I kinda don’t buy it. The sand thing, sure. But i’m pretty sure human hair is cylindrical in shape and is scaly. It seems more to me that that might be some kind of very thin wire.
Not all individual strands of hair will be exactly and perfectly cylindrical. That’s an image using an electron microscope, which has VASTLY superior resolution that the simple visible-light methods used. Hair is extremely elastic, so there’s no reason to assume it isn’t being deformed by tension. Which we know for a fact it is, because it’s tied in a knot. Why would the photographer lie about using hair, and use something else instead? What motivation exists to be honest about a grain of sand, but dishonest about the hair?
I’m not doubting the photographer if this was really what he said. I’m more so doubting what the OP said.
Hair follicle shape is literally the reason for all the different kinds of human hair we can easily observe. There are several shapes, each causing a different look/texture to the naked eye.
Differences in the shape of the scalp hair follicle determine the observed ethnic differences in scalp hair appearance, length and texture.
See the Structure section here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_follicle
If you zoom in on the photo, you can make out the scales on the hair.
If you look closely on the right you can see the scaly texture
You posted an electron microscope image of a cylindrical hair…
It looks scaly when viewed with the extreme resolution and contrast of an electron microscope. Without that extreme resolution, some details are lost and you can’t clearly perceive those scales.
It also looks different in grayscale, and the election microscope can’t see transparency. But otherwise, I think those both look pretty identical, they look like hair.
Also, if you zoom in, you can in fact see those scales in some places. (The transparency of those thin layers contributes to making them hard to see)
Right? It’s a completely different imaging technique on a different hair. It looks more cylindrical, so it might be from a straighter hair. Or it might just be the angle.
It looks greasy and false-colored
Who the fuck’s hair looks like that? Who the fuck’s sand looks like that?
Somebody cherry picked two exquisite specimens for this shot. Kudos to the photographer.
That’s exactly what he did. The photographer is Ethan Beckler. It is a sand garnet on a hair from his daughter’s head.
Wow. He’s got some incredible skill.
Could’ve used oil or some other chemical like a varnish to smooth the hair.
Here’s your chance to show how it’s done!
I have no lens capable of such a good macro shot.
I thought it was topaz on wrought iron.
This is amazing.
sir that is a potato noodle
Hair as 3D printer filament……
Smell of burning hair intensifies
That ain’t no human hair.
I guess I’ve never really taken the time to actually look at micro-photographs of hair, but damn does it look cool.
it looks chewy
Dont trust the look
Yea, no.
Human hair is cylindrical
How are there multiple comments saying this? It’s a well known fact that there are several shapes.
Differences in the shape of the scalp hair follicle determine the observed ethnic differences in scalp hair appearance, length and texture.
See the Structure section here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair_follicle
Because people see one electron microscope image of a human hair and instantly become experts in the subject. Dunning-Kruger effect at its dumbest.
I agree, and not only that, but they seem to want to shit on anything cool/beautiful where possible, because they are superior to “all these idiots who just believe anything in a post they see”. Or at least that seems to be the pattern imo.
As is tradition
Mine isn’t. Probably has something to do with why it curls
First in a series of why I can’t stand the beach
I don’t like sand. It’s course and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere.
It’s like poetry, it rhymes.
