in front, simply because the grafts can quite easily appear as 1 hair rather than 2's.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Arashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gc83uk View Post
    Yes I had already seen that. I don't think there is anything odd to be honest. different samples will yield different result for sure, especially when relatively small. I will upload the results when next on my laptop.

    Also I've noticed that doing a hair count from that angle which you have analysed is much harder and less accurate than when the camera is behind the grafts rather than shooting from in front, simply because the grafts can quite easily appear as 1 hair rather than 2's.
    Graft counting will never be 100% accurate, but that works both ways. Like you correctly noted, sometimes you will miss a hair and will count a 2 as 1. But on the other hand, in the analysis I did, I labeled a few time a graft as double when I wasn't sure if it was a double or just two singles quite close together. I favoured them always as being a 2 in my analysis.

    That being said, the photo you shot and which I used for my analysis was quite sharp and ideal for analysis ! So I think the result is quite accurate.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arashi View Post
    Graft counting will never be 100% accurate, but that works both ways. Like you correctly noted, sometimes you will miss a hair and will count a 2 as 1. But on the other hand, in the analysis I did, I labeled a few time a graft as double when I wasn't sure if it was a double or just two singles quite close together. I favoured them always as being a 2 in my analysis.

    That being said, the photo you shot and which I used for my analysis was quite sharp and ideal for analysis ! So I think the result is quite accurate.
    Your result may have been accurate, however that doesn't mean the result really IS 1.28 overall.

    Would you like it if the result was higher than 1.28 or would you rather be proven correct?

    We can look at another photo if you want and come to a consensus. I'll pick the photo this time though!

  4. #14
    Senior Member Arashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gc83uk View Post
    Your result may have been accurate, however that doesn't mean the result really IS 1.28 overall.

    Would you like it if the result was higher than 1.28 or would you rather be proven correct?

    We can look at another photo if you want and come to a consensus. I'll pick the photo this time though!
    You make it sound like I picked a particular photo to favour low graft count. I just took the first photo I thought was clear enough for analysis and then marked a random spot that I was sure was bald area before. I didnt cherry pick anything. I analyzed a total of 583 hairs, I was aiming for at least 500 hairs to lower statistical variance.

    But if you want to look at another photo and do a similar analysis, please be my guest ! Make sure you do at least 500 hairs and we can then discuss it here if you want.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arashi View Post
    You make it sound like I picked a particular photo to favour low graft count. I just took the first photo I thought was clear enough for analysis and then marked a random spot that I was sure was bald area before. I didnt cherry pick anything. I analyzed a total of 583 hairs, I was aiming for at least 500 hairs to lower statistical variance.

    But if you want to look at another photo and do a similar analysis, please be my guest !
    How did you come to that conclusion?

    Like I said I have already looked at two other photos and fine a similar analysis.

  6. #16
    Senior Member Arashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,888

    Default

    Well you say "this time I pick the photo", maybe you didnt mean it like that but it sounds to me you think I cherrypicked a certain photo. I didn't, just took the first photo I thought was good enough quality to do a decent analysis.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arashi View Post
    Well you say "this time I pick the photo", maybe you didnt mean it like that but it sounds to me you think I cherrypicked a certain photo. I didn't, just took the first photo I thought was good enough quality to do a decent analysis.
    lol, no!

    I mean I would pick the photo because of what I said about angles earlier, that is all!

  8. #18
    Senior Member Arashi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gc83uk View Post
    lol, no!

    I mean I would pick the photo because of what I said about angles earlier, that is all!
    Ok, internet can be confusing sometimes when it comes to communication But what I liked about this photo too was not just what it was a sharp one: I also liked the hairlength here. If the hair is much longer than in this photo, analysis becomes harder if not impossible and when it's too short, it becomes harder to differentiate between 1's and 2's.

    Anyway I think that if I had cherrypicked a photo and/or the area I possibly even have might have gotten below 1.25 but honestly I took a random photo and a random area, just one I was sure that it was bald skin before. I trust you to do the same and I'd be happy to verify your analysis !

