Jacob
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 44
the lighting and angle are different. you have to use the same lighting and angle to be credible. use flash and take photos from further back to show your entire head in bright light. we don't care if the regrowth is a lot or a little, but nobody's going to believe you if you switch the lighting and keep zooming in.
jacob: my point is that photo 6 shows more hair than photo 1 if we assume photo 1 is the exact same spot as photo 6. that's just what my eye tells me, without taking angle and lighting into account. also, can this guy profit off of misinformation? who's selling this stuff?
Yes..6 shows "more hair" than 1. That's because the hair is longer. And as in your first paragraph there..as I've pointed out and asked for to clear things up as well- w/out a "further back" picture to show the entire head(and more than one btw...some from diff angles) it just looks like longer hair coming from the frontal area.
Now if you're going to say pics 4-6 show new growth- where the heck is it in 1 and especially 2-3? Notice the 4-6 pics are closer up etc.
How can this guy profit off of misinformation????????????????? Have you ever heard of Dr. Proctor? Leon Maliniak? On and on.
From what I've read in the err..non-English forums..he supposedly is a "trialist" for the company or some blame thing. So you know there's that connection(if the translations are right). But it's a bit odd for such a person to have his posts edited and deleted in various forums...to have others too point out the crap he's doing with the pictures...for him to constantly post the same pictures over and over just to bump up threads- even in threads that have nothing to do with the product..etc..and not think that he's just a shill for the company.