Colouring is a looks multiplier

[Deleted member 17791]

SMV=A
Ratios=B
Colouring=C

A=B*C

If 10/10 is the maximum possible SMV, lets assume that with plane colouring, your maximum SMV (face only) is 8/10. So the best colouring (north atlantid) would have a multiplier of 1.25.

A=8*1.25
A=10

So each colouring would have a maximum possible looks level. I'm not sure what the multiplier for all would be yet, you'll have to look at an example of a phenotype with perfect/near perfect colouring to find the multiplier. I already know that north atlantid already has the maximum possible multiplier.



For a north atlantid, their looks level for each level of ratios is as follows.

1=1.25
2=2.5
3=3.75
4=5/10
5=6.25
6=7.5
7=8.75
8=10

Lets assume that gingers have a looks multiplier of 0.75. Basically as strong as north atlantid but in the opposite direction.

1=0.75
2=1.5
3=2.25
4=3
5=3.75
6=4.5
7=5.25
8=6

As you can see, it takes having just 6.66 ratios to even be considered a 5/10 as a ginger while a north atlantid only has to have 4 ratios to be a 5/10.


A ginger can only ever be a 6/10 while a north atlantid can be a 10. That's a difference of 4 points which is night and day.


Why is this useful? It shows that colouring becomes more important at higher looks levels. someone with 1 ratios would only deviate about 0.5 points, which is tiny and not very noticeable but is massive once you have high level ratios. This is good because it shows phenotype and race doesn't matter when you're ugly, blue eyes wont ascend an ugly eye area but will massively improve a top tier eye area.

This is better than simply adding a point or two depending on colouring because a north atlantid with 1 ratios will be turned into a 2 or even a 3 which is obviously not reflective of reality, a severely deformed atlantid isn't going to be rated a 3/10 but they might be rated a 1.25/10.

Spoiler: tagging users

@ForeverRecession
@Erik-Jón
@Moggie
@enchanted_elixir
@B.T.N.O.M.A
@StrangerDanger
@fucclife
@StreegeReturn
@PCT01
@TRUE_CEL
@LMSMaxxer
@Stopping@Nothing19
@Nameless_Sunflower
@uglymug2
@Octillionaire

 

[Moggie]

nice idea but the multiplier values are completely arbitrary

 

[Deleted member 4430]

mumbo jumbo

 

[Moggie]

some high iq cel needs to make a complete calculator for smv like a legit formula based on stats and shit

 

[Deleted member 17791]

nice idea but the multiplier values are completely arbitrary

I set the maximum looks level from ratios alone to 8 because 8/10 is considered chad level. So someone with plane colouring should be able to reach chad level but never gigachad. I got the multiplier for north atlantid be simply using what closes the gap.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

some high iq cel needs to make a complete calculator for smv like a legit formula based on stats and shit

I'll attempt to make one. It seems very well possible.

 

[ReadBooksEveryday]

some high iq cel needs to make a complete calculator for smv like a legit formula based on stats and shit

High IQ cel = likely to be rice or curry = you know exactly how the calculator is gonna turn out

 

[Moggie]

High IQ cel = likely to be rice or curry = you know exactly how the calculator is gonna turn out

we need to bow down to out Dravidian and Punjabi overlords

 

[Deleted member 19766]

I guess this is only accounting for face, right?
What about facial leanness? Is that accounted for by the ratios category as well?

 

[Deleted member 14160]

what is multiplier for ethniks

 

[Deleted member 17791]

I guess this is only accounting for face, right?
What about facial leanness? Is that accounted for by the ratios category as well?

Well, your leanness would effect the shape of your face somewhat so I suppose it could be. I was using the word 'ratios' to include anything to do with the shape of the face.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

what is multiplier for ethniks

You'd have to base it on getting one with 5 ratios and finding what their SMV is. So if someone with normal ratios has a facial SMV of 4, their colouring's looks multiplier would be 0.8.

4/5=0.8

So if you wanted to find the looks multiplier for a typical ethnic colouring, you'd get someone with mediocre ratios, have the forum rate him and then divide his rating by his proportions.

 

[Deleted member 19766]

Well, your leanness would effect the shape of your face somewhat so I suppose it could be. I was using the word 'ratios' to include anything to do with the shape of the face.

How would hollow cheeks and a sharp/defined/chieseled jawline be accounted for?

 

[B.T.N.O.M.A]

SMV=A
Ratios=B
Colouring=C

A=B*C

If 10/10 is the maximum possible SMV, lets assume that with plane colouring, your maximum SMV (face only) is 8/10. So the best colouring (north atlantid) would have a multiplier of 1.25.

A=8*1.25
A=10

So each colouring would have a maximum possible looks level. I'm not sure what the multiplier for all would be yet, you'll have to look at an example of a phenotype with perfect/near perfect colouring to find the multiplier. I already know that north atlantid already has the maximum possible multiplier.



For a north atlantid, their looks level for each level of ratios is as follows.

1=1.25
2=2.5
3=3.75
4=5/10
5=6.25
6=7.5
7=8.75
8=10

Lets assume that gingers have a looks multiplier of 0.75. Basically as strong as north atlantid but in the opposite direction.

1=0.75
2=1.5
3=2.25
4=3
5=3.75
6=4.5
7=5.25
8=6

As you can see, it takes having just 6.66 ratios to even be considered a 5/10 as a ginger while a north atlantid only has to have 4 ratios to be a 5/10.


A ginger can only ever be a 6/10 while a north atlantid can be a 10. That's a difference of 4 points which is night and day.


Why is this useful? It shows that colouring becomes more important at higher looks levels. someone with 1 ratios would only deviate about 0.5 points, which is tiny and not very noticeable but is massive once you have high level ratios. This is good because it shows phenotype and race doesn't matter when you're ugly, blue eyes wont ascend an ugly eye area but will massively improve a top tier eye area.

This is better than simply adding a point or two depending on colouring because a north atlantid with 1 ratios will be turned into a 2 or even a 3 which is obviously not reflective of reality, a severely deformed atlantid isn't going to be rated a 3/10 but they might be rated a 1.25/10.

Spoiler: tagging users

@ForeverRecession
@Erik-Jón
@Moggie
@enchanted_elixir
@B.T.N.O.M.A
@StrangerDanger
@fucclife
@StreegeReturn
@PCT01
@TRUE_CEL
@LMSMaxxer
@Stopping@Nothing19
@Nameless_Sunflower
@uglymug2
@Octillionaire

This information is irrelevant because there is no quantitative designation and only works on an arbitrary scale

 

[Deleted member 17791]

How would hollow cheeks and a sharp/defined/chieseled jawline be accounted for?

I have an idea that you'd have certain sections for each part of the face. Lower third, Mid third and upper third.

Each section would have the individual traits averaged out.

So

(chin height + jaw width + etc) / the number of factors included.

Each trait would be on a scale of 1/10. 10/10 would be defined as if it is exactly inside the ideal range.

So each section of the face would be the averaged score of each individual trait. You would then have another section which would be how well each third goes together, lets call that facial harmony for now, it is defined as if you have equal thirds and the right face height/width ratio.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

This information is irrelevant because there is no quantitative designation and only works on an arbitrary scale

The point of the thread is to try to make it non arbitrary by using formulars and adjusting them to fit real life. I've already shown treating colouring as a multiplier is a better idea than just adding it to a final rating.

 

[Deleted member 16853]

I don't believe in coloring Halo for Sub-5, lets pray you have good phenotype+coloring

 

[Deleted member 17791]

I don't believe in coloring Halo for Sub-5, lets pray you have good phenotype+coloring

Well my theory predicts just that, it gets less important when you're ugly

 

[B.T.N.O.M.A]

The point of the thread is to try to make it non arbitrary by using formulars and adjusting them to fit real life. I've already shown treating colouring as a multiplier is a better idea than just adding it to a final rating.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

View attachment 1863345

hmm

 

[Stopping@Nothing19]

legit post, colouring isn't talked about enough here

 

[Deleted member 17791]

legit post, colouring isn't talked about enough here

it's over for unideal colouringcels. They can have perfect ratios but still be a 6/10

 

[Michael Myers]

So then South Asians can't be higher than a 3.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

So then South Asians can't be higher than a 3.

The looks multiplier prolly isn't that low.

Would you say the average looks level of them is?

 

[Michael Myers]

The looks multiplier prolly isn't that low.

Would you say the average looks level of them is?

I am of the view that objectivity is king. So no I don't think that any race should have "tax", it's dumb and defeats the purpose of objective ratings.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

I am of the view that objectivity is king. So no I don't think that any race should have "tax", it's dumb and defeats the purpose of objective ratings.

Colouring is objectively part of looks.

 

[Michael Myers]

Colouring is objectively part of looks.

Nope, that's subjectivity.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

Nope, that's subjectivity.

muh objective, subjective. That's just how it is, no denying it.

 

[Michael Myers]

muh objective, subjective. That's just how it is, no denying it.

Do you know the meaning of these words?

 

[Deleted member 17791]

Do you know the meaning of these words?

go on, define subjectivity and objectivity to me. Doesn't change the fact certain colour palletes are more attractive then others.

 

[Michael Myers]

go on, define subjectivity and objectivity to me. Doesn't change the fact certain colour palletes are more attractive then others.

"Hurr durr go define objectivity/subjectivity to me while I focus on subjectivity."

 

[Deleted member 17791]

"Hurr durr go define objectivity/subjectivity to me while I focus on subjectivity."

okay, I think it's time for this conversation to come to a close.

 

[Michael Myers]

okay, I think it's time for this conversation to come to a close.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

I can't believe you don't think It's me

 

[Deleted member 19499]

I use this calc that I created for myself to assess SMV

As you can see, I'm a Low-Tier Normie, bordering on Subhuman level

I should probably add pheno/race to it as well

 

[enchanted_elixir]

some high iq cel needs to make a complete calculator for smv like a legit formula based on stats and shit

Can't happen. I would've made that already if that was objectively calculatable, but since subjectivity plays into it, it isn't calculatable.

