Hollow undereyes with a positive orbital vector??????

[Alucard69]

Wtf i just discovered my orbital vector isn't even negative, it's a meme tbh, it's all about fat pads and skin, fuck i need to try volufiline/fat graft or something and lower eyelid retraction

 

[diditeverbegin]

Bumping

 

[lifeless]

No idea what orbital vector means, but volufiline for purple/hollow undereyes is cope. I've tried, 0 results.
Only surgery is fat implants

 

[Alucard69]

No idea what orbital vector means, but volufiline for purple/hollow undereyes is cope. I've tried, 0 results.
Only surgery is fat implants

Yes fat graft is the best bet, and implants depending on the case

 

[lifeless]

Yes fat graft is the best bet, and implants depending on the case

I unironically am gonna get fat injections. My undereyes are especially subhuman as i'm incredibly pale

 

[diditeverbegin]

I unironically am gonna get fat injections. My undereyes are especially subhuman as i'm incredibly pale

Might do it too

 

[Alucard69]

I unironically am gonna get fat injections. My undereyes are especially subhuman as i'm incredibly pale

Me too fat graft probably in the future, but not on the top of my list and urgent

 

[Deleted member 86876]

Mine is positive and I have undereye bags too. I haven't heard about the two being correlated. It's the maxilla.

 

[diditeverbegin]

Mine is positive and I have undereye bags too. I haven't heard about the two being correlated. It's the maxilla.

I think it is the skin, mine is thin there, positive vector indicates forward growth

 

[Alucard69]

Mine is positive and I have undereye bags too. I haven't heard about the two being correlated. It's the maxilla.

They are very related, if you have positive orbital vector, you are much more likely to have better undereye region.

I think it is the skin, mine is thin there, positive vector indicates forward growth

Fat pads is a bigger reason i'm pretty sure, everyone has somewhat thin skin under eyes

 

[Deleted member 86876]

I think it is the skin, mine is thin there, positive vector indicates forward growth

I don't believe so. My orbital vector has always been positive, even in my baby pictures, that is before you get any kinda growth. My maxilla isn't flat but it definitely could be fixed up with a Lefort surgery, I was a mouth breather due to sickness. I have high cheekbones and it kinda makes it worse. I have seen similar cases on here.

 

[Deleted member 86876]

I don't believe so. My orbital vector has always been positive, even in my baby pictures, that is before you get any kinda growth. My maxilla isn't flat but it definitely could be fixed up with a Lefort surgery, I was a mouth breather due to sickness. I have high cheekbones and it kinda makes it worse. I have seen similar cases on here.

I guess I am wrong. I just haven't heard that. Maybe I had good development during one stage and bad during another and that is where the correlation comes from, things usually come in a complete package.

 

[Alucard69]

I don't believe so. My orbital vector has always been positive, even in my baby pictures, that is before you get any kinda growth. My maxilla isn't flat but it definitely could be fixed up with a Lefort surgery, I was a mouth breather due to sickness. I have high cheekbones and it kinda makes it worse. I have seen similar cases on here.

Lefort 1 doesn't go into your undereye region.

I mean it just makes sense that positive orbital vector gives better undereye region, more bone support=pushing fat pads etc.. forward to prevent the caved in sunken look, i'm out of my element a bit here, but i'd imagine that's close to how it works.

You can still have good undereye support with a neg vector like o'pry has for example though, or worse under eye with a neutral/positive

 

[Deleted member 86876]

Lefort 1 doesn't go into your undereye region.

I mean it just makes sense that positive orbital vector gives better undereye region, more bone support=pushing fat pads etc.. forward to prevent the caved in sunken look, i'm out of my element a bit here, but i'd imagine that's close to how it works.

You can still have good undereye support with a neg vector like o'pry has for example though, or worse under eye with a neutral/positive

I know. A Lefort surgery + implants or I might lay some dough on somethin a lil naughty

 

[Alucard69]

I know. A Lefort surgery + implants or I might lay some dough on somethin a lil naughty

Yeah but be realistic and don't just masturbate mentally about some LF2 or 3 that you probably aren't gonna do, even lf1+implants is brutal

 

[Deleted member 86876]

Yeah but be realistic and don't just masturbate mentally about some LF2 or 3 that you probably aren't gonna do, even lf1+implants is brutal

I'm getting a lot of money from my grandparents and I already own a home. I have been obese my whole life so I am in the same position as that short indian guy in that leg lengthening documentary. I haven't eating in 40 days and Im going to inject steroids and take all the risky hairloss ancillaries.