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arashi View Post
    Ok, internet can be confusing sometimes when it comes to communication But what I liked about this photo too was not just what it was a sharp one: I also liked the hairlength here. If the hair is much longer than in this photo, analysis becomes harder if not impossible and when it's too short, it becomes harder to differentiate between 1's and 2's.

    Anyway I think that if I had cherrypicked a photo and/or the area I possibly even have might have gotten below 1.25 but honestly I took a random photo and a random area, just one I was sure that it was bald skin before. I trust you to do the same and I'd be happy to verify your analysis !
    OK well what I'll do is upload what I did a couple of days ago here (pic), I didn't really do it for 'other people' so it's a bit messy, I just did it for myself!

    Have a look at it and then I'll do another analysis more precise.... to be honest, whether it's 1.28 or 1.41 it isn't a big difference, btw if your wondering why I marked some of the grafts on the edges of the picture as a 1 or 2, it's because I cropped it around the blurry areas and almost cut off some grafts!

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,340

    Default analysis

    I've done a larger analysis from a photo which was taken around october/november 2013.

    848 Fu's in total.

    Average came out at 1.37 hairs per FU.
    Average of 39 FU's cm2
    53 hairs cm2

    In the slick area, I had approx 4500 grafts (this is before my most recent HST)
    Slick area 115cm2
    So assuming this 39 grafts is correct and indeed the average all over the slick area, then that would equate to 4485 grafts. Which adds up of course.

    Obviously 53 hairs per cm2 isn't enough, 1cm2 white sqaure in the picture indicates approx 70 hairs in that cm2 with other areas less than 50 to give the average of 53!

    I've since had another 600 or so placed in the slick area (the other 600 was placed in the front areas), which is a drop in the ocean, that equates to approx 7 hairs cm2. So I'm probably on around 60 hairs cm2 at the moment. The next 1200 grafts I have // 1650 hairs will be going directly into the main slick area. So that should take me up to 75 hairs cm2, which I also know isn't exactly amazing, especially when you have zero hairs to begin with.

    Here is the analysis I did, not perfect, some 1 hairs could be 2 hairs because they always stick together and of course some 2 hairs could in fact be 1 hairs depending on groupings, there was a few 3 hairs too, but chosen to ignore those..., however I guess the important thing is the total number of hairs!

    I would have thought anything less than 100 hairs cm2 or 70 HST FU's isn't really going to allow me to have my hair long, but to get to that figure I would need another 3400 HST grafts, which would mean a total of 9500 HST grafts including the 1000 I put in the front and at the moment I'm only prepared to go for another 1200 assuming my donor is OK!
    I'll have to just see what happens, but I really don't think I can get 9500 HST grafts or 13000 hairs from my donor, it wasn't strong enough to begin with, that is basically the equivalent of 6000-7000 normal FUE, especially when other clinics were saying I had a max of 2000-2500 before I started this journey, there is no way I can go that far IMO.

Similar Threads

  1. Gaz (Gc83uk) can you give us an update.
    By c5000 in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
    Replies: 269
    Last Post: 10-31-2013, 04:41 PM
  2. gc83uk's september '13 procedure.
    By Arashi in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
    Replies: 357
    Last Post: 09-16-2013, 02:46 PM
  3. gc83uk recipient from a distance
    By Kiwi in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-11-2013, 06:15 AM
  4. Anything comparable to this (gc83uk or ironman)
    By Kiwi in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-26-2013, 04:15 PM
  5. gc83uk - Hasci sept to march
    By gc83uk in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 07-01-2012, 10:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

» IAHRS

hair transplant surgeons

» The Bald Truth

» Recent Threads

1800 graft repair case results by Dr. Lindsey
Yesterday 08:38 AM
Last Post By Dr. Lindsey
Yesterday 08:38 AM
Navigating the German Job Market as a Kenyan Citizen
11-04-2023 06:31 AM
Last Post By Keegan212
Yesterday 03:51 AM
DR HAKAN DOGANAY/ 4500 GRAFTS / Implanter Pen+FUE
03-26-2024 04:15 PM
Last Post By Hakan Doganay, MD
03-26-2024 04:15 PM
The Mane Event for Thursday, June 15th, 2023
06-15-2023 02:59 PM
Last Post By gisecit34
03-26-2024 08:05 AM