Why almost all transplants STILL look unnatural.

[hairyjoe]

I don't think you have to be an expert to know what a natural hairline looks like.

 

I think the fact Konior is still obsessing and trying for more natural hairlines is great, but it also supports my point that there is work to go to get to totally natural.

 

As far as my recommendations.... I think hand picking thinner hairs for hairlines is a big improvement and am glad to know Dr. Konior does that...I had not known that. I wonder why more docs haven't followed suit.

 

I also believe nape hair should be standard procedure if the normal thinnest hairs still appear too coarse for hairline. I underatand the yield might be less and lifespan may be less, but a more refined hairline for maybe just 5 years would be desirable to me.

 

Hair angle still seems to be a problem for many docs.. Specifically, many after photos of guys who comb back their hair, have this weird look where the hair first goes forward and loops backward (looks like a fish hook shape).

 

Maybe this is nitpicking to many of you, but I see room for improvement. If you don't, that's fine.

 

DrNoHair is right..I shouldn't have said I'd avoid that particular doc like the plaque...that was inflammatory.. I will edit that out.

[DrMoreHair]

There's always room for improvement with anything HairyJoe. Of course hair transplants can be continually improved and we should be able to get to the point where hair can be cloned in a dish and there is no need for linear scars or microdots all over the back of the scalp from donor harvesting. The Porsche 911 GT2 that I got to ride in last month is an awesome car and still there are room for improvements.

 

However, I'd still take the Porsche with all of its "flaws" over the Ford Focus and I'd take Matt's full head of hair from Dr. Konior with what you call "coarse ends" over a Norwood IV any day of the week! Maybe you prefer the norwood IV?

[djgLXXII]

Matt's hairline looks totally natural to me. Knowing it's a hair transplant is causing you to be hyper critical. You're looking for anything that might be construed as "unnatural". I guarantee if you were shown a non-transplant hairline, told it was a transplant, you'd say it was unnatural!

 

The thing is, people don't stare at hairlines. Unless something looks really off, most people won't notice the transplants performed by our best surgeons. That's my take anyway.

 

And, furthermore, I'd rather have a semi-unnatural looking hairline versus this ragged, thin looking mess I have now.

[Noodles123]

There are surgeons out there who can deliver results that closely resemble nature. The only people who can point out the "unnaturalness" would be us, a bunch of guys who spend too much time obsessing about minute details that would escape most notice by ordinary people.

 

Don't let perfect be the enemy of the good.

[DrMoreHair]

 

Don't let perfect be the enemy of the good.

 

I'm not at all religious, but AMEN brother! ;-)

[Rootz]

Since a lot of people are weighing in on Matt's result/example I don't think it looks very natural. It doesn't scream "HT!!" but it has a strange look because of the overall low density. With that said, it probably looks natural enough that if a random person looked closely they'd just think, "Hmm interesting"

[hsrp10]

I think for 11 months and not having much or any native hair left in the hairline pre-op, it looks pretty decent especially as he's not wearing his hair as a part over or comb down.

 

Rootz, will you post your results with Dr. Feriduni at the 11 month mark with hair combed back for comparison? That would be interesting.

Edited July 14, 2014 by hsrp10

[Rootz]

Rootz, will you post your results with Dr. Feriduni at the 11 month mark with hair combed back for comparison? That would be interesting.

 

Yes I plan to post pictures once I get there

[1978matt]

Since a lot of people are weighing in on Matt's result/example I don't think it looks very natural. It doesn't scream "HT!!" but it has a strange look because of the overall low density. With that said, it probably looks natural enough that if a random person looked closely they'd just think, "Hmm interesting"

 

Thanks for those kind words:rolleyes:.

 

It would look far stranger if the doc had given me a patch of high density hair that was totally out of kilt with the rest of my head. This is of coarse (sic) why hair pieces can look unnatural. Anyway, I'm sure the doc would appreciate it if you emailed him to let him know where he went wrong with the density distribution:).

