Chad/Model Facial Analysis & Measurement Stats (Closer Look To Harmony)

[randomvanish]

Have you check this measurement system ?
If this is true, we must create more famous celebrities stats in this chart too.

 

[randomvanish]

@MakinItHappen @RealSurgerymax @SubhumanCurrycel @Lorsss

 

[Warlow]

should focus more on harmony rather than sheer width imo

 

[randomvanish]

We need more male facial stats to analyze harmony better.

 

[randomvanish]

should focus more on harmony rather than sheer width imo

well, it's the only way to analyze harmony. you need measurements, not only buy pixellated ratios.

 

[Warlow]

well, it's the only way to analyze harmony. you need measurements, not only buy pixellated ratios.

well on this topic in particular, some will look better with a narrower bizygo width b/c it matches their tall skull, high class look and others are better suited for a shorter, wider more robust face.

 

[randomvanish]

well on this topic in particular, some will look better with a narrower bizygo width b/c it matches their tall skull, high class look and others are better suited for a shorter, wider more robust face.

harmony isn't something magical dude, it's about measurement+proportions+dynamics acting together.
so that means we can create a system to understand it better ?
it's not like "some look good some look bad".
it can be calculated but not easily.

e.g. wide bigonial width is good but not when your mouth is narrow.
so we need stats.

 

[Deleted member 4887]

colouring is more important anyway

 

[randomvanish]

colouring is more important anyway

not related with this topic.

Dude, @DatGuyYouLike, check this out.

 

[Warlow]

harmony isn't something magical dude, it's about measurement+proportions+dynamics acting together.
so that means we can create a system to understand it better ?
it's not like "some look good some look bad".
it can be calculated but not easily.

e.g. big jaw is good but not when your mouth is narrow.
so we need stats.

yeah i'm just saying the process in itself is quite tedious. But the ideal measurement is not always the best one if you catch my drift.

a top-tier bizygo breadth of 15mm for example makes some look absolutely subhuman or gigachad like Sean O'pry.

so what is it you're trying to achieve with a measurement system? Considering there could be cases where the average or lower-end of average for something say bizygo width could be better off for some folks.

idk maybe i'm off

 

[Deleted member 4797]

not related with this topic.

Dude, @DatGuyYouLike, check this out.

ratios work just fine bro, because it takes into account size as it pertains to proportionality

 

[randomvanish]

ratios work just fine bro, because it takes into account size as it pertains to proportionality

So what are the ratios for face then?
The one on this forum doesn't look proper at all.

 

[Deleted member 4797]

So what are the ratios for face then?
The one on this forum doesn't look proper at all.

ratios to look good?

a midface which is slightly shorter relative to the rest of the skull. wide IPD relative to bi-zygomatic width. taller lower third relative to skull length. jaw width that is roughly 95% of bizygomatic breadth. etc etc

 

[randomvanish]

a midface which is slightly shorter relative to the rest of the skull. wide IPD relative to bi-zygomatic width. taller lower third relative to skull length. jaw width that is roughly 95% of bizygomatic breadth. etc etc

dude come on this isn't even a stat. ton's of people have this and don't look good. that's why i'm talking about creating a database, stats etc.

 

[Deleted member 4797]

dude come on this isn't even a stat. ton's of people have this and don't look good. that's why i'm talking about creating a database, stats etc.

if you post somebody who has good ratios and doesn't look good, I can tell you why. if you have good ratios and features aren't ugly, you cant not look good

 

[randomvanish]

if you post somebody who has good ratios and doesn't look good, I can tell you why.

this is only making things up to concede a point.
also look at scientific papers on facial stats&lookism. your sentence is just a statement, not a controlled analysis on a face.if i can post a male you'll try to find anything could be wrong on his face and then say "that's it".

i'm pretty sure if i post this guy and say "rate him", numerous of high iq people would rate him wrong but women adores him. they are basically whoring around him badly.
males struggle to understand what females see as attractive in general.
and it's normal, we cannot understand easily that.
However, we can mimick and analyze attractive people to get better results by surgeries.

 

[SubhumanCurrycel]

this is only making things up to concede a point.
also look at scientific papers on facial stats&lookism. your sentence is just a statement, not a controlled analysis on a face.if i can post a male you'll try to find anything could be wrong on his face and then say "that's it".

View attachment 835950
i'm pretty sure if i post this guy and say "rate him", numerous of high iq people would rate him wrong but women adores him. they are basically whoring around him badly.
males struggle to understand what females see as attractive in general.
and it's normal, we cannot understand easily that.
However, we can mimick and analyze attractive people to get better results by surgeries.

Hair
End of thread

 

[Deleted member 4797]

this is only making things up to concede a point.
also look at scientific papers on facial stats&lookism. your sentence is just a statement, not a controlled analysis on a face.if i can post a male you'll try to find anything could be wrong on his face and then say "that's it".

View attachment 835950
i'm pretty sure if i post this guy and say "rate him", numerous of high iq people would rate him wrong but women adores him. they are basically whoring around him badly.
males struggle to understand what females see as attractive in general.
and it's normal, we cannot understand easily that.
However, we can mimick and analyze attractive people to get better results by surgeries.

I can see why that guy looks good though, wide face, high levels of facial flatness ACROSS the face (sides are not too far back behind from centre of forehead and inner infraorbitals).

dead average features, but good spacing and side-side facial flatness + decent dimorphism = good looking guy irl.

Im not like some of the autistic raters here who think you need zygos that look like a skeleton to be attractive lol

 

[randomvanish]

high levels of facial flatness ACROSS the face (sides are not too far back behind from centre of forehead and inner infraorbitals).

i couldn't understand this tbh

 

[Deleted member 4797]

i couldn't understand this tbh

this implant for example will increase the zygo flatness across the face

the line between the centre where the inner infraorbital region is, and the outside corner of the zygo, that line has become straighter (flatter) because the outside corner has been brought forward in higher amounts that the inside parts that were augmented.

this applies the same to the forehead too, a handsome forward has temples which are forward set relative to the centre of the forehead (no including brow ridge, relative to the forehead centre right above the brow ridge)

example of good forehead

In fact Sean Connery is a great example of facial flatness side-side across the entire skull, its a large part of his handsomeness.

 

[reptiles]

Have you check this measurement system ?
If this is true, we must create more famous celebrities stats in this chart too.

2nd most useful thread on this forum