6
6became7
Iron
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2025
- Posts
- 6
- Reputation
- 3
Most people are already aware of the ES (Eye-Seperation) ratio, obtained by taking your IPD (Inter-Pupillary Distance) and dividing this by your Bi-Zygomatic Width.
The intention is to compare the separation of your eyes to the proportions of your face, in most instances, your zygomatic arch, at which your face extends the furthest laterally, at either your temples, or zygomatic bone.
It does a better job than the IPD ratio, as the IPD measurement only measures the distance between the pupils, and doesn’t have a relative comparison, therefore deriving immediate conclusions isn’t clear. The ES ratio manages to include another specific of measurement, which includes the point ar which the face is the widest.
However, there are outlier instances, such as in those where there is facial cranial asymmetries, such as maxillary rotation, causing an eye cant, which can alter the height of the temples, and thus alter the widest points of the face.
Aswell, in faces where the temporalis extends further than the zygomatic bone, an ES ratio can give the illusion of facial adequacy, however in practicality, is lacking further specification.
My personal solution, is to introduce a measurement, in degrees, of which begins at the widest point of the face, and at 0 degrees, extends up-to the center of the pupil.
This measurement incapsulates the specifics of where the widest peak of the face occurs, and thus indicates zygomatic protrusion as opposed to instances of hypertrophied temples, and thus provides a better understanding of an individuals eye area.
The intention is to compare the separation of your eyes to the proportions of your face, in most instances, your zygomatic arch, at which your face extends the furthest laterally, at either your temples, or zygomatic bone.
It does a better job than the IPD ratio, as the IPD measurement only measures the distance between the pupils, and doesn’t have a relative comparison, therefore deriving immediate conclusions isn’t clear. The ES ratio manages to include another specific of measurement, which includes the point ar which the face is the widest.
However, there are outlier instances, such as in those where there is facial cranial asymmetries, such as maxillary rotation, causing an eye cant, which can alter the height of the temples, and thus alter the widest points of the face.
Aswell, in faces where the temporalis extends further than the zygomatic bone, an ES ratio can give the illusion of facial adequacy, however in practicality, is lacking further specification.
My personal solution, is to introduce a measurement, in degrees, of which begins at the widest point of the face, and at 0 degrees, extends up-to the center of the pupil.
This measurement incapsulates the specifics of where the widest peak of the face occurs, and thus indicates zygomatic protrusion as opposed to instances of hypertrophied temples, and thus provides a better understanding of an individuals eye area.