 

I should add that I blow dry my hair backwards every morning and apply a 'clay' styling product and sometimes a bit of hairspray. This does have a tendency to clump hairs together and make it look slightly thinner (wet hair effect).

 

Funny that you mention Lorenzo as having the best hairlines. He does not feature in most people's top 3 list. I'm not knocking the man but his results photos are almost exclusively shot from a 45 degree angle down onto the top of the patients head. A lot of the time you cant even see the hairline properly.

 

With your expert knowledge on photos perhaps you're seeing something we're not.

 

Anyway, here's one last photo of my 'not very natural', 'strange looking', 'hmm interesting' hairline. Sorry about the angle, flash, lighting, sun tan....

[hairthere]

No HT is going to look 100% natural because.....drum roll please....it's not.

 

1978Matt, I bet most guys are envious of your hair, whether they know it's a HT or not. I would suggest maybe using a different styling product because as you mentioned clay can tend to clump hair up and make it look thinner.

 

Btw, your hairline shape reminds me a bit of this famous chap....know who it is?

[TomCruise]

 

Btw, your hairline shape reminds me a bit of this famous chap....know who it is?

 

Tom Cruise of course.

[hairthere]

Well done Tom Cruise!

[Rootz]

Matt I think your result is pretty good I just don't think it's a great example of a natural looking hairline based on your pics (the pics lack some clarity and without hair product I suspect it would look better though). I commented only because you offered it as an example and because others were talking about it. Of course, you're 11 months which means it will probably get even better.

 

I personally think if Konior had gven you a patch of density, as you say, it would probably look more natural... but this is just what I would prefer. If you're happy with it, that's what counts!

 

Funny that you mention Lorenzo as having the best hairlines. He does not feature in most people's top 3 list. I'm not knocking the man but his results photos are almost exclusively shot from a 45 degree angle down onto the top of the patients head. A lot of the time you cant even see the hairline properly.

 

If you really meant to say Lorenzo I'm confused because he has videos. But I think Lorenzo has the best FUE results for the hairlines he draws. I did not go to Lorenzo though because he would have not have done the hairline I wanted. If you meant Feriduni, I don't agree with the limited view opinion either because in addition to 45 degree shots he also does shots from other angles including usually a level shot of the hairline with the hair up.

[delancey]

I've spent over a year researching the s... out of the hair transplant industry, reading reviews of every doctor imaginable and viewing 1000s of pictures in the process. Matt, in my opinion, has a very nice and natural looking hairline. I am not an expert, and still have so much to learn. But I can comment on what is natural, and I think it looks as natural as it is going to get (unless a huge amount of grafts were to be used).

 

The problem with hair transplants right now is that hairs will never be spaced as closely together as someone with native density. Does anyone like football? Several young Colombian and Argentinian players have extremely high native density in the hairline. That is 100% natural and it cannot be obtained via hair transplantation unless a huge amount of grafts were to be used. And as we all know, unfortunately, supply and demand still control the marketplace.

 

This is what I consider unnatural:

 

1) Unnaturalness is apparent when a Norwood 5-6 decides to have a Norwood 1.5 - 2 hairline. There is a large area to cover and it is important to make the hairline age appropriate in correlation to the pattern of baldness.

 

2) Unnaturalness is apparent when a Norwood 5-6 has a hair transplant of say 3000 grafts only in the frontal 90 cm2 of the scalp, without touching the crown. An even better example of this is when a Norwood 7 has a hair transplant. Men do simply NOT bald in this pattern. It just does not look natural or convincing to have a relatively thick hairline with a completely bald dipping crown. And contrary to what is sometimes claimed here, we view someone's head from many different angles, not just the front.

