To begin this conversation I want to say myself and others were seriously duped by Alex Siegel and it has become painfully obvious in his haste he has talked poorly upon his peers who helped him succeed and everyone around him who he thought he owned thier knowledge. I spent money with him and now I am forced to keep my identity secure to avoid being publicly attacked by him after these revelations.
Data: the data Alex is pushing is 100% made up. The data Alex is pushing is entirely fraudulent. Alex decided to invent his own non imperial data interpretation. I began noticing this when I saw chlorophyll is entirely not in its position where it needs to be. Alex superimposed data screens as facts while denying any and all other known data correspondence in the market or scientific documentation that is available on market. The data Alex is pushing is not only not quantifiable but it is also not accurate or repeatable. Each sample generates slightly different result. Each sample shows data in the wrong locations. The pigment tracker had so much noise in it that Alex decided to interpret the noise and false data as factual data. We have all been duped, and Alex made a killing selling these devices he didn’t it even develop realistically, or perfect the data acquisition. For about 10-30 bucks each he decided to upcharge what the competition makes for profit for instance on a fraction finder where the price maybe higher but has same margin I’m guessing.
Hardware: there is what looks to be like no uv detection happening at all. Inside the device it seems that there is some kind of a adafruit style ccd chiplet. I will further investigate what he selected but I can assure you this device only sees color. What Alex has done is treated us all like ignorant bafoons. After talking to a couple serious industry techs, specialists and heavily levy’d knowledge centers for the specific details it has become prevalent that Alex didn’t even use any uv detection optics or hardware. What I found inside my pigment tracker was basically a hardware (non optical prism) that cannot repeat the defraction process repeatably. As well as there is no ultra violet signal appropriations. Alex has simply made a rudimentary and inaccurate light splitter that uses a colorimetry style interpretation. It seems like he is sending this signal through to a open source software base that only interprets wide band data and not particular data and there is no deleting or removed out of signal-wrong data. Like lights, false signals, noise etc. He has bamboozled all of us on his claims that fraction finder is not a detector and his is.
This type of projection had made me curious. So I decided to open one up after realizing as a customer I was being abused verbally and repeated propaganda and nonsense about other products so I would purchase and use his device. After opening up my fraction finder it has become obvious the fraction finder actually has a uv exciter, and a uv detector and all the research and build out design required to be a uv detector.
Alex didn’t put any effort into it. And he also technically makes money on freeshare software he used to interpret his data Wich he sells with the device and I’m sure that’s not entirely legit.
The light he sends through id of a non Validated and bogus flashlight. I began to realize he was gaslighting the entire time about his product vs his hated arch nemesis arometrix. However untill further review it has become apparent he is using colorimetric data only and color type chiplet similar to a camera ccd that was modified into a hobbyist light on off detector.
Alex uses absolutely no uv detection and he barely had anything excited becusee the light coming from his flashlight almost entirely dilutes the received signal. In uv detection the light is the trigger, the light must turn off, and then the material to be investigated glows slightly sending back a response to a detector. Unlike the fraction finder Wich uses a correct uv exciter it also receives the data first and deletes the color it’s shooting off, while allowing the glowing uv coming off the sample to actually be measured. This is not the case. Alex is using colorimetry and deceiving the consumer base into thinking it’s a uv detector. Or that it actually reads uv signatures or signals. It does not. It just interprets the flash light and the material itself whose behavior of light that would be subjected to what that flashlight produces and what its sorta emitting off the material sample.
Conclusions:. Alex is reselling all the info he has learned from his peers. In fact his pigment free distillation process is basically a simpler and not as detailed version of the processes I learned from several people in the bay area to the east coast. The only difference is Alex blends his words so you don’t exactly catch where his speeches or support advice comes from. Secondly his process is vague and actually isn’t as detailed as others who had released it years before him. It is very bad this guy makes money off free info everyone else posts. His crystalization process came from someone he did a consult for and accidentally found out what they were doing. This process was also good for another industry so there’s nothing unique about it. It’s similar to dropping sugars from crude oil in separation tanks. He lied to myself and everyone about the pigment tracker while attempting to cause slander to his competition for sales. This would have been okay if what he said was true. I apologize publicly for the things I said because of what Alex told me.
There are not much similarities or technologies that weave themselves to determine if pigment tracker or fraction finder is the best tool for the job. Let me write out comparisons;
Not uv detector.
No uv detector parts.
Extremely noisy electronics and signal.
Not useful in motion.
Hobbyist chiplet for image acquisition.
Form of splitting light into colorimetric data acquisition.
No data can be validated, nearly wrong locations on display software.
Uses flashlight with bogus uv imposed bulb that isn’t real, only some uv triggering but not genuine.
Genuine uv emitter/exciter with uv detection custom board.
Repeatable and accurate every time.
Deletes noise from room and exciter.
Validated positions for chlorophyll and all similar points of interest.
Custom software to interpret and read uv data.
I don’t feel bad for saying this. Alex has a bogus way of saying “the industry deserves better”. He is right. Alex should not be slandering and causing bogus claims to spread about others he wants to compete with. Please feel free to take apart your pigment tracker and post what I had mentioned here in pics so the community can validate these facts. The industry Trully deserves better than Alex, his scams, his stolen ip he takes claim to and how he made us turn on the people who introduced the fraction finder without any empirical data or facts other than posting a video of someone’s fraction finder where apparently the sensors fell out of their positions and claimed it doesn’t work.
-very angry customer of Alex.