Hairline Design Qs and Observations

[TheEmperor]

I've been researching HTs for years and I have seen all the pics.

 

There are a few things regarding hairline design and front/top graft placement.

 

I have noticed that native hair grows perpendicularly to the scalp. Therefore hair that is farther forward in the hairline is angled forwarwd. Native hair on top of the head grows straight upward.

 

So what i have noticed about HT hair placement is that almost all of the docstors angle the hairs forward, even if they are on the direct top of the head. I suppose this is to give the illusion of coverage and make it less see-thru.

 

My first question is if this is really a good idea? Shouldnt the surgeon try to match EXACTLY the growth of the native hair. (Before someone says that they do -- I know that they frequently do not and I can provide many pictures showing this.)

 

The problem with having all the hairs angled forward together is that almost everyone you see who gets a HT, combs all the hair together one direction of the other, so its a "combover" style with perhaps a little more density than a real combover.

 

The other question relates to relative density. It seems that several physicians blast the front centimeter with hair to a greater density than the midscalp. My obervation of my loss pattern is that it thinned out uniformly -- if anything the hairline thinned a bit faster than the top. This looks totally natural.

 

If a physician plants higher density in the first cm, will this not be unnatural. And again, really limit the hairstyle o a combover?

 

The BEST hair transplants I have seen are the ones where the doc tight packs the grafts through the front AND top. (Say 5500+ grafts on a Nor4/5a) Lots of Dr. Hasson's patients come to mind.

 

If a doctor plants at a high enough density, is it possible for him to avoid having to angle the hairs on the top forward?

 

My observation is that for naturalness, it might be better to focus on central density and mimicking the natural hair angles, instead of going a bit lower with the hairline, putting more grafts in the from centimeter, and angling everything to the same degree to create a "hair shingle".

 

Another observation is that the hair behind the hairline (and its angulation) plays a significant role in the overall look of the hairline.

 

I suspect these are questions that the top docs wrestle with. The doctor who is planting 3000 grafts in front of existing hair on a 22yo patient doesnt have to deal with these questions, Im sure.

[TheEmperor]

I've been researching HTs for years and I have seen all the pics.

 

There are a few things regarding hairline design and front/top graft placement.

 

I have noticed that native hair grows perpendicularly to the scalp. Therefore hair that is farther forward in the hairline is angled forwarwd. Native hair on top of the head grows straight upward.

 

So what i have noticed about HT hair placement is that almost all of the docstors angle the hairs forward, even if they are on the direct top of the head. I suppose this is to give the illusion of coverage and make it less see-thru.

 

My first question is if this is really a good idea? Shouldnt the surgeon try to match EXACTLY the growth of the native hair. (Before someone says that they do -- I know that they frequently do not and I can provide many pictures showing this.)

 

The problem with having all the hairs angled forward together is that almost everyone you see who gets a HT, combs all the hair together one direction of the other, so its a "combover" style with perhaps a little more density than a real combover.

 

The other question relates to relative density. It seems that several physicians blast the front centimeter with hair to a greater density than the midscalp. My obervation of my loss pattern is that it thinned out uniformly -- if anything the hairline thinned a bit faster than the top. This looks totally natural.

 

If a physician plants higher density in the first cm, will this not be unnatural. And again, really limit the hairstyle o a combover?

 

The BEST hair transplants I have seen are the ones where the doc tight packs the grafts through the front AND top. (Say 5500+ grafts on a Nor4/5a) Lots of Dr. Hasson's patients come to mind.

 

If a doctor plants at a high enough density, is it possible for him to avoid having to angle the hairs on the top forward?

 

My observation is that for naturalness, it might be better to focus on central density and mimicking the natural hair angles, instead of going a bit lower with the hairline, putting more grafts in the from centimeter, and angling everything to the same degree to create a "hair shingle".

 

Another observation is that the hair behind the hairline (and its angulation) plays a significant role in the overall look of the hairline.

 

I suspect these are questions that the top docs wrestle with. The doctor who is planting 3000 grafts in front of existing hair on a 22yo patient doesnt have to deal with these questions, Im sure.

[TheEmperor]

Forgot to add.. .

 

Another observation is that docs seem to use the lateral slit to control the forward angulation of hair. This lets them create the "hair shingle".

 

If a doctor is using a saggital slit, so they then have less control of the forward angle? Would this then create higher variabilty in the foward angle and possibly a "rougher" look?

 

I see Shapiros hair work (saggital) and it looks differnt from say H&Ws work (lateral). From reviewing the web sites, the H&W patients seem to have more of a forward growing "hair shingle" and the Shapiro patients look a bit more unkempt with perhaps more vertical volume. (While I'm at it I might as well dispense my observations of other docs: Feller's hairlines are triangular. Rahal's patients have a blocky look. Armani's hairlines have an artificial outward "swell" leading towards the temple area.)

 

Not saying one is better than the other, I'm just making observations about how they use their respective techniques to create an illusion of density and the final product.

[Gorpy]

Those are excellent observations Emperor. It is true that hairs angled forward provide more of a shingled effect. That's also why many guys comb their hair forward. From what I can see, my doctor followed my native hair angle exactly. Some of my midscalp native hair does tend top point upward instead of forward. I'm not sure that it has anything to do with saggital or lateral slits. I don't know. I know Shapiro will use either wherever he feels it is necessary.

 

I do strongly believe that there should be an emphasis on strengthening the central forelock area to prevent a see-through look.

[jagdish]

Originally posted by TheEmperor:

Forgot to add.. .

 

Another observation is that docs seem to use the lateral slit to control the forward angulation of hair. This lets them create the "hair shingle".

 

If a doctor is using a saggital slit, so they then have less control of the forward angle? Would this then create higher variabilty in the foward angle and possibly a "rougher" look?

 

I see Shapiros hair work (saggital) and it looks differnt from say H&Ws work (lateral). From reviewing the web sites, the H&W patients seem to have more of a forward growing "hair shingle" and the Shapiro patients look a bit more unkempt with perhaps more vertical volume. (While I'm at it I might as well dispense my observations of other docs: Feller's hairlines are triangular. Rahal's patients have a blocky look. Armani's hairlines have an artificial outward "swell" leading towards the temple area.)

 

Not saying one is better than the other, I'm just making observations about how they use their respective techniques to create an illusion of density and the final product.

 

Where should I go to have a triangular shingled blocky hairline that swell leading towards the temple area with vertical volume.