 

3. Sometimes a hairline is too perfect to be true. This is usually a giveaway that someone has had work done.

 

I think it's also important to point out that we (the hair loss community) spend a lot of time looking at pictures and hair transplants. We are probably the toughest critics out there! Yet, a normal person would never even guess that *insert name* had a hair transplant by a recommended top 10 surgeon. When i had a lot of hair, I was preoccupied with my own hair. Unfortunately, right now, I care more about other peoples' hair. I wish I had a Lorenzo/Konior hair line, though.

Edited July 14, 2014 by delancey

[Jotronic]

I see issues with so many results where very few other do, or at least they don't point them out publicly. I cannot point out flaws publicly because I cannot forget that the result is on the scalp of a human being, with feelings, and because my opinion has weight it can make some people very upset.

 

Unfortunately most of you do not know what truly natural results are because you are relegated to viewing photos on websites only with the occasional video here and there. Photos from most clinics use flash which makes hairlines look twice as thick and they soften the harsh indicators of surgical intervention. Harsh flash makes coarse hairs look finer and you don't see how the skin is affected by having thousands of tiny wounds inflicted on the recipient zone. It is like judging the aesthetic or performance merits of a Porsche 911 when it is really a kit car built out of VW bug. You are judging an illusion as if it is the real thing thus the judgement is invalid. Until all clinics being discussed cease using flash photography, and start adding HD video of their results, then this discussion is moot.

 

In addition, "natural" and "density" are not synonymous. Natural means something you'll find in nature at any phase of progress. A thin hairline can be "natural" as long as it does not look man-made.

 

Personally, I'm disappointed that more people do not demand non-flash photos and plenty of HD video. I've talked about it for years, basically wrote the book on the subject, and people still see results posted with flash and or the ever present "shaky cam" and "ooh" and "ahhh" over the results when I just have to shake my head because the image is so far from reality that if two photos of the same patient were presented, both with and without flash, the one patient would look like two different people.

 

Demand better. Only then will you be in a position to judge accurately.

[NM156]

Thanks for those kind words:rolleyes:.

 

It would look far stranger if the doc had given me a patch of high density hair that was totally out of kilt with the rest of my head. This is of coarse (sic) why hair pieces can look unnatural. Anyway, I'm sure the doc would appreciate it if you emailed him to let him know where he went wrong with the density distribution:).

 

I should add that I blow dry my hair backwards every morning and apply a 'clay' styling product and sometimes a bit of hairspray. This does have a tendency to clump hairs together and make it look slightly thinner (wet hair effect).

 

Funny that you mention Lorenzo as having the best hairlines. He does not feature in most people's top 3 list. I'm not knocking the man but his results photos are almost exclusively shot from a 45 degree angle down onto the top of the patients head. A lot of the time you cant even see the hairline properly.

 

With your expert knowledge on photos perhaps you're seeing something we're not.

 

Anyway, here's one last photo of my 'not very natural', 'strange looking', 'hmm interesting' hairline. Sorry about the angle, flash, lighting, sun tan....

 

 

Matt, I happen to think that Dr. Konior did an outstanding job on your ht. Your results are a huge part of the reason I have chosen him to do mine when the time comes. Thanks also for your contributions to this site.

 

Cheers

[hsrp10]

"Tom Cruise of course."

 

Well done Tom Cruise!

 

That made me laugh , glad I got something out of this thread...

[DrMoreHair]

Jotronic makes good points on the difficulty of judging work through photos...

 

Nonetheless, I'm willing to bet that if I took photos of 10 guys with good/great transplant results and 10 guys who never had any work done most of the supposed "hairline experts" on here would have an extremely low rate of figuring out who had transplant and who had a natural hair line...

 

Bets?

Edited July 15, 2014 by DrMoreHair

[Jotronic]

Jotronic makes good points on the difficulty of judging work through photos...

 

Nonetheless, I'm willing to bet that if I took photos of 10 guys with good/great transplant results and 10 guys who never had any work done most of the supposed "hairline experts" on here would have an extremely low rate of figuring out who had transplant and who had a natural hair line...

 

Bets?

 

Problem is, where are you going to get photos of ten hairlines, not transplanted, that are in comparable angles, with comparable lighting, and are not of celebrities or stock photos that have been altered? Also, for a true comparison you need to have hairlines that are complete reconstructions, not blending into existing hair or making use of a forelock that is front and center, distracting from the surgical work. No flash can be used in any photos and the images have to be crystal clear.

[FUE2014]

When I think of natural hairlines, two doctors spring immediately to mind:

 

(1) Dr Feriduni

(2) Dr Lorenzo

[Mickey85]

I see issues with so many results where very few other do, or at least they don't point them out publicly. I cannot point out flaws publicly because I cannot forget that the result is on the scalp of a human being, with feelings, and because my opinion has weight it can make some people very upset.

 

Unfortunately most of you do not know what truly natural results are because you are relegated to viewing photos on websites only with the occasional video here and there. Photos from most clinics use flash which makes hairlines look twice as thick and they soften the harsh indicators of surgical intervention. Harsh flash makes coarse hairs look finer and you don't see how the skin is affected by having thousands of tiny wounds inflicted on the recipient zone. It is like judging the aesthetic or performance merits of a Porsche 911 when it is really a kit car built out of VW bug. You are judging an illusion as if it is the real thing thus the judgement is invalid. Until all clinics being discussed cease using flash photography, and start adding HD video of their results, then this discussion is moot.

 

In addition, "natural" and "density" are not synonymous. Natural means something you'll find in nature at any phase of progress. A thin hairline can be "natural" as long as it does not look man-made.

 

Personally, I'm disappointed that more people do not demand non-flash photos and plenty of HD video. I've talked about it for years, basically wrote the book on the subject, and people still see results posted with flash and or the ever present "shaky cam" and "ooh" and "ahhh" over the results when I just have to shake my head because the image is so far from reality that if two photos of the same patient were presented, both with and without flash, the one patient would look like two different people.

 

Demand better. Only then will you be in a position to judge accurately.

 

So true. When i see world-class recommended clinics giving us a mere 2-4 post-operative results it just makes me shake my head. When the lighting in the room is obviously different between the pre-operative and post-operative shots, I shake my head. We all know lighting and angles can make a HT appear much better or much worse than it really is. It is downright disingenuous of those clinics that use such trickery. I have had guys tell me privately that their results in real life look NOTHING like the photos that the clinic took of them. Start demanding video documentation(preferably in high-definition but anything will be good for now) and we will see which clinics work is truly genuine and which clinics work is smoke and mirrors.

[hairyjoe]

I see issues with so many results where very few other do, or at least they don't point them out publicly. I cannot point out flaws publicly because I cannot forget that the result is on the scalp of a human being, with feelings, and because my opinion has weight it can make some people very upset.

 

Unfortunately most of you do not know what truly natural results are because you are relegated to viewing photos on websites only with the occasional video here and there. Photos from most clinics use flash which makes hairlines look twice as thick and they soften the harsh indicators of surgical intervention. Harsh flash makes coarse hairs look finer and you don't see how the skin is affected by having thousands of tiny wounds inflicted on the recipient zone. It is like judging the aesthetic or performance merits of a Porsche 911 when it is really a kit car built out of VW bug. You are judging an illusion as if it is the real thing thus the judgement is invalid. Until all clinics being discussed cease using flash photography, and start adding HD video of their results, then this discussion is moot.

 

In addition, "natural" and "density" are not synonymous. Natural means something you'll find in nature at any phase of progress. A thin hairline can be "natural" as long as it does not look man-made.

 

Personally, I'm disappointed that more people do not demand non-flash photos and plenty of HD video. I've talked about it for years, basically wrote the book on the subject, and people still see results posted with flash and or the ever present "shaky cam" and "ooh" and "ahhh" over the results when I just have to shake my head because the image is so far from reality that if two photos of the same patient were presented, both with and without flash, the one patient would look like two different people.

 

Demand better. Only then will you be in a position to judge accurately.

 

 

If what Joe says above is true (I believe him)..that almost all photos use flash which doesn't give an accurate view of results, most of us haven't a clue what REAL results from most docs look like. That is scary. I applaud H&W for their commitment to natural photos. lets hope others follow suit.

 

Makes me wonder who does really know which docs are good. Seems like the only way to know for sure is seeing dozens of results in person and who has the time to do that? I guess Jotronic, Spex, Spencer, and probably a handful of other experts/advocates do, but the rest of us are stuck looking at a zillion bad pics and maybe seeing a couple patients.

 

It is also insightful IMO, that these advocates/experts tend to be the most conservative when they talk about the current state of transplants. I'm guessing they've seen enough in person to know that the results we are seeing in photos are optimistic to say the least.

 

So how about this for an idea.... Think Comicon for Hair Transplants....a convention where docs set up booths and have with them 5 patients for all of us to view in one place. You'd get to see a 100 transplants in one place, in one day... problem solved. Maybe Pat can work on that

[MAGNUMpi]

I see issues with so many results where very few other do, or at least they don't point them out publicly. I cannot point out flaws publicly because I cannot forget that the result is on the scalp of a human being, with feelings, and because my opinion has weight it can make some people very upset.

 

Unfortunately most of you do not know what truly natural results are because you are relegated to viewing photos on websites only with the occasional video here and there. Photos from most clinics use flash which makes hairlines look twice as thick and they soften the harsh indicators of surgical intervention. Harsh flash makes coarse hairs look finer and you don't see how the skin is affected by having thousands of tiny wounds inflicted on the recipient zone. It is like judging the aesthetic or performance merits of a Porsche 911 when it is really a kit car built out of VW bug. You are judging an illusion as if it is the real thing thus the judgement is invalid. Until all clinics being discussed cease using flash photography, and start adding HD video of their results, then this discussion is moot.

 

In addition, "natural" and "density" are not synonymous. Natural means something you'll find in nature at any phase of progress. A thin hairline can be "natural" as long as it does not look man-made.

 

Personally, I'm disappointed that more people do not demand non-flash photos and plenty of HD video. I've talked about it for years, basically wrote the book on the subject, and people still see results posted with flash and or the ever present "shaky cam" and "ooh" and "ahhh" over the results when I just have to shake my head because the image is so far from reality that if two photos of the same patient were presented, both with and without flash, the one patient would look like two different people.

 

Demand better. Only then will you be in a position to judge accurately.

Awesome post. I just tested this at home. Slicked my hair back and took some flash pics and then some more pics in good natural light. SOOO different/// I wish I really looked the way the flash made me look there for a minute. damn.

Great point Jotronic.

 

So how about this for an idea.... Think Comicon for Hair Transplants....a convention where docs set up booths and have with them 5 patients for all of us to view in one place. You'd get to see a 100 transplants in one place, in one day... problem solved. Maybe Pat can work on that

That would be really great. I would be there in a heartbeat. Imagine being able to really get a good look at a lot of different HT's and loss progression around the HT's etc. It would save years of online research. Maybe one day it will happen.

[Questionmark]

So how about this for an idea.... Think Comicon for Hair Transplants....a convention where docs set up booths and have with them 5 patients for all of us to view in one place. You'd get to see a 100 transplants in one place, in one day... problem solved. Maybe Pat can work on that

 

Great idea in any case, would be awesome. Lots of work to do, but wow, really that would be awesome :cool:

[Jotronic]

Hairyjoe,

 

If what Joe says above is true (I believe him)..that almost all photos use flash which doesn't give an accurate view of results, most of us haven't a clue what REAL results from most docs look like. That is scary. I applaud H&W for their commitment to natural photos. lets hope others follow suit.

