Is It Me Or Fut Procedure Is Being Portraied As Outdated?

[on64]

I have done a tiny bit of research regarding FUE and FUT and came to the conclusion that FUT would be more suitable for me
I live in Romania and searched for clinics and noticed that most are doing FUE and in their description they also talk about FUT and portray it as an outdated inferior method.
Recently just watched a youtuber that had a hair transplant in Los Angeles and the doctors talked about how advanced FUE is and harvesting the follicles using a robot and portrayed FUT as an outdated procedure

Now I am confused, because I watched some videos of that rather famous hairloss and hair transplant persona Danny Some Italian name, forgot it, but you might now who I am talking about in which he interviews surgeons and came to the conclusion that FUT is better if you want dense long hair and will genetically continue your balding pattern until reaching at least Norwood 5

 

[Rocknroutlaw]

The old FUE vs FUT debate has been done to death, and it seems clear that majority of people believe FUE is far superior.

However, this shouldn't get in the way of your decision making. There are circumstances which make FUT a preferred choice, and I can speak from experience.
It may seem odd to many, but having a full head shaved is my ultimate nightmare which stopped me getting a transplant for many years, until I realised FUT is the solution. I wanted to keep my long hair, and didn't mind it looking like a terrible mullet with half a head shaved with the rest long, enduring the long and painful growth phase. I got there now and it is finally looking like a style as opposed to a desperate cover-up, and glad I have made the choice of FUT. Of course there is also non-shaved FUE available, but from what I understood it simply makes the job more difficult to perform, hence less likely to achieve a good result.
There are many younger surgeons who are not even trained at FUT at all, hence they do all they can to discourage you from choosing it to have your business, labeling it 'outdated' or inferior' etc. I think the choice should be based on your personal circumstances. Clinics should provide you with unbiased info, so any clinics which blatantly puts down FUT should be approached with caution.

As short hair styles for men is the norm, majority of men don't mind shaving their head for the procedure, and hate the idea of having a scar across the back and sides, making FUE a far better choice. I always want to keep my hair long, so the scar at the back isn't an issue for me.

While I acknowledge for majority of people FUE would be a better choice , FUT should not be simply disregarded.
What is your reason for inclining towards FUT ? Are you receding at an advanced stage?

 

[on64]

here is a picture of my hairline and a picture of what I want to change, basically to fill in that norwooded forhead
I thought that FUT would be the better option in obtaining density

 

[Rocknroutlaw]

My understanding is you are able to achieve a higher number of grafts using FUT, so it suits those at advanced stages.
It appears you wear your hair quite short, but probably long enough to cover the FUT scar.
Density is dependent on how tightly the surgeon is able to create graft sites without casing transection, and the % of grafts surviving the procedure. Some seem to believe FUT yields a slightly higher survival rate hence gives you better density..others don't believe it makes any difference.
You should have enough donor hair anyway, so I personally don't see how a FUE wouldn't do just as well for you.