 

[Deleted member 86876]

I'm getting a lot of money from my grandparents and I already own a home. I have been obese my whole life so I am in the same position as that short indian guy in that leg lengthening documentary. I haven't eating in 40 days and Im going to inject steroids and take all the risky hairloss ancillaries.

Once I get to goal weight.

 

[Alucard69]

I'm getting a lot of money from my grandparents and I already own a home. I have been obese my whole life so I am in the same position as that short indian guy in that leg lengthening documentary. I haven't eating in 40 days and Im going to inject steroids and take all the risky hairloss ancillaries.

Alright but be smart about everything and do as much research as possible with hardcore decisions, and think them through trust me

 

[wasteyute]

I unironically am gonna get fat injections. My undereyes are especially subhuman as i'm incredibly pale

Yes fat graft is the best bet, and implants depending on the case

isnt the consensus on here that fat graft for undereyes is a cope surgery ? or am i just completely wrong?

can't rlly remember the reasons but i believe it was something about like most of the cells grafted onto that area end up dieing off (cuz the undereye area is just rlly bad for procedures)

 

[Alucard69]

isnt the consensus on here that fat graft for undereyes is a cope surgery ? or am i just completely wrong?

can't rlly remember the reasons but i believe it was something about like most of the cells grafted onto that area end up dieing off (cuz the undereye area is just rlly bad for procedures)

No it's not cope at all

yes most fat usually dies true, just need more fat

 

[wasteyute]

No it's not cope at all

yes most fat usually dies true, just need more fat

wdym just need more fat? like u tell the surgeon to inject more fat than they normally would lmao or what ?

 

[Deleted member 86876]

Alright but be smart about everything and do as much research as possible with hardcore decisions, and think them through trust me

It isn't smart in the first place Hopefully all goes well but I'm going to do all my bloodwork and have plans for if anything goes wrong with the hormones. I don't think I need lefort 3 my midface is 1:1. Prob lefort 1+ implants.

 

[Alucard69]

wdym just need more fat? like u tell the surgeon to inject more fat than they normally would lmao or what ?

yeah that's an option also, too much overfilling can lead to some problems.

It's common to get fat injections multiple times i.e you get a fat graft, wait for recovery and whatnot, then get it again

 

[greycel]

They are very related, if you have positive orbital vector, you are much more likely to have better undereye region.

Fat pads is a bigger reason i'm pretty sure, everyone has somewhat thin skin under eyes

I think with more support from bone there would exist less fat that is affected by sagging

 

[wasteyute]

yeah that's an option also, too much overfilling can lead to some problems.

It's common to get fat injections multiple times i.e you get a fat graft, wait for recovery and whatnot, then get it again

oh shit , i see

how does a timeline look for multiple fat graft procedures done on undereyes - renew it after a year, and for how long to keep renewing it? also is it usually a <$10k surgery?

 

[Alucard69]

I think with more support from bone there would exist less fat that is affected by sagging

What would the reason behind there being less fat be though? Idk why there would be a correlation, it's not like the bones will resorb the fat or anything i don't think, but again i rly don't know shit.

By sagging you mean aging, when fat pads start to melt down?

 

[greycel]

Lefort 1 doesn't go into your undereye region.

I mean it just makes sense that positive orbital vector gives better undereye region, more bone support=pushing fat pads etc.. forward to prevent the caved in sunken look, i'm out of my element a bit here, but i'd imagine that's close to how it works.

You can still have good undereye support with a neg vector like o'pry has for example though, or worse under eye with a neutral/positive

Yeah I was wondering how does O’Pry have incredible undereye fat pads with 0 hollowing but he has bone recession
Surely the periorbital fat should’ve started sagging?

 

[greycel]

What would the reason behind there being less fat be though? Idk why there would be a correlation, it's not like the bones will resorb the fat or anything i don't think, but again i rly don't know shit.

By sagging you mean aging, when fat pads start to melt down?

Reduced skin elasticity/collagen that helps with keeping fat pads intact despite poor bone structure
As we age we rely more on bones
That’s my theory, we shift from largely one dependency to the other

 

[Alucard69]

oh shit , i see

how does a timeline look for multiple fat graft procedures done on undereyes - renew it after a year, and for how long to keep renewing it? also is it usually a <$10k surgery?

