• Welcome to Hair loss Experiences hair loss forum.

    Free impartial hair loss advice, hair transplant advice, hair loss medications and hair loss news.
    You can contact us directly at [email protected] if you experience any problems.

Thickening Effect SMP

Milena Lardì

Milena Lardì

Member
74_zpsfd4957a5.jpg

75_zps1611fe6d.jpg
 
D

Dazzster26

Valued member
I have been going through some of your results and this SMP is pretty amazing love the density effect.


Thank you for posting

Dazz
 
Bigmac

Bigmac

Administrator
Staff member
How many sessions/treatments is this result.
 
C

Coopman

Valued member
There is a bright flash on the first photo, whereas the flash is absent on the second photo. I have no doubt there is a visual improvement, but show some consistency with your photographs.
 
JoeTillman

JoeTillman

Valued member
I don't see a flash. I see the light from the overhead work lamp and then in the after pic I see the light of the afternoon sun. It looks to me like the shot was taken after the job was done and the overhead lamp was turned off since it wasn't needed.
 
C

Coopman

Valued member
Joe

Whatever the reasoning behind the transparency of the photographs, the after photo looks better because it is not as bright as the before photograph.
Everyone suffering from hairloss knows if you take a photo of your hair from overhead without a bright light or flash, it will look a lot denser.

Im certainly not criticising the results. But if top FUE Clinics and I know some SMP Clinics can produce before and after photos under the same lighting conditions, there is absolutely no reason to not follow suit, its notrocket science!

Everyone researching SMP or FUE should be fully aware that if before and after photos are taken in different lighting conditions, with the after picture in darker lighting, then thats a big red flag.
If its a genuine mistake by the Clinic to produce photos like this then it is very easy to rectify.
 
Prohairclinic

Prohairclinic

Prohairclinic FUE and SMP
I totally agree with Joe on this one. I believe the lighting difference is also due to the sunlight comming trough the window. An SMP procedure may take hours, hence the sun may or may not hide behind clouds on any particular moment.

As for results it really shows the power of Trycopigmentation!

Coopman,
I understand your comment, however not every clinic has seperate rooms which are fully blanked out from outside lighting condidations.
 
SMPLooks

SMPLooks

Member
I was trained in the room this procedure was performed in. There is a big window directly behind the table. The procedure probably began in the morning when direct sunlight was hitting the room which is the light you are seeing.
 
C

Coopman

Valued member
Regardless of how much natural daylight enters the room.
The point i am making is that the work is being advertised to many potential SMP patients online.

By providing after photographs in darker light than the before photographs, you are not showing the true results from the procedure.

An easy solution to provide consistent photographs is to provide dark blinds to the room. Problem solved with minimun financial outlay.
 
topccat29

topccat29

29 year HT veteran
Coopman you are absolutely spot on in your posting.

I have been also been seeing pictures with HT that have the filter going on to give the a softening effect to the end result. Sometimes they are even so bold to not use the filter in the before picture. But if you point it out then somehow you are being negative when in fact what you are doing is positive. Pointing out something some young guy might not be aware of by giving him more information.
 
Milena Lardì

Milena Lardì

Member
Hallo everyone,
First of all thank you as usual for your feedbacks.

It is true light is different in the two pictures but the reason is that they were taken in two different moments of the same day and of course the sun light was not the same.

Remember to visit: www.beautymedical.it for updates and feel free to write here whenever you need information so that I can provide you with all the details and pictures.
Regards
 
C

Coopman

Valued member
Topccat

Thank you for your comment. What surprised me the most was the other posters were more concerned about the reasoning behind why the after photo was darker and did not acknowledge the simple fact that the darker photo made the result look better, especially as the before photo was taken under a bright lamp.

Now every poster knew what i was implying, but chose to ignore it.I was particularly surprised with one poster. They are all well versed on hair smp procedures and are fully aware of how lighting can affect the before and after photographs. Why do this?

For any guy considering SMP please research how photographs can give an inaccurate representation of results.


Milena Lardi

I have seen plenty of your work and it seems to be amongst the best in the SMP world. Now you may not have been aware of the lighting differences in the before and after photographs, but it is something that can be changed when you publish more of your work online.
 
Prohairclinic

Prohairclinic

Prohairclinic FUE and SMP
Coopman wrote:
Regardless of how much natural daylight enters the room.
The point i am making is that the work is being advertised to many potential SMP patients online.

By providing after photographs in darker light than the before photographs, you are not showing the true results from the procedure.