 

[Foreverbrad]

I use this calc that I created for myself to assess SMV

View attachment 1863945

As you can see, I'm a Low-Tier Normie, bordering on Subhuman level

I should probably add pheno/race to it as well

Whatever weighting you gave to face probably isn't enough.

 

[Deleted member 20189]

I’m north Atlantid and at least 4/10, the numbers you’re using are too arbitrary I think

 

[Deleted member 20189]

I use this calc that I created for myself to assess SMV

View attachment 1863945

As you can see, I'm a Low-Tier Normie, bordering on Subhuman level

I should probably add pheno/race to it as well

How do exactly do u calculate it?

 

[Deleted member 17791]

I use this calc that I created for myself to assess SMV

View attachment 1863945

As you can see, I'm a Low-Tier Normie, bordering on Subhuman level

I should probably add pheno/race to it as well

How do you calculate it?

 

[CyprusGD]

SMV=A
Ratios=B
Colouring=C

A=B*C

If 10/10 is the maximum possible SMV, lets assume that with plane colouring, your maximum SMV (face only) is 8/10. So the best colouring (north atlantid) would have a multiplier of 1.25.

A=8*1.25
A=10

So each colouring would have a maximum possible looks level. I'm not sure what the multiplier for all would be yet, you'll have to look at an example of a phenotype with perfect/near perfect colouring to find the multiplier. I already know that north atlantid already has the maximum possible multiplier.



For a north atlantid, their looks level for each level of ratios is as follows.

1=1.25
2=2.5
3=3.75
4=5/10
5=6.25
6=7.5
7=8.75
8=10

Lets assume that gingers have a looks multiplier of 0.75. Basically as strong as north atlantid but in the opposite direction.

1=0.75
2=1.5
3=2.25
4=3
5=3.75
6=4.5
7=5.25
8=6

As you can see, it takes having just 6.66 ratios to even be considered a 5/10 as a ginger while a north atlantid only has to have 4 ratios to be a 5/10.


A ginger can only ever be a 6/10 while a north atlantid can be a 10. That's a difference of 4 points which is night and day.


Why is this useful? It shows that colouring becomes more important at higher looks levels. someone with 1 ratios would only deviate about 0.5 points, which is tiny and not very noticeable but is massive once you have high level ratios. This is good because it shows phenotype and race doesn't matter when you're ugly, blue eyes wont ascend an ugly eye area but will massively improve a top tier eye area.

This is better than simply adding a point or two depending on colouring because a north atlantid with 1 ratios will be turned into a 2 or even a 3 which is obviously not reflective of reality, a severely deformed atlantid isn't going to be rated a 3/10 but they might be rated a 1.25/10.

Spoiler: tagging users

@ForeverRecession
@Erik-Jón
@Moggie
@enchanted_elixir
@B.T.N.O.M.A
@StrangerDanger
@fucclife
@StreegeReturn
@PCT01
@TRUE_CEL
@LMSMaxxer
@Stopping@Nothing19
@Nameless_Sunflower
@uglymug2
@Octillionaire

k

 

[Deleted member 17791]

I set the maximum looks level from ratios alone to 8 because 8/10 is considered chad level. So someone with plane colouring should be able to reach chad level but never gigachad. I got the multiplier for north atlantid be simply using what closes the gap.

I’m north Atlantid and at least 4/10, the numbers you’re using are too arbitrary I think

This is the reason I set it to that. And by north atlantid I was referring to the most ideal colouring, extremely light eyes, bitch black hair.

 

[Deleted member 20189]

This is the reason I set it to that. And by north atlantid I was referring to the most ideal colouring, extremely light eyes, bitch black hair.

If your're going off extremely light eyes and very black hair then yah I dont fit that, I have lightish grey eyes with dark brown hair

 

[Deleted member 17791]

If your're going off extremely light eyes and very black hair then yah I dont fit that, I have lightish grey eyes with dark brown hair

This was what I was thinking of.

 

[Deleted member 20189]

This was what I was thinking of.
View attachment 1864803

tbh I can get my eyes and to look like that in bathroom lighting as well as my hair, my skin still isn't tan at all though. I need to get MT2

 

[Deleted member 17791]

tbh I can get my eyes and to look like that in bathroom lighting as well as my hair, my skin still isn't tan at all though. I need to get MT2

Good luck. I still am limited by having brown eyes

 

[Deleted member 20189]

Good luck. I still am limited by having brown eyes

eye color is exaggerated here I think, most girls don't really care that much, its more a looks multiplier as you said about coloring. However, a bad pheno is a failo.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

eye color is exaggerated here I think, most girls don't really care that much, its more a looks multiplier as you said about coloring. However, a bad pheno is a failo.

My pheno is more neutral. I need blue eyes for it to be top tier.

 

[Deleted member 20189]

My pheno is more neutral. I need blue eyes for it to be top tier.

What pheno do you have?

 

[Deleted member 17791]

What pheno do you have?

Light skin, brown hair and brown eyes.