A reminder that you can have projected infras yet hollow eyes. Your infras are beyond hollow vs unhollow. [KNOWLEDGE THREAD]

[Hide]

A common trait i see in people is routinely saying they have recessed infras despite having a positive orbital vector. THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

This is especially prevalent in caucasoid populations, where they project greater infraorbital support over other races.

The infraorbital rim only acts as a base support for your undereyes, it is not a guarantee of your infraorbital cleanliness.

Please look at your eye area and look at how adipose it is, does it posses fat pads or not? You can enjoy a very projected infraorbital rim, but if your eye area doesnt have fat support, it will ONLY show the hollow area. Its the same way your cheeks are hollow because it is not adipose.

Negative orbital vector, yet godly fat distribution.

It is best to suggest that your infraorbitals should be percieved in the facial depth POV rather than undereye hollowness, because undereye bone support is UNPREDICTABLE.

Some bones support better. Your infraorbitals reflect how developed your facial morphology in transition to your eye area.

 

[Resonance]

A common trait i see in people is routinely saying they have recessed infras despite having a positive orbital vector. THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

This is especially prevalent in caucasoid populations, where they project greater infraorbital support over other races.

The infraorbital rim only acts as a base support for your undereyes, it is not a guarantee of your infraorbital cleanliness.

Please look at your eye area and look at how adipose it is, does it posses fat pads or not? You can enjoy a very projected infraorbital rim, but if your eye area doesnt have fat support, it will ONLY show the hollow area. Its the same way your cheeks are hollow because it is not adipose.

Negative orbital vector, yet godly fat distribution.
View attachment 5136976
It is best to suggest that your infraorbitals should be percieved in the facial depth POV rather than undereye hollowness, because undereye bone support is UNPREDICTABLE.

Some bones support better. Your infraorbitals reflect how developed your facial morphology in transition to your eye area.

in sean's case, isnt it that he has a good infraorbital support and just has bad fat distribution in his infras?

 

[Hide]

@Cinnamon fan64 @BigBallsLarry @Orka @valentine @AustrianMogger

 

[Hide]

in sean's case, isnt it that he has a good infraorbital support and just has bad fat distribution in his infras?

His orbital vector is negative, now, almost every human being's bone has his bone not protruding his eyeball. However, in Sean's case, with noted amazing amount of fat hiding his hollowness, it can be noted that its not the bone holding but rather the fat pads.

Your cheeks are hollow for example because they lack fat, my supraorbitals around my eyelid region due to my horrid fat pads in eye area cause me to have hollow supra and undereye region

The main attribute to the clean look that is "filled" is adiposity.

Look at how hollow my eye area is for example, in both the supraorbital regipn and infraorbital region. I have very deep set eyes, but the main seperator?

Fat pads.

 

[Resonance]

His orbital vector is negative, now, almost every human being's bone has his bone not protruding his eyeball. However, in Sean's case, with noted amazing amount of fat hiding his hollowness, it can be noted that its not the bone holding but rather the fat pads.

Your cheeks are hollow for example because they lack fat, my supraorbitals around my eyelid region due to my horrid fat pads in eye area cause me to have hollow supra and undereye region

The main attribute to the clean look that is "filled" is adiposity.

I understand that adiposity is what makes an eye area look "deep set" but for sean I think it's a combination of both.

in many photos his cheekbones project forward instead of laterally which gives him more infra support aswell as it been extremely high set and his nasal bridge also being really prominent and making his undereyes more supported.

 

[Hide]

hmm, issue is that your infraorbital area is seperate from your zygomatic bone. They both come from different mechanisms upon the midface at least from what i understand.

A Case to look at is the arctic populations, where despite insane projection, thekr midface sits flat together while their zygoma is severely projected

As for the nasal bridge, tbh id like to know how the nasal bridge does provide such things, id wanna know

I understand that adiposity is what makes an eye area look "deep set" but for sean I think it's a combination of both.
View attachment 5137033View attachment 5137049

in many photos his cheekbones project forward instead of laterally which gives him more infra support aswell as it been extremely high set and his nasal bridge also being really prominent and making his undereyes more supported.

 

[armemann]

so what is better ROI: fat grafting or implants in ur opinion?

 

[Hide]

so what is better ROI: fat grafting or implants in ur opinion?

It depends, a general rule of thumb is to check your level and type of hollowness.

Usually, if you have a negative orbital vector, you probably need an infraorbital rim implant.
Besides, it would improve your facial depth.

However, it can also be by lack of fat pads. It is very individual dependant and requires you seeing the trends of your fat distribution.

Fat grafting can also improve orbital vector, which also helps, but can fail if your support may predominantly be weak.

However, If you have a positive orbital vector, always get fat grafting.

another option could be a careful filler.

 

[Hide]

Bump

 

[Resonance]

hmm, issue is that your infraorbital area is seperate from your zygomatic bone. They both come from different mechanisms upon the midface at least from what i understand.

A Case to look at is the arctic populations, where despite insane projection, thekr midface sits flat together while their zygoma is severely projected

As for the nasal bridge, tbh id like to know how the nasal bridge does provide such things, id wanna know

The cheekbones form the lateral part of the infraorbital region which also usually determines a person's canthal tilt.
Together with the maxilla they form the infraorbital rim of a person.

As for the nasal bridge's connection to the infraorbital rim, im not entirely sure i understand how its correlated but i remember reading a thread on this forum way back (which i can't find now) which explained how it influenced the medial part of the infraorbital rim.


But I've seen alot of examples both online and in-real life of it.

Renee Simonsen is one example. Her cheekbones are really high-set and her nasal bridge is curved and small and her nose is overall very tiny.
It's also why East Asian's have a very canthal tilt. They dont really have high set cheekbones but their nasal bridges aren't projected.
Another examples is African people where they also don't have projected nasal bridges and due to that they have very high canthal tilts.

The canthal tilt part is due to the medial part of the infraorbital rim not being well supported and low set and therefore the cheekbones are at a higher part so the lateral canthus of the eye gets pushed upwards. (Same goes for people with low canthal tilts. You'll often see that they have very prominent nasal bridges (raised infra rims) or lowset cheekbones.

 

[Hide]

Bump