Way under 10k, price is dependant on location. Not sure about the timeline, depends on the person, however i would always expect the worst, and be prepared for a couple more just incase

 

[wasteyute]

Way under 10k, price is dependant on location. Not sure about the timeline, depends on the person, however i would always expect the worst, and be prepared for a couple more just incase

damn , i looked into this shit briefly a long time ago and just deemed under eye filler and fat grafting as cope but i might look more into fat grafting again since it may be promising actually

dont rlly wanna need to resort to concealer either for my sunken undereyes either lol

 

[Alucard69]

Yeah I was wondering how does O’Pry have incredible undereye fat pads with 0 hollowing but he has bone recession
Surely the periorbital fat should’ve started sagging?

Yeah he just has very good fat pads, and i think highset infras also probably help, maybe means the soft tissue (fat etc..) is denser because the infraorbital is higher and thus it's not as spread out in large area.

If you look closely you can clearly see his fat pad there, while i have nothing, just sunken empty space

Reduced skin elasticity/collagen that helps with keeping fat pads intact despite poor bone structure
As we age we rely more on bones
That’s my theory, we shift from largely one dependency to the other

Yeah the more/better bones you have compared to soft tissue, the less aging will hit you on average

 

[TheoRaven]

Hollow undereyes rarely indicate an infraorbital rim deficiency, that is usually indicated by undereye bags because the orbital fat lacks the structure to keep that fat from herniating out of the orbital socket.

They actually usually indicate the opposite. Infraorbital rims and cheekbones that are too projected compared to your maxilla. Your maxilla doesn't offer up enough soft tissue support for the malar fatpad, so it glides down your face and causes that hollow look under your eyes.

You can test this by lying on your back, if that, for the most part, fixes your undereye hollows then your infras are fine, your maxilla just isn't.

 

[Alucard69]

Hollow undereyes rarely indicate an infraorbital rim deficiency, that is usually indicated by undereye bags because the orbital fat lacks the structure to keep that fat from herniating out of the orbital socket.

They actually usually indicate the opposite. Infraorbital rims and cheekbones that are too projected compared to your maxilla. Your maxilla doesn't offer up enough soft tissue support for the malar fatpad, so it glides down your face and causes that hollow look under your eyes.

You can test this by lying on your back, if that, for the most part, fixes your undereye hollows then your infras are fine, your maxilla just isn't.

Interesting.. sounds logical, where did you hear this?

Providing all this is true, probably my upper maxilla recessed, i actually thought that could be the case because my radix isn't very projected, although it's not completely flat.

But then why do you think asians have mogger under eye support? Is it that their entire face is flat on the same level, and nothing is more projected forward comparetively and good fat pads and compact orbitals too ofc

 

[TheoRaven]

Interesting.. sounds logical, where did you hear this?

Providing all this is true, probably my upper maxilla recessed, i actually thought that could be the case because my radix isn't very projected, although it's not completely flat.

By actually studying human anatomy, but even without that, just actually reading the literature on how bone and soft tissue interact with each other and how they change as we age to make us appear older would eventually lead you to that same conclusion. The infras are actually one of the first areas that recedes as you age, that's why old people tend to get undereye bags.

I actually have no idea why people on here seem to think that infraorbital recession causes hollowing under the eyes. Infraorbital recession is exceedingly rare and basically only exists in people that have some sort of syndrome or are like 40+ at the least.

What exactly is your radix not projected to in relation to? Your globes? There is so much variation with radix projection that its hard to use it as an actual point of reference, outside of a ceph. Not to mention that if you have a maxillary and likely also mandibular deficiency your nose won't be in line with the "projection" you'd expect and your naturally comfortable head tilt will change as well.

The best thing you can do when you take a profile shot is to align it to the franktfurt plane.

But then why do you think asians have mogger under eye support? Is it that their entire face is flat on the same level, and nothing is more projected forward comparetively and good fat pads and compact orbitals too ofc

You mention it yourself, good fat pads, they also generally have better collagen. And honestly, they really aren't that flat when it comes to their maxilla. Flatter than the average european, yes, but not nearly as flat as most seem to think. But you would likely get the impression of flatness because most asian phenotypes lack browridge projection, have shallow orbits but very good fat pads. The shallow orbits are also the reason why asians develop eyebags much earlier and often compard to europeans for example.

