A 2–10 Looks Scale and a Structured, Unbiased Guide to Facial Analysis (RATE YOURSELF OR OTHERS WITH EASE)

- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC
1763590147801


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
1763590188841

These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
1763590197941

strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
1763590250973

Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
1763590257097

Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
1763590264444

Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
1763590286768

Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
1763590294371

Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
1763590302388

Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
1763590309941

Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
1763590317872

Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
1763590325257

Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
1763590332767

Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
1763590339406

Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
1763590346003

Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
1763590353037

Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
1763590525293


The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between all thirds.

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
 
Last edited:
  • +1
  • JFL
  • Woah
Reactions: nabiwabi, Idk❤️, unkownincel and 24 others
@Gengar @Aryan Incel @unon @Leo @Starborn
 
  • +1
  • Love it
Reactions: Idk❤️, unkownincel, LTNUser and 8 others
Pure art
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser, qxdr, unon and 1 other person
Bookmarked, mirin high iq thread!:Comfy:
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser, qxdr, unon and 1 other person
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser, Leo, qxdr and 4 others
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.[ /td]
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face, emphasizing a masculine tapered forehead and cheek transition.
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.
[td]

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.4432%
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between 33-33-33

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
Very high effort thread. I couldn’t help but notice you left me off in the 9.1-10 section
 
  • +1
Reactions: skibidisigma6741, LTNUser, greycellbrill and 4 others
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser, qxdr, unon and 1 other person
Vito basso and near ideal in the same sentence yeah alr
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser, qxdr, unon and 1 other person
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.[ /td]
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face, emphasizing a masculine tapered forehead and cheek transition.
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.
[td]

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between 33-33-33

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
wow this is really good shit

only got through half of it but high quality thanks
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, unon and BigBallsLarry
Tom welling and Sean o'pry in the same tier JFL
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, Framem4xx and unon
8 to 9 difference is crazy
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, unon and BigBallsLarry
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between 33-33-33

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
Extremly high iq thread BOTB worthy @BigBallsLarry How long did this take holy
mirin effort my nigga
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, unon and BigBallsLarry
Mirin effort holy rare to see these days, bookmarked
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, BigBallsLarry and unon
Extremly high iq thread BOTB worthy @BigBallsLarry How long did this take holy
mirin effort my nigga
Not long, it's not that good of a thread, just a passtime activity
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, unon and Starborn
Not long, it's not that good of a thread, just a passtime activity
Very good of a thread to me been looking for examples of each tier and this is the first one ive seen
Bookmarking this shit
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, unon and BigBallsLarry
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between all thirds.

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
Ayo this peak

Inb4 botb
 
  • +1
  • Love it
Reactions: qxdr, BigBallsLarry and unon
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between all thirds.

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
nice thread but the app is a trojan jfl
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, BigBallsLarry, Saint and 1 other person
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between all thirds.

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
Bookmarked, mirin effort
 
  • +1
Reactions: qxdr, BigBallsLarry, chudthefag and 1 other person
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between all thirds.

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
Mirin effort
Lil corrections/notes:
You overrated Brad Pitt, underrated Haruma, Ward and Arvid are not 8/10's, and the 4th example you have who is a 4/10 is Wanderlei Silva
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser and BigBallsLarry
probably the best thread ive read on facial aesthetics, deserves botb tbh
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser, BigBallsLarry and Framem4xx
Good but should’ve added the women for each tier as well🙏
 
  • +1
  • Hmm...
Reactions: BigBallsLarry and Framem4xx
Stick + BOTB when..

Sad Michael Scott GIF
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser, qxdr, BigBallsLarry and 1 other person
Mirin the effort
The "average" looking person 5/10 is less good looking than in the thread
Screenshot 20251120 085709

Is he average ? No obviously in hyperborea maybe
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser and BigBallsLarry
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between all thirds.

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
DID read mirin iq.
 
