i had a treatment today with the arion unit (alexandrite) on medium coarse hairs , and from what i saw on the display of this unit is that for 14mm spot (which is max on this machine) the max j/cm2 is 18 , and the minimum pulse width is 20ms. when you go lower to 12mm spot you can get to as minimum as 5ms pulse width and j/cm2 as follows : 12mm - 22 max , 10mm - 30 max
now my question is , as long as i get treatments with this machine (they dont have any other brand) , for the medium coarse black hairs i got on my shoulders , belly and chest, is it better to go with the 14mm , 20ms , 18j max , or with 12mm, 5-10ms , 22j max ?
it’s better to go with highest joules and spot size and lowest pulse combo. it’s hard to say between the two. test out both and see what brings better results.
maybe sslhr can share his point of view also , i’ll be glad.
another question i have about the settings is for another type of hairs i have which are light black short hairs. for them i can only use the 12mm or 10mm because only this spot sizes can go low to 5ms pulse width. so according to this , what can be better - the 22j on the 12mm , or the 30j on the 10mm (with the assumption that my skin can handle those fluences).
unfortunately, this is where the operator tries it and sees what works better. they’re not too different, so it’s hard to say. sslhr believes that larger spot size is usually better for all types of hair.
mordoh you can’t reach the pulse 5-15ms with 12mm,22j
the minimum pulse width is 20ms…
if you want to reach the max with 14,12 or even 10mm (18,22,30j/cm2) the minimum pulse is 20ms. and if you want to use 15,10,5ms the maximum fluence for 14mm is 12j, with 12mm 15j and with 10mm 18j is the max.
anyway i had my legs done last month with this machine (skin type III, coarse hair) and the results are not that bad it’s like i had them waxed, all the hair is growing back but finer… i’ll wait to see after 2 months what will happen.
but who told u that you can use 5ms at the max flunce with 10,12mm? are u sure?
thats what i saw on the panel of the machine. on 14mm the lowest pulse width is 20ms , and on the 10mm, 12mm the lowest pulse is 5ms. i dont think that when you go up with the fluence the pulse width is blocked and cant be used… i have got a treatment with the 10mm spot at 20j with 5ms pulse width…
if what you say is true , which i will check very soon , then this machine doesnt have enough power at all…
yes lagirl i’m talking about (wavelight,arion,alexandrite)
mordoh i checked the sitting again today, and yes all what i said before was right except for with the 10mm,5ms u can acually reach 25j but it’s not the max for this spot size (30j max).
so with 14mm, 5-15ms, the max fluence is 12j
and with 12mm, 5-15ms, the max fluence is 15j
with 10mm, 5-15ms, the max fluence is 25j
so if you try to reach the max j for all the spot size even 8mm the pulse width lower than 20ms is blocked. :s
thats very intresting… so it means that this machine is really not that powerfull and it probebly harder to get good effect if any… what is your expirence with this machine someone?
now this settings makes me wonder… if i would like to use the lower pulse width , lets say 5ms , for treatment of fine black hairs , what will be better after all , the bigger spot size which will penetrate the photons better but with smaller fluence or the smaller spot size with the higher fluence… hmm … i can’t really tell the depth of this hairs but it seems there is a better result after i used the 10mm , 20j, 5ms … so probebly some of the hairs werent that deep in the skin.
The best for finer hair would be a machine like GentleLASE that goes to 20j, 18mm, and 3ms. You can try 10mm, 20j, 5ms, but not sure how effective that would be.
my experience with this machine like i said before i had my legs done 5 weeks ago with 14mm, 40ms, 18j… and i’ve tried some areas with 20ms, 18j and all hair is growing back but finer, i didn’t see any difference between 20ms and 40ms…
(black normal to coarse hair, skin type III)
and also i had 1 treatment for the anderarms with apogee it was the first one for this area (10mm,20ms,18j) black coarse hair… the hair grew back the same.
i had the second session with arion,for the same area (underarms) 6 weeks ago (12mm,30ms,20j) there’s like 10 hairs only are growing back but also finer.
i know that these sittings are not effective to actually kill the hair and i’m not expecting a permenant hair removal, but it’s better than shaving everyday beside that the clinic that i’m going to is not expensive.