Plastic surgery is also a huge market in asia, almost everyone over there gets some, so you're a lot less likely to actually see people with eyebags.

 

[Alucard69]

What exactly is your radix not projected to in relation to? Your globes? There is so much variation with radix projection that its hard to use it as an actual point of reference, outside of a ceph. Not to mention that if you have a maxillary and likely also mandibular deficiency your nose won't be in line with the "projection" you'd expect and your naturally comfortable head tilt will change as well.

Yes ofcourse also compared to browridge (about a 110 nasofrontal), compared to nose too, has a slight bump because of that and sort of tapers to a more projected at the tip. High radix/nose bridge is linked to upper maxilla being forward i'm pretty sure.

Not to mention that if you have a maxillary and likely also mandibular deficiency your nose won't be in line with the "projection" you'd expect and your naturally comfortable head tilt will change as well.

Can you elab on this, new concept to me i think tbh

You mention it yourself, good fat pads, they also generally have better collagen. And honestly, they really aren't that flat when it comes to their maxilla. Flatter than the average european, yes, but not nearly as flat as most seem to think.

Meh asians usually have easily discernible much flatter profile, it's noticeable, i think you're wrong here

The shallow orbits are also the reason why asians develop eyebags much earlier and often compard to europeans for example.

Plastic surgery is also a huge market in asia, almost everyone over there gets some, so you're a lot less likely to actually see people with eyebags

Honestly i think you're underplaying their under eyes a bit here, asians usually have god tier under eyes region compared to whites, even middle aged asians tend to have it better than whites

 

[TheoRaven]

Can you elab on this, new concept to me i think tbh

Basically, if your maxilla is set back your nose will be set back as well and you'll get a "hump" on your nose.

Your head tilt changes from your Frankfurt plane being parallel to the ground to being tilted more forward because both jaws being recessed fucks with your neck,spines and skulls balance. Then there's possible airway compensation, bite compensation, habit, and so on and so forth. There's basically a huge amount of reasons why your head is tilted the way it is. But proper alignment should be the Frankfurt plane +-2°.

Meh asians usually have easily discernible much flatter profile, it's noticeable, i think you're wrong here

Yes, their profiles are flatter, but not really because their maxillas are flatter, their upper maxillas/cheekbones tend to be more projected in relation to their nasal bone. But if you look at the actual lower portion of the maxilla, the part that would support the malar fat pad, there's very little difference on average and its basically in line with what you'd exepct on european skulls. I've held a fair amount of asian and european skulls, you can tell the difference mostly by nasal bone and orbit shape. But funnily enough the aveolar region, the part of your skull that connects to the teeth, tends to be more projected in asians than it is europeans.

Honestly i think you're underplaying their under eyes a bit here, asians usually have god tier under eyes region compared to whites, even middle aged asians tend to have it better than whites

Anterior projection of the midface is mostly dependant on soft tissue, which asians just have the better cards with, better collagen means better and thicker soft tissue. Collagen is also what keeps the ligaments that keep your fatpads in place healthy and tight.

And specifically that comment was on undereye bags, they're actually a fair bit more common in asian populations due to their orbit anatomy.

 

[TheoRaven]

Here's pictures of clones of a European males and and Asian males skull. Ignore the obvious dental tooth decay in the Asian male, but if you align them towards the Frankfurt plane you'll see that the lower portion of the maxilla isn't actually less projected in relation to the cheekbones, it does sit at a bit different of an angle though for that individual. What you will see is that the nasal bone is less projected and that the brow ridge is less prominent.

European:

Asian:

 

[sbrbrz777]

No idea what orbital vector means, but volufiline for purple/hollow undereyes is cope. I've tried, 0 results.
Only surgery is fat implants

where are they taking the fat from

 

[Alucard69]

Yes, their profiles are flatter, but not really because their maxillas are flatter, their upper maxillas/cheekbones tend to be more projected in relation to their nasal bone. But if you look at the actual lower portion of the maxilla, the part that would support the malar fat pad, there's very little difference on average and its basically in line with what you'd exepct on european skulls. I've held a fair amount of asian and european skulls, you can tell the difference mostly by nasal bone and orbit shape. But funnily enough the aveolar region, the part of your skull that connects to the teeth, tends to be more projected in asians than it is europeans.