 

It is true, indeed and unfortunately many of the recognized "experts" on this and other forums are not really experts. I'm not being negative or condescending, just realistic in that they are sitting at their keyboards making judgments and giving advice that unfortunately have a real world impact on the decisions of others. Some are really smart guys, no debating that, but I refer to my Porsche kit car reference. One can't really be blamed for this however as there really is nothing else to go on aside from photos and the occasional video because we can't expect the average forum member to go camp out at a few clinics and meet patients or sit in on procedures for months or years like I have. Personally, I appreciate what some of the more informed members do here because it saves me a lot of work as most of the advice given here is pretty sound.

 

A few clinics get it. I remember when I was in Spain and I first met Dr. Lorenzo in Madrid. We were having dinner at a restaurant ( where I got to meet the band LMFAO, good times! ) and he was telling me he had been emulating what I started for H&W with the HD video presentation and the comb throughs. This was a little while before he became known on this side of the pond but he's done really well with that. Another doctor in India (not recommended here) told me the same, and he's done it too. There are a couple of other clinics that do a good job with photos like Dr. Rahal and a clinic in Belgium owned by a friend of mine. Dr. Wesley has some, not all, results without flash and a few others as well. But that is only the first step. There has to be a standard for clarity. I honestly think some clinics don't own a tripod because some of the results photos I see may not be taken with a flash but they have so much blur that you cannot see any details, or they are just out of focus or both.

 

I know what I'd do if I ran the forums. No results can be posted until they meet the standard criteria. Any postings will be flagged or deleted is they don't meet the standards set. This protects the patients and it raises the bar because believe you me; once the flash is eliminated you will see the quality of results plummet. You'll see less density and more details. This is not to pick on Bill and the gang, he knows how I feel about this subject, but I'd just like to see the standards raised.

 

It is also insightful IMO, that these advocates/experts tend to be the most conservative when they talk about the current state of transplants. I'm guessing they've seen enough in person to know that the results we are seeing in photos are optimistic to say the least.

 

That is a spot on interpretation, at least when it comes to my point of view. You will rarely see me comment on a result because as I said earlier, my opinion carries weight, and I don't like hurting feelings of others. I'm talking about the patients because I don't care if I hurt the feelings of clinics. When it comes to the results I post out of H&W, I know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder but I am also confident that the results I post will speak for themselves and are FAR superior to those of the majority of clinics because there is no trickery. We have a policy in place in that we will only crop the images and blur out a face with Photoshop if necessary. We don't do the wet before pics and dry after pics. I will RARELY post pics sent in by patients but sometimes I will if they are obviously dramatic. I would says that some of our before photos should not have the hair quite so messed up but that also has to do with being up at 6:15 a.m., lol! We aren't perfect but I feel we do a damn good job, better than others. I'm exploring ways to up the standards however as there is always room for improvement. We standardized on a new camera (had some problems recently) and we added some brighter overhead lights to eliminate the color and ISO problems we've had off and on. Flash would have eliminated these issues but I refuse this option for previously stated reasons.

 

The one way that flash can be used is when it is pointed up at the ceiling instead of directly at the subject. If one is using a DSLR with an add on flash then the flash can be angled up toward the ceiling so that the light bounces down on top of the subject. It illuminates the whole area and does not have unrealistically favorable benefits. I tested this in my home studio and it works well when properly executed.The problem is that a clinic would have to make a real effort to learn how to do this properly which I do not foresee happening anytime soon.

 

So how about this for an idea.... Think Comicon for Hair Transplants....a convention where docs set up booths and have with them 5 patients for all of us to view in one place. You'd get to see a 100 transplants in one place, in one day... problem solved. Maybe Pat can work on that

 

I'm for it if there are Cosplay ladies:) There is an event that is close to your suggestion, the ISHRS annual meeting, but unfortunately it is closed to the public. Oh, how I wish it were an open meeting. You'd be shocked!