Bigonial to bizygomatic ratio

[PubertyMaxxer]

Again we have many contradicting sources saying different ideals.

0.95

0.90

Crazy sources saying 0.7 even

 

[UglyGod360]

Mines is bad cause of my tiny jaw

 

[jabaduk]

Again we have many contradicting sources saying different ideals.

0.95

0.90

Crazy sources saying 0.7 even

View attachment 1513573

Mine is almost 1:1

 

[crosshold]

i think ideal is 1:1 with your temples

 

[germanlooks]

I would say:

1:1 is ideal for the most masc and robust appearance

1:1.1 is ideal for models and looking more aesthetic

 

[Deleted member 5786]

What is Stanley Kubrick ratio

 

[Aesthetics_III]

jfl at the cope in this thread saying 1:1 is ideal

 

[PubertyMaxxer]

I would say:

1:1 is ideal for the most masc and robust appearance

1:1.1 is ideal for models and looking more aesthetic

Bigonial should be below bizygomatic width

 

[germanlooks]

Bigonial should be below bizygomatic width

1:1 can look really masc and good tho

 

[Amexmaxx]

Wtv helps you slay is good.

 

[crosshold]

1:1 can look really masc and good tho
View attachment 1513726

this is not the same as bone structure measurements

 

[PubertyMaxxer]

this is not the same as bone structure measurements

Elaborate pls?

 

[Deleted member 16380]

Idk, I do not like the 1:1 view. Looks square, and non-aesthetic. Foids and gays can be ofc of different opinion.

I think 0.9 is way more beautiful if done right.

But I am biased since I have a narrow jaw myself and ratio 0.9

 

[Edgar]

Looks very aesthetic when the zygomatic arch "pops"

 

[crosshold]

Elaborate pls?

i think the 0.9:1 ratio is referring specifically to your BONES not your face. because your masseters are thick and will throw the ratio off making it look 1:1 when in reality the bone itself is .9:1

if that makes sense

 

[CosmicMaxxer]

i think the 0.9:1 ratio is referring specifically to your BONES not your face. because your masseters are thick and will throw the ratio off making it look 1:1 when in reality the bone itself is .9:1

if that makes sense

If anything .9 refers to the soft tissue, because the average soft tissue ratio is like .85. Which I happen to think is actually ideal. .85 with thin masseters but good definition and horizontal/vertical length and chin size. Jagged jaws look better than minecraft ones.

 

[needjawsurgery]

so is there really an ideal ratio for this or is it dependent on the individual

 

[Deleted member 16380]

so is there really an ideal ratio for this or is it dependent on the individual

I think it is pheno-dependent. Some guys would definitely look ogrish with anything higher than 0.9

 

[crosshold]

If anything .9 refers to the soft tissue, because the average soft tissue ratio is like .85. Which I happen to think is actually ideal. .85 with thin masseters but good definition and horizontal/vertical length and chin size. Jagged jaws look better than minecraft ones.

perhaps, tbh ive seen 1:1 and .9:1 soft tissue look good. probably because everyone has a different ideal ratio. in my opinion, and what im gonna tell my surgeon, is to line my gonions with my temples

 

[randomvanish]

Crazy sources saying 0.7 even

lifefuel for my narrow ass lower third

 

[DaddyLooksmax]

You should take into account also masseters.

 

[Mewton]

1:1 can look really masc and good tho
View attachment 1513726

Only if the neck is insanely thick aswel

 

[Mewton]

1:1 can look really masc and good tho
View attachment 1513726

Some pretty boys have 1:1.1 , a v-face with defined jawline
They can get away with not so big neck