  • +1
Reactions: LTNUser and BigBallsLarry
  • +1
Reactions: GonorrhoeaGobbler, 7evenvox22 and BigBallsLarry
@Gengar can we pin this? i don't want it to get lost, it's a good guide.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Framem4xx
will read later
 
  • +1
Reactions: BigBallsLarry
Where is muh muh "minority (black) representation" in 9-10 range :forcedsmile:
 
  • +1
Reactions: BigBallsLarry
- Credits for the idea of this thread goes entirely to imsubhumanlmfao on discord

- Credits for information and analytics inside of the thread goes to BigBallsLarry, imsubhumanlmfao on discord, the rater “lexi”, the rater “FaceIQ”, aswell as the currently pinned threads and BOTB posts in this forum

- credits for the ANGU and DIMO formulas go to max

- Credits for the looks scale go ENTIRELY to this highly detailed doc, the user that made this has spent hours on it and i completely respect it, however i couldn’t find WHO actually wrote it, so if you see this and wish it to be taken down then i am free to do so.

Code:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hsV7keyO3pxRtET12Nnbq4E09cGwvVJF1yjC5sBoOdg/edit?gid=1682270163#gid=1682270163

i have not come up with the examples myself, i simply wrote them down.

Disclaimer: The formulas and facial ratings in this thread might not be seen as the complete truth for everyone, and many people could disagree with placements and scores. This is completely fine, however it’s still a very good place to start, and shouldn’t be immediately dismissed.

This thread is meant to serve as a guideline on facial analytics, that is both accurate and objective.

In it, we will cover:

- an example of a looks scale - with real life examples and ratings
- A formula on calculating one’s harmony score. (HARM)
- A formula on calculating one’s dismorphism score. (DIMO)
- A formula on calculating one’s angularity score. (ANGU)
- A formula on calculating one’s miscellaneous score. (MISC)
- And how to put these scores into an objective looks rating

Why? - The ratings on this forum are usually done on a whim, and extremely rarely performed with a consistent structure. This leads to inflated variance, personal or subjective bias, unreliable comparisons or just overall bad ratings.

For the people who actually care about precision, that is unacceptable. Therefore, this thread is meant as a staple, repeatable and benchmarked solution to provide yourself or others with accurate, non-biased ratings that also point out flaws and strong points so the users know what to work on.

1. Looks scale

Factored on HARM, DIMO, ANGU and MISC


9.1-10 RANGE (~1 in 1.2million - 1 in billions)
View attachment 4343171
These men are near perfect levels of facial looks, and individuals in this level place among the best (known) looking faces of all time.

Features:
- Only a handful in the world
- Only a few minor imperfections
- Very high facial harmony
- High dismorphism
- High health indicators
- Low BF% (near 8-12%)
- High set cheekbones

Examples:
- Matt Bomer
- Vasily Stepanov
- Rodrigo Guirao Diaz
- Vito Basso
- Henry Cavill
- Mikel Pishek
- Hernan Drago
- Atesh Salih
- Andreo Erikesen
- Miroslav Cech


9 (1 in 1.2million)
View attachment 4343173
strikingly attractive, subjectively can be placed into the 9.1-10 range.

Features:
- Very small group of people (models, actors, etc.)
- Few flaws, perhaps unideal eye spacing, nose shape, etc.
- High facial harmony and dimorphism
- low BF% (near 8-13%)
- High set cheekbones
- High health indicators

Examples:
- Thom Strijd
- David Gandy
- Sebastian Rulli
- Alfredo Hernandez De La Cruz
- Brad Pitt
- Alain Delon
- Jeremy Meeks
- Brian Whittaker
- Simonas Pham
- Tom Cruise
- Tyler Maher


8.5 (1 in 58000)
View attachment 4343177
Exceptionally attractive

Features:
- Few in the world (Mostly models & actors)
- Minimal flaws
- High facial harmony common, but not always present
- Low bodyfat
- Less angularity, but still lean features
- High health indicators
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Tom Welling
- Haruma miuara
- Sahib Faber
- Oscar Spendrup
- Alessandro Dellisola
- Matthew Noszka
- Micheal Yeargar
- Elias de Poot
- Ian Sommerhalder
- Sean Opry
- Alexander Zanoza