An easy solution to provide consistent photographs is to provide dark blinds to the room. Problem solved with minimun financial outlay.
Are you suggesting than pictures that are supposed to be used for advertisement should always be made in a studio? That would bring up the argument that professional picture are 'cleaned up' and again you would have a debate about this issue.
Fact is however hair or hair pigments look totally different in different lighting situation and this is also true in real life.;)
 
C

Coopman

Valued member
Im only suggesting that when before and after results are shown, that every attempt is made to ensure that both photographs are undertaken in similar lighting conditions. You do not need a Studio for that.

By showing before and after photos in different lighting conditions, you are giving a false representation of the actual results.

This can work both ways, a really good result may be hindered by poor quality photography. But more importantly a bad result can be disguised by reducing contrast, brightness etc.

Im certainly not suggesting this is a bad result. But any person looking at the photographs is unable to make a judgement because of the difference in lighting conditions.

Back in the 90s and early 00s, newspapers/magazines were plagued with HT Clinics advertising their results, by providing photographs with discrepancies in the lighting conditions. They done this to give false representations of their results.

Im am not under any circumstances suggesting that is what Milena Lardi has done. I have seen her work documented, it is amongst the best in the SMP world!
I originally only commented that the flash was different on both photographs, which in actual fact was the conditions of the room in question.

But what i have suggested is that because of the difference in lighting between both photos, that they are not conclusive proof of the actual results of this procedure.

I am not suggesting the results are poor, im only suggesting that every effort should be made to ensure consistency between the before and after photographs.
 
JoeTillman

JoeTillman

Valued member
Cooperman,
You are correct. I was explaining the reasoning but did not acknowledge the issue. This was not intentional. Yes, the lighting is different and there can be a benefit to this. It is what it is.
Topcat,
I have been also been seeing pictures with HT that have the filter going on to give the a softening effect to the end result. Sometimes they are even so bold to not use the filter in the before picture. But if you point it out then somehow you are being negative when in fact what you are doing is positive. Pointing out something some young guy might not be aware of by giving him more information.
What relevance do HT pictures have to this SMP procedure?

What is this "filter going on" you speak of?

What are your qualifications for making this observation and assumption?

Knowing how clinics operate, since I actually have worked in two of them and have had a lot of dialogue with many others, I know for a fact that most clinics don't even know how to focus a lens without having the camera set to full Auto mode. To suggest that subterfuge is being carried out, at the level of using photographic filters no less, assumes far too much with regards to not only the capabilities of most clinics, but their comprehension of such things to begin with.






 
Last edited:
C

Coopman

Valued member
Joe

"It is what it is" Absolutely, I dont disagree. But its not really good enough.

For anyone with diffuse hair whom is considering SMP to produce a thickening effect. This result tells them nothing other than dont trust the photos.

You mention that you did not acknowledge the issue and that it was not intentional. But then so did SMPlooks and Bverotti. Sorry but that is all rubbish.
All 3 of you guys are linked to Milena Lardi. Anyone of you guys could have come forward and just said "the photos are not great". Instead we had reasons why the lighting conditions in the room changed during the day.

But every single one of you knows how lighting can affect photography. None of us need to be Einstein to work that one out. We have all been part of various forums over the years, so we are all well versed on this issue.

Im just very dissapointed.

Matt Iulo, recently posted how difficult it is to provide SMP when the patient has existing hair. It gets in the way etc, just like it does if a FUE procedure is undertaken when the patient has not shaved down, when implanting into the donor area..
People who are researching this want decent, honest close up photographs free from glare. They do not want after photos, that create questions and dont provide answers.
 
JoeTillman

JoeTillman

Valued member
Coopman,
Am I missing something? Didn't I just agree with you? In case you didn't see it..
Yes, you are right. The photos could be better and the lighting difference can have a positive effect on the outcome. This time I typed it with gritted teeth so you know I mean it.
I'm sorry for disappointing you.
In all seriousness, I have been speaking with Milena recently and I do have her ear when I need it so I'll make a recommendation that a policy be put in place where the shades should be drawn down for each before and each after image and no additional lighting should be used.
In fact, once I'm done with this, you might not be so disappointed in me after all:)



 
C

Coopman

Valued member
Thats fine Joe.

As I said in a previous post Milena Lardi may have been unaware in the lighting conditions of both photos. At no point in this thread am I criticising her work. I consider it amongst the best in the SMP world.

And I say that through gritted teeth as im not a fan of SMP. But I recognise SMP is a viable treatment for the right individual.
 
Top