Hmm well maybe it's more appropriate to address the area as the lf2 region not maxilla then.

But like this asian guy with a more projected nose still doesn't look like he has projected lf 2 (excluding 1) region, is it because the nose bone being forward would actually pull the surrounding skin, or is the upper maxilla just not forward? I thought it's the latter but idk.

Pic is from this thread i found btw: https://looksmax.org/threads/upper-maxillary-projection-is-the-key-to-aesthetics.825806/

Basically, if your maxilla is set back your nose will be set back as well and you'll get a "hump" on your nose.

Your head tilt changes from your Frankfurt plane being parallel to the ground to being tilted more forward because both jaws being recessed fucks with your neck,spines and skulls balance. Then there's possible airway compensation, bite compensation, habit, and so on and so forth. There's basically a huge amount of reasons why your head is tilted the way it is. But proper alignment should be the Frankfurt plane +-2°.

Yeah i know that recessed maxilla cause nose humps, in my case my nose bridge is just a bit too low so it causes a very minor one, i think it makes my maxilla look more forward grown tbh because the nose is more proclined.

also compared to my ogre browridge i just dislike the look a bit, i like high nose bridges alot anyway, and when i edit myself with a higher one it looks better and higher class.

Anterior projection of the midface is mostly dependant on soft tissue, which asians just have the better cards with, better collagen means better and thicker soft tissue. Collagen is also what keeps the ligaments that keep your fatpads in place healthy and tight.

Yeah they have very good fat pads and collagen.

So your original point was that hollow undereyes are mostly caused by a recessed maxilla compared to other bone, how does the maxilla being recessed compared to zygos etc cause the fat to 'glide down' and what exactly does it mean. The maxilla doesn't directly sit on the under eye fat pads right? except the part that makes a part of the infras ofc.

 

[TheoRaven]

Hmm well maybe it's more appropriate to address the area as the lf2 region not maxilla then.

It would be, more or less, that region overall is less projected in Asians than it is in europeans in relation to the overall skull. But their lower maxilla, the lf1 region, is about in line with what you see in a European skull in relation to the lf2 region

But like this asian guy with a more projected nose still doesn't look like he has projected lf 2 (excluding 1) region, is it because the nose bone being forward would actually pull the surrounding skin, or is the upper maxilla just not forward? I thought it's the latter but idk.

Pic is from this thread i found btw: https://looksmax.org/threads/upper-maxillary-projection-is-the-key-to-aesthetics.825806/

View attachment 3282576

Increasing the nasal projection doesn't increase the projection of the lf2 region. Asians generally have less projected lf2 regions, compared to europeans, which is what gives them that "flat" appearance as the midface in relation to the other 2 thirds looks flatter and less projected.

So your original point was that hollow undereyes are mostly caused by a recessed maxilla compared to other bone, how does the maxilla being recessed compared to zygos etc cause the fat to 'glide down' and what exactly does it mean. The maxilla doesn't directly sit on the under eye fat pads right? except the part that makes a part of the infras ofc.

Hollow undereyes are caused by a recessed lf1 region compared to the lf2 region. The malar fat pad under your eyes is supported by 2 structures, the bone of the maxilla below it, the lf1 region, or more or less the positive inclination it causes with the lf2 region, and the tear trough ligament that it is connected to above it. If you lack the support of the maxilla below this fat pad the ligament will stretch over time and your malar fat pad will descend prematurely giving you hollow undereyes. The tear trough ligament is also connected to your inferior orbital fat pad and as that ligament loses tension, that fat pad will be stretched too making it appear thinner than it actually is, which will make the hollowing just worse.

Yeah i know that recessed maxilla cause nose humps, in my case my nose bridge is just a bit too low so it causes a very minor one, i think it makes my maxilla look more forward grown tbh because the nose is more proclined.

also compared to my ogre browridge i just dislike the look a bit, i like high nose bridges alot anyway, and when i edit myself with a higher one it looks better and higher class.

A recessed lf1 region causes a nose hump as the nasal bone sits at a different angle to the lower maxilla due to the lower maxillas recession. If the lower maxilla were projected enough to align the nasal cartilage with the nasal bone properly you'd have a compeltely straight nose.