8 (1 in 4100)
View attachment 4343178
Surpassingly attractive

Features:

- Easier to find, but can model or act at a high level
- Can have a handful of flaws, and larger ones
- Low gonial angle
- High Fwhr usually necessary
- Low bodyfat
- High health indicators & harmony
- Usually, but not always possess high cheekbones
- High facial dimorphism

Examples:
- Harri Musumeci
- Arvid Gustavasson
- Alex Schlab
- Jensen Ackles
- Laurence Coke
- Chace Crawford
- Michael Ward
- TherealSofian
- Arvid heistner
- Paul Walker


7-7.5 (1 in 68 - 1 in 440)
View attachment 4343180
Considerably or highly attractive

Features:
- Atleast one striking feature
- Recognized for their looks, or will stand out in a crowd
- Can be succesful models/actors
- Low body fat, but less facial angularity than the ones above.
- High health indicators
- High (7.5) or above average (7) facial harmony, usually flawed by eye spacing, face shapes, FWHR, etc.
- High dimorphism, but less than above

Examples:
(7.5)
- Chris Hemsworth
- Harry Styles
- Critsiano Ronaldo
- Cillian Murphy
- Rome Flynn
- Daivid becham
(7)
- Justin Bieber
- Penn Badgley
- Neymar.JR
- Archie Gray

6.5 (1 in 16)
View attachment 4343183
Noticably attractive

Features:
- Can spark a modeling c areer or social media following
- Looks are not a life barier & usually an advantage
- Attractive actors found here
- Facial flaws more obvious
- Hotably higher than average facial dimorphism
- High health indicators
- Bodyfat does not have to be super low, but still in shape

Examples:
- Arthur Kulkov
- Jude Bellingham
- Karl Tune
- Timothee Chalamet
- Noah Beck
- Max motta
- Bradley Cooper
- Jacob Elordi


6 (1 in 5.4)
View attachment 4343185
Decently attractive

Features:
- Generally considered attractive
- Subjectivity comes more into play
- Best looking in a small classroom or workplace
- Facial dimorphism and defenition above average
- Flaws are apparent
- Fit, but not always low bodyfat

Examples:
- Justin Timberlake
- Ben Sherell
- Hector Diaz
- Finley Williams
- James Smith
- Shahid Kapoor


5.5 (1 in 2.7)
View attachment 4343186
Moderately attractive

Features:
- Not seen as unattractive
- Do not stand out in a crowd, but can act or do music
- Face not an advantage or disadvantage in life
- Lacking masculinity
- Facial flaws obvious (bulbous nose, long philtrum, droopy eyes, etc.)
- Facial harmony will typically be average around 55%.
- Health indicators are medium

Examples:
- Charlie Cox
- Kawhi leanord
- Steven Yeun
- Bryce Hall
- Ansel Elgort
- Riz Adhmed


5 (1 in 2)
View attachment 4343187
Decent looking, ordinary

Features:
- Completely ordinary
- Can sometimes be considered below average by some
- Facial dimorphism, strikingness all about average
- Facial harmony almost always below 50%
- Weak chin and jaw are common
- Health indicators can vary

Examples:
- John Mulaney
- Daniel Kaluuya
- Adres Guardado
- Jamie Penedo
- Callum Stodart
- Messi


4.5 (1 in 2.16
View attachment 4343188
Below average looking, can still be considered ordinary

Features:
- Considered ugly by most, but very ordinary in reality
- Bodyfat varies, but can be high around 20%
- Facial harmony lacking

Examples:
- Anoop Desai
- Jonah Hill
- lil Wayne
- Dalvis Paula
- Hirohiko Araki
- Hakan Calhanoglu


4 (1 in 3.69)
View attachment 4343189
Ordinarily ugly

Features:
- Considered ugly by most
- Still very ordinary in public
- Few good features

Examples:
- Ed Sheeran
- Psy
- Jay Z
- DJ Khaled


3.5 (1 in 9.7)
View attachment 4343191
Unordinarily ugly

Features:
- There is not much to note past this point. These are the bottom tiers of facial aesthetics.
- Past his point there is little purpose in discerning exactly how unattractive one’s facial features are.

Examples:
- Hong-Man Choi
- Richard Cabral
- Flavor Flav
- Lewis Capaldi


3 (1 in 39.2)
View attachment 4343192
Extremely ugly

2.5 (1 in 243)
View attachment 4343193
Extraordinarily ugly

2 (1 in 2316)
View attachment 4343194
Otherwordly ugliness


2. MISC formula - calculating a miscellaneous score

MISC makes up 26% of a facial score, therefore next to harmony it’s the second most important formula.

Below you’ll see tables with numbers that will later be calculated into a 0=100 score.


SkinTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin clearness (acne + blemishes)50251050-10-20-30No acne or blemishes
Hyperpigmentation3010520-5-10-30None
Moles1075310-5-10None
Skin texture15105310-2-5Smooth
Acne scarring15105310-2-5None
Facial folds + wrinkles402010520-5-15

Eye areaTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Upper eyelid352010530-5-15No UEE, straight/curved, no drooping
Lower eyelid shape20105310-3-8Straight/slightly curved, no drooping
Sclera show155310-5-10-15None
Eyelashes158420-2-4Thick, dense, dark
Eyebrows30189520-5-15Thick, dense, dark
Periorbital darkening251050-5-10-30-50None
Under eye circles158420-3-5-15None
LEE1510520-5-8None
Eye colour1075Light colour
Scleral triangles84210-5-10-15Even triangles
Medial canthus10520-1Downturned, long, not thin
PFL2010530-5-10-1527mm+ (iris method)
Sclera colour8420White
Unibrow531-2-5-10-15-30None

ColouringTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Skin colour3010530Tanned
Lip colour1510530-3Reddish pink
Eyelash visibility158420Contrasting + visible
Eye colour20105Light eye colour
Hair colour251050Dark colour
Eyebrow colour201050Dark colour
Sclera whiteness1050

Overall lower thirdTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Gonions402010530-5Flared
Chin shape30158420-5Square
Chin width2513730-5Wide
Ramus length352010530-5Tall
Mandible length30158420-5Long & straight
Mandible shape105310-3Straight (minimal antegonial notch)

LipsTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Lip width25126310-5Wide
Philtrum length20105310-5Short (not excessive)
Philtrum ridges10520-3Defined
Lip fullness1584210-5Full
Lip health1584210-5No cracking
Commissures10520-3Slight upturn
Cupid’s bow10520-3Prominent
Lip seal5310-3Straight, aligned with vermillion border

NoseTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Alar width1584210-5Not wide
Nose bulbosity20105310-5Low bulbousness
Nasal tip25126310-5Defined, not droopy
Nostril show20105310-5Minimal
Nostril flare10520-3None
Dorsum5310-3Straight
Radix projection1584210-5Projected, visible nasofrontal angle

Other miscTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Tier 8Ideal
Ears15840-5-10-20-40Pinned back
Symmetry100705030100-10-50Minimal asymmetry

Now how do you calculate this into a 0-100 score?

An ideal, 100% MISC score will hold 1031 points, with these ideal categories:

1. Skin - 160
2. Eyes - 231
3. Colouring - 135
4. Overall lower third - 170
5. Lips - 110
6. Nose - 110
7. Other misc - 115

The worst possible MISC score will hold -460, with these worst categories:

1. Skin - -95
2. Eyes - -186
3. Colouring - 2
4. Overall lower third - -28
5. Lips - -32
6. Nose - -31
7. Other misc - -90

To calculate a total MISC score, use this formula

Code:
((YOURMISC - WORSTMISC) / (MAXMISC - (WORSTMISC)) X 100

For example, a misc score of 571 would be:

Code:
((571 - (-460)) / ((1031 - (-460))) X 100 = 69.16

Therefore, the person will overally have a 69.16% MISC score, or 6.916/10


3. ANGU formula - calculating an angularity score

The angularity score has the same weight as the dimorphism score - 20%

To calculate it, follow this formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Mandible Visibility (Front)24.7521.0417.3313.619.906.193.09Broad mandible flare, clear contour, no lower-face fat masking
Facial 3D-ness18.7515.9413.1310.337.524.712.36Strong midface projection, sharp anterior depth, good orbital support
Gonion Sharpness18.7515.94]13.1310.337.524.712.36Well-defined gonial angle (120°–130°), visible edge
Facial Depth17.2514.6612.089.496.914.332.17Strong maxilla + mandible forward projection
Mandible & Ramus Visibility16.7414.2311.719.196.684.172.09Long, tall ramus, sharp rear-jaw contour clearly visible from front
Ogee Curve15.7513.3911.038.676.303.941.97Defined midface curve, strong high cheekbone projection
Cheekbone Visibility15.1112.8510.588.326.053.791.89High, wide-set malars, strong lateral projection, sharp shadow line (aka. hollow cheeks)
Chin Angularity12.3010.468.616.774.923.081.54Squared chin pad, sharp pogonion definition, low convexity
Lower-Midface Fat10.438.867.305.734.173.131.56Minimal buccal fat, sharp lines, lean jaw contour

To calculate your angularity score, do the exact same calculation as with MISC.

Max score - 149.83
Worst score - 19.03
(example) your score - 71


Code:
((71 - 19.03) / (149.83 - 19.03)) x 100 = 39.73

Therefore, this (example) persons angularity score is 39.73%, or 3.973/10


4. DIMO formula - how to a calculate dimorphism score

DIMO, with a weight of 20%, describes how masculine a person is, with 0 being the closest to female-ish features, and 100 usually being a manly ogre.

DIMO is very easily eyeballed with a DIMO chart, but there’s still a rough formula that might be useful to some people


The chart:
View attachment 4343210

The formula:
FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Ideal (highest masculinity)
Eye depth22.3216.7411.160.00-33.48Very deepset eyes with strong supraorbital projection and obvious orbital shadowing
Brow ridge shape13.4410.086.723.36-3.36Pronounced brow bossing with a sharp, continuous supraorbital margin.
Chin shape12.729.546.363.36-12.72Broad, square chin with forward projection and a strong pogonion. Minimal taper, well-defined horizontal chin plane.
Buccal fat size11.708.785.852.93-2.93Very low buccal fat, hollowing beneath the cheekbones, clear cheek/mandible shadowing that enhances male angularity.
Ramus length (front)11.538.655.772.88-2.88Tall, visible ramus with strong vertical jaw height producing a long lower face and a dominant jawline from frontal view.
Gonion outward growth11.048.285.522.76-2.76Wide gonial flare, laterally projecting jaw angle that creates a broad, V-to-square lower face silhouette.
Narrowing upper third9.006.754.502.25-2.25Noticeably narrower upper third (temples to brow) relative to mid/lower face
Facial hair development7.805.853.901.95-1.95Dense, coarse facial hair covering jaw, chin and cheeks. full beard or heavy stubble that reinforces masculine lower-face mass.
Rough skin texture7.205.403.601.80-1.80Thicker, textured dermis with visible pores/roughness consistent with mature male skin.
Cheekbone size6.915.183.461.73-1.73High, laterally projecting malar bones with clear shadow lines beneath cheekbones that support a strong midface and sharp ogee curve.
Lip fullness6.344.753.171.58-1.58Relatively thin to average lips (reduced fullness), tighter vermillion border.

You already know how the score calculation goes.

Max - 120
Worst- -67.44
(example) Your score - 81


Code:
((81 - (-67.44)) / (120 - (-67.44))) x 100 = 79.20

Therefore, this persons DIMO score will be 79.20% or 7.92/10


5. HARM formula - how to calculate a harmony score

Harmony is easily the most important facial aesthetic score in here. It holds a whopping 32% overall importance.

The term gets thrown around everywhere, but in reality it’s just your features on a mathematical scale.


Formula:

FeatureTier 1Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4Tier 5Tier 6Tier 7Ideal
Jaw Width20.5918.5310.296.18-18.53-46.32-Wide mandible width balanced with cheekbones. horizontally strong lower face
Eye to Eyebrow Distance / Eyebrow Setness19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-brows close to eyes without drooping
Brow Ridge Inclination Angle19.8317.849.915.96-5.96-11.90-smooth but defined brow ridge
Facial Thirds19.8317.849.915.95-5.95-11.90-1:1:1 proportion between upper/mid/lower thirds
Nasofrontal Angle19.0617.169.535.72-5.72-34.31-125–135°
Neck Width19.0617.169.535.72-17.16-34.31-Thick neck proportional to jaw width and face size
Lower Third Proportion18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Lower third = ~33-34% of total face height
FWHR18.3016.479.155.49-16.47-49.41-neither too long nor too wide, between 1.8–2.0
Eye Aspect Ratio18.3016.479.155.49-5.49-10.98-Almond shaped eyes with slight lateral taper
Gonial Angle16.7815.108.395.03-10.07-20.13-~120°
Ramus Length14.4114.418.015.80-10.59-20.13-Long ramus with strong vertical jaw height
Thirds of Jaw17.5415.788.776.48-3.89-23.35-Symmetric vertical jaw thirds and a balanced mandible height
Chin to Philtrum Ratio12.9611.676.483.89-1.95-3.89-Short philtrum with proportional chin height (preferebly ~1:2)
Lateral Canthal Tilt12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Positive 3+ degrees lateral tilt
Mouth to Nose Ratio12.3511.126.183.71-3.71-7.4-Balanced width between nose base and mouth corners, preferably 1:1.6
Eye Separation12.2010.986.593.66-10.98-65.88-IPD at ~62-65 mm
Midface Ratio11.9010.715.953.57-3.57-7.14-Short/mid midface height centered around 47-50mm
Jaw Frontal Angle9.158.244.582.75-4.58-9.15-Strong frontal jawline angle without tapering inward
Cheekbone Setness201052.50-2.5-High, laterally projecting zygos with visible ogee curve
Face Length201052.50-2.5-Proportionate long face without vertical excess
Bizygomatic Width201052.50-2.5-Strong cheekbone width of 140-150 mm
Nose to Bizygomatic Ratio73.751.880.940-0.94-Nose width ~70% of cheekbone width
Eyebrow Tilt1052.50-2.5-5-Neutral to slightly upward lateral brow rise
Medial Canthal Angle7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Symmetric medial canthi forming subtle inward angle
Bitemporal Width7.53.751.880-1.88-3.75-Strong but not overly wide temples
Lower Third Proportion52.51.250-1.25-2.5-Evenly divided between all thirds.

MAX score - 389.74
WORST score - -409.92
(example) your score - 110


Code:
((110−(−409.92)) / (389.74−(−409.92))) x 100 = 64.99

Therefore, this (example) persons harmony score is 64.99, or 6.499/10


6. Overall facial score

We will take all the example scores we already made:

harmony - 64.99, or 6.499/10
DIMO - 79.20%, or 7.92/10
ANGU - 39.73%, or 3.973/10
MISC - 69.16%, or 6.916/10

and make an overall facial analysis score with this simple calculation made byimsubhumanlmfao:

32% harmony
26% misc
22% ang
20% dimo

deductions: Highest score - lowest score = TS
TS x 0.1 = D
overall score - D = True Score