please mordoh keep me up to date to your results, i’m ciorious to know
sure thing, but i am starting to wonder now if this machine has enough power to acctually do something… wierd, it is a german build machine , should have been a good one…
12mm, 30ms, 20j is not a bad setting for coarse hair and should give result. the problem comes when you’re trying to treat finer hair. even the best machines with best settings have a very hard time with fine hair. GentleLASE didn’t work on mine. so this one has little chance. However, for coarse hair, you may have luck at above settings.
kinda of topic from this post , but from what i have read in this forum someone (dont remember the name) have used the harmony ipl for treating fine hairs and got very good results, better then with alex laser, and in another forum some doctor posted that he have great results with the starlux ipl… and now days this technology only seem to get better with : starlux 500, ipulse , harmony , and more on the same level ipls.
so my question is if someone have used ipl on finer hairs, on what area he used it , what machine , and what is the result… and maybe everyone which used it with good results dont post anymore in the forums , same as with laser results… hmm…
We have not seen any posts from anyone who’s used any of those machines on finer hair for more than one treatment. So it’s really impossible to judge whether it actually worked at all. After one treatment, it always seems like it’s working, but then the hair comes back 2 months later.
thats not true , there is a post from one or two years ago about the harmony ipl… maybe everyone who enters this forum (including me) read here and gets the impression that ipl not working at all compared to laser and then go to get treatment with laser, so thats why no one really stick with it that long… so this post is for anyone which did stick with it , if there is anyone like that… i must addmit that the post i have read made me wonder about the really effectivness of the ipl machines particulary with fine hairs …
I know who you are talking about as I’ve been here for longer than 2 years. You are talking about RC2001 who tried it and felt it was pretty good. But he has also tried about 5 different machines and almost had no hair left at that time. Another poster, hairbastard? tried it as well, but only for one or two treatments. All IPLs are not the same, and I wouldn’t discount Harmony. Why don’t you try it and compare the two? We’re not advising people to go for true lasers because of stories on these forums btw. There has been research and professionals like SSLHR who have tried many machines over the course of 10 years have figured out which ones work best.
IPLs work a bit differently, by heating up the entire area, not just the hair. So there is a higher risk for burns on darker or slightly tanned skin too (so it’s not just about effectiveness). Some IPLS can produce similar results for very light-skinned patients, but there is a higher risk if you get a bit of a tan too. In terms of effectiveness and safety, for most people true GOOD lasers (all lasers are not the same either) will work better. You will also see that all respected professionals in the industry who have been around for a while and concentrate on hair removal specifically don’t use IPLs. This is not a coincidence. IPLs are generally used by clinics that offer other skin treatments that those machines can provide and offer hair removal as a just another way to make money with the same machine while offering other services.
i dont remember the name of the poster but it was someone else then the ones you have mantioned , i remember his post where he said he had tried the alexandrite , lightsheer , harmony and one more machine , and he got the best results with the harmony ipl for fine hairs.
i must say that from all the posts i read , sslhr didn’t used the new generations ipl machines at all . he did try the palomar estilux and another one… so it can be that the new generation of ipl indeed works better then true lasers on a specific hair type if not on all… it is just that every post i read you say that ipl is not working as well as lasers, but it might work even better . no one really post their expirience with ipl to know that …
there are plenty of posts from people who used various IPLs and didn’t get results. there are also posts by some of these same people who then tried true lasers (in good hands) and got results.
yes, you are talking about RC2001.
either way, you should do whatever you personally think is best. we try to help, but some people like to learn on their own mistakes.
You are right that I haven’t used all the new IPL machines. Though I have used the older ones extensively. And I have tested a few of the newer ones. But to really use a machine, you have to use it for a lot of treatments and I haven’t been willing to pay the money it would require to truly test one. What I have done is side by side comparisons over 4-5 treatments of one side with an alex (control) and the other side with an IPL on a number of clients and then compare the results and try to extrapolate. Not the best science but not a big financial commitment.
I would actually love to use IPLs. First, they are a lot less expensive to manufacture and repair and second a lot more reliable than a laser. The reason I don’t use them is that based on my limited testing of current machines and a pretty good understanding of the technology, the fundamental issues going against the IPLs haven’t changed. Most of the newer ones are variations on the same theme with better cooling and in some cases better filters. But nothing really different in the underlying concept. Nothing that would lead one to believe that the IPL would all of a sudden afford vastly more targeted follicular destruction.
