BonesAndHarmony
Taking a break from the autism
- Joined
- May 29, 2019
- Posts
- 2,017
- Reputation
- 3,451
Can't believe the PSL community is not aware of the averagenesspill.
In 1990, one of the first computer-based photographic attractiveness rating studies was conducted. During this year psychologists Langlois and Roggman wanted to systematically examine whether mathematical averageness is linked with facial attractiveness.[1][2][3][12][13][14][15] To test this, they selected photographs of 192 young male and female Caucasian faces; each of which was computer scanned and digitized. They then made computer-processed composites of each image, as 2-, 4-, 8-, 16-, and 32-face composites, averaged by pixel. These faces, as well as the component faces, were rated for attractiveness by 300 judges on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = very unattractive, 5 = very attractive). The 32-composite face was the most visually attractive of all the faces.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averageness
The more faces you add the more attractive the resulting face.
This explains many things. For one why attractive people have their ratios approaching the golden ratio.
This means the ideal IPD is 46% of your facial widht and the distance between your pupils and center of mouth has to be 36% of your face height.
I measured this with Lachowski and he fulfills both paremeters.
This is a brutal Blackpill, think about it. It means that only a lucky few have mathematically speaking the privilege of good looks since you need a lot of people with different facial features, shapes, ratios, etc, to create averageness (Inb4 ''water is wet'') while the vast majority of the population is condemended to a life of subpar looks.
In 1990, one of the first computer-based photographic attractiveness rating studies was conducted. During this year psychologists Langlois and Roggman wanted to systematically examine whether mathematical averageness is linked with facial attractiveness.[1][2][3][12][13][14][15] To test this, they selected photographs of 192 young male and female Caucasian faces; each of which was computer scanned and digitized. They then made computer-processed composites of each image, as 2-, 4-, 8-, 16-, and 32-face composites, averaged by pixel. These faces, as well as the component faces, were rated for attractiveness by 300 judges on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = very unattractive, 5 = very attractive). The 32-composite face was the most visually attractive of all the faces.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averageness
The more faces you add the more attractive the resulting face.
This explains many things. For one why attractive people have their ratios approaching the golden ratio.
This means the ideal IPD is 46% of your facial widht and the distance between your pupils and center of mouth has to be 36% of your face height.
I measured this with Lachowski and he fulfills both paremeters.
This is a brutal Blackpill, think about it. It means that only a lucky few have mathematically speaking the privilege of good looks since you need a lot of people with different facial features, shapes, ratios, etc, to create averageness (Inb4 ''water is wet'') while the vast majority of the population is condemended to a life of subpar looks.
Last edited:
