-
Originally Posted by Arashi
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.
-
Senior Member
Originally Posted by gc83uk
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.
-
Originally Posted by Arashi
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!
-
Senior Member
Originally Posted by gc83uk
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.
-
Originally Posted by Arashi
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.
-
Senior Member
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.
-
Originally Posted by Arashi
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!
-
Senior Member
Originally Posted by gc83uk
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 !
-
Originally Posted by Arashi
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!
-
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
-
By c5000 in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
Replies: 269
Last Post: 10-31-2013, 04:41 PM
-
By Arashi in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
Replies: 357
Last Post: 09-16-2013, 02:46 PM
-
By Kiwi in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
Replies: 1
Last Post: 03-11-2013, 06:15 AM
-
By Kiwi in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
Replies: 14
Last Post: 02-26-2013, 04:15 PM
-
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
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks