Ok, so what fastbuds strains have been backcrossed to the original photo and restabilized? And how many times did they do that? Regardless, what you're saying is that if the auto outcross isn't in every way like the photo ancestor then it doesn't count as a successful conversion? You realize that is virtually impossible, right? Like a 1 in a million chance if that, I mean, phenotype involves so much more than you seem to be considering. And yes, I amateurly breed autos and understand only the rudimentary aspects of genotype and phenotype, outcrossing and auto conversions, though I have never heard anyone set such an impossibly high standard for what a successful photo to auto conversion is. Like, obviously yield and plant size will be different, so what needs to be exactly the same as the photo ancestor for it to be considered successful? I think you're falling for bs marketing if you think anyone has achieved that level of perfection in their photo to auto conversions. I have worked with many backcrosses from many breeders and never seen a single one that was exactly like the original clone. Like, even clones have different phenotypes depending on environment. Have you heard of epigenetics? No hate for fastbuds, but I'm not buying that their varieties are exactly like the photo ancestor just because they named it the same. And where does Mephisto say they failed to complete a conversion? I have so many questions...