So, our facial score will be:

Code:
Harmony: 6.499 x 0.32 = 2.07968

MISC: 6.916 x 0.26 = 1.79716

Angularity: 3.973 x 0.22 = 0.87406

DIMO: 7.92 x 0.20 = 1.58400

2.07968+1.79716+0.87406+1.584=6.33490

with the deduction calculation:

Highest score: DIMO = 7.92
Lowest score: ANGU = 3.973

TS=7.92−3.973=3.947
D=TS×0.1=3.947×0.1=0.3947
True Score=6.33490−0.3947=5.9402

With all of this, our example person is a 5.9402/10

(bonus) how to measure ratios easily


Best way to measure ratios is to use the line tool in a photoshop app (or for example paint.net), then dividing those pixels to get a structured ratio.


@Randomized Shame @Daddy's Home @TechnoBoss @NumbThePain @Hernan
didnt read too long. Upvoted for ND
 
  • +1
Reactions: BigBallsLarry
Mirin effort
Lil corrections/notes:
You overrated Brad Pitt, underrated Haruma, Ward and Arvid are not 8/10's, and the 4th example you have who is a 4/10 is Wanderlei Silva
I was instructed to tell you to add 'imsubhumanlmfao' on discord, you guys can talk about it then :feelshah:
 
  • +1
Reactions: ascensionisgold
Im an iqlet. How do i know what tier im in? Did i miss something in the thread?
 
  • +1
Reactions: BigBallsLarry
I mean the tier for each feature. How do i know that?
You rate yourself (or preferably get someone else to rate you) using the formulas below via eyeballing.
 
Last edited:
So its just by feeling. Fair enough.
Pretty much yes, but with the amount of tiers it's easy to eyeball it and be accurate.

Although, this works best if you're unbiased, therefore it's recommended to not rate yourself, but it might still be a decent baseline.
 
Pretty much yes, but with the amount of tiers it's easy to eyeball it and be accurate.

Although, this works best if you're unbiased, therefore it's recommended to not rate yourself, but it might still be a decent baseline.
Sure. Thanks. It can be pretty hard to get someone to do that for you though. Maybe if i offer someone to do it for them in return, but the quality of such analysis would be very questionable. So i might have to do it myself. Thank you very much for your time. You did a great job with the thread.
 
  • +1
Reactions: BigBallsLarry
Sure. Thanks. It can be pretty hard to get someone to do that for you though. Maybe if i offer someone to do it for them in return, but the quality of such analysis would be very questionable. So i might have to do it myself. Thank you very much for your time. You did a great job with the thread.
No problem! :feelsautistic:

And yes, it takes a lot of effort to perform a full analysis, which is why youtubers or some users usually take payments to do it (for example faceiq takes like 40? or 50? bucks).

This entire formula itself is pretty simplified aswell, normally it'd be more obnoxious but this is really good aswell.
 
No problem! :feelsautistic:

And yes, it takes a lot of effort to perform a full analysis, which is why youtubers or some users usually take payments to do it (for example faceiq takes like 40? or 50? bucks).

This entire formula itself is pretty simplified aswell, normally it'd be more obnoxious but this is really good aswell.
Saving money for peptides so cant really buy that now😭. Imma use this formula for sure sometime. Thanks a lot.
 
  • +1
Reactions: BigBallsLarry

Similar threads

Sociobiology
Replies
6
Views
142
Sociobiology
Sociobiology
TrueEveSlayer
Replies
5
Views
153
TrueEveSlayer
TrueEveSlayer
habeebullah
Replies
46
Views
883
5'4loser
5'4loser
d4iwik
Replies
29
Views
592
maxximus
maxximus
TRYINGIMNOT
Replies
13
Views
236
RideTheTiger
RideTheTiger

Users who are viewing this thread

  • BigBallsLarry
  • Abdou
  • dridrimo
  • flxtasy
  • e1488shciozl
Back
Top