In total agreement with this. I only trim ends that are clearly damaged, split or thin at the ends. When you do this regularly....you never accumulate much of them and you're able to retain more of your progress because you're eliminating them before they can compromise any significant part of your progress. I love Traycees video on dusting and S&D. I saw that video and it really got me to thinking......then when I saw pinkskates swears by this method as well.....I was sold.
The first time I did it...clipped only the ends that needed it...some parts needed more some needed less....
Except my definition goes more like:
I combine S&D's with regular trims and dustings. I need everything, lol. I couldn't or wouldn't want to get away with just S&D's. I like fresh ends and I feel that all ends need a fresh start sometime. I have to do S&D's because I get splits on those shorter strands that are no where near the bottom so I could never get them with a trim. Splits are so frustrating.
here's Traycee's vid on how she does S&D and Dusting her method of dusting doesn't involve cutting all her ends either....I love it.
It sho is workin for her!
I use Traycee's method....love it! But dosen't she cut good ends too? I remember her saying that in the vid....she likes to give even good ends a fresh start, which i agree with. Or do you mean the ends/bottom length of her hair?Hey yall!
I agree with you on the twisting method. I don't use that one because it's not thorough enough for me. There's too much hair hiding in that twist. What I do is use her method of taking a small section and sliding down it, clipping all ends that stick out on the way down. I use this only to "freshen" my ends that are farther up. Along with that I do regular dustings and S&D's where I examine and clip all bad ends that I find. With all these methods I have my ends covered pretty well for once *fingers crossed*. It's a lot of work though.
Have you viewed Traycee's vid?I wish I could see a video of what you mean. I think what I'm having difficulty understanding is because curly hair bends this way and that at different points along its length, how can you be sure what is sticking out isn't a full end that just happened to be close to a direction change in your hair's pattern?
I mean, if you look at a split magnified, it looks like this:
What you're looking at there is what you would see if you divided this line _____ 100 times and then looked at one part of those hundred pieces.
So when you see a split, it has to have gone way beyond just that 1/100th of a centimeter damage you see there. If all the parts of the split are intact, it'd look like a fan or frayed or just fuzzy. But how y'all would be able to see that on a strand of hair and know for sure, I don't know.
BTW, sliding your finger down a strand may tell you if your cuticles are raised because the strand would feel rough. But even if it were possible to find a split that way, what is it you cut off? Does that mean you just remove half the damage? Coz a split happens to a whole strand, so if you're only cutting things that stick out, exactly what sort of strand are you leaving behind?
I took a photo of a shed hair at its life size and then magnified it 4 times. (Attached pics) I cannot even tell if that end on the magnified hair is a whole end or whether it has split coz human eyes are not made to see such tiny things and be able to distinguish such tiny changes. Definitely mine aren't coz they felt strained when I tried to examine that single strand. And if the magnified one was even hard for me to see, how could I possibly expect to be able to see a split on the real sized strand? And examine 100,000+ of them?
erplexed Sure, there may be some tiny ones that my eyes can't pick up but I don't worry about those. That's what I use the "end freshening" method for....to hopefully get what I can't see and freshen the ends. 
Have you viewed Traycee's vid?
I only do these method on straightened hair. I wouldn't attemt it on a textured style if that helps you understand any better.
I'm not sure if I understand all of what your saying but for S&D's I only cut the splits I can see and they are visible plain as day to me, no magnification needed.
When I cut the hairs that stick out that's only part of my process. I don't expect to get all splits that way....mainly just to freshen/dust the ends that are farther up. I rely on S&D's to get rid of all visible splits.
I don't know if i've cleared up anything, lol.
Gotcha, and I totally agree.Poka, because you also do dusting, I think you cross all T's and dot all I's.
My issue is with the fact that people actually believe S&D finds all splits. And even if you press your hair, unless you're examining from root to end to make sure the strand stays thick all through, how can you tell whether the strands that don't look split are no post-split ends? In other words, people will swear they have no splits yet they have see-through ends. How does that happen? It happens when a split goes so far that it tears off while you comb, so by the time you're LOOKING for splits, you can't find them and think all is well.
The images I posted show you that splits happen at such a microscopic level that by the time you are seeing them, the split has gone as far as here:
And since it's so hard to see it before it goes too far, I think just dusting all strands (as you do Poka) is the surest way to keep hair healthy and full. One of my gorgeous ends idols is Spring who doesn't S&D but just dusts regularly. Her hair is so full and thick from base to ends, just like yours Poka. And I can bet my bottom dollar that your ends look so great Poka because you dust, not because you S&D.