 

[TheoRaven]

The tear trough ligament is also connected to your inferior orbital fat pad and as that ligament loses tension, that fat pad will be stretched too making it appear thinner than it actually is, which will make the hollowing just worse.

I mean the SOOF here instead of the inferior orbital fat pad, jesus christ. The IOF is the pad inside the Orbit that herniates if your Orbital Rim is recessed.

 

[Alucard69]

Increasing the nasal projection doesn't increase the projection of the lf2 region. Asians generally have less projected lf2 regions, compared to europeans, which is what gives them that "flat" appearance as the midface in relation to the other 2 thirds looks flatter and less projected.

Yes, but lf2 region is largely composed of maxilla too if i'm right, therefore their upper maxilla is not as projected either.

Hollow undereyes are caused by a recessed lf1 region compared to the lf2 region. The malar fat pad under your eyes is supported by 2 structures, the bone of the maxilla below it, the lf1 region, or more or less the positive inclination it causes with the lf2 region, and the tear trough ligament that it is connected to above it. If you lack the support of the maxilla below this fat pad the ligament will stretch over time and your malar fat pad will descend prematurely giving you hollow undereyes. The tear trough ligament is also connected to your inferior orbital fat pad and as that ligament loses tension, that fat pad will be stretched too making it appear thinner than it actually is, which will make the hollowing just worse.

Interesting although i think i've pretty much had it since childhood/puberty in some form, though it probably has gotten worse but not sure if i just notice it more now.

Also if this was the case, wouldn't lefort 1 fix hollow undereyes, however i haven't seen results of that happening. What's going on with that then??

Also does the infraorbital rim plays some part? i can feel it being lower and (and less ptrousive) on 1 side of face, and that side has it much worse tbh especially in 3/4 view. Maybe everything is spread out even more there because of bigger space idk.

A recessed lf1 region causes a nose hump as the nasal bone sits at a different angle to the lower maxilla due to the lower maxillas recession. If the lower maxilla were projected enough to align the nasal cartilage with the nasal bone properly you'd have a compeltely straight nose.

Eh i probably just mean a different thing by hump.

Let's take this guy with a edited vs normal nose bridge for example, it can't lf1 area problem if just by editing the nasion you get a straighter nose, shouldn't it just be the total opposite actually. This is what i have, my browridge looks caveman compared to nose bridge

 

[TheoRaven]

Yes, but lf2 region is largely composed of maxilla too if i'm right, therefore their upper maxilla is not as projected either.

Upper and lower maxilla develop largely independently from each other, that is one of the biggest struggles of orthognathic surgery, surgeons can easily fix a lower maxillary deficiency with a lf1, but there really isn't a good, easy and permanent solution for an upper maxillary deficiency and we don't even know why some people end up getting that. Implants aren't really permanent and everything else will end up being really invasive.

Also if this was the case, wouldn't lefort 1 fix hollow undereyes, however i haven't seen results of that happening. What's going on with that then??

Undereye support for these people does increase, but the soft tissue just bunches up on top of the lower maxilla since the damage to the ligament that would've retained the soft tissue and elevated it is already done. You can completely fix it by getting the ligament tightened again by a plastic surgeon afterwards though.

Also does the infraorbital rim plays some part? i can feel it being lower and (and less ptrousive) on 1 side of face, and that side has it much worse tbh especially in 3/4 view. Maybe everything is spread out even more there because of bigger space idk.

You could try measuring the height of your orbits to see if they are asymmetrical. 35mm is about average for caucasian men, 30-32mm is the ideal range. People are usually highly asymmetrical in minor ways. The thickness or fat pads, stage of malar fat pad descension etc, all way vary between the 2 sides of your face. Odds even are that maybe your orbits are of different heights.

Eh i probably just mean a different thing by hump.

Let's take this guy with a edited vs normal nose bridge for example, it can't lf1 area problem if just by editing the nasion you get a straighter nose, shouldn't it just be the total opposite actually. This is what i have, my browridge looks caveman compared to nose bridge
View attachment 3284538View attachment 3284543

No, that's the type of "hump" I mean, outside of lower maxillary recession there is a lot of other things that can give the appearance or worsen it. You already mentioned that you had a deeply set nose radix, that'd be one of the things that could worsen it by a lot.

 

[Alucard69]

Undereye support for these people does increase, but the soft tissue just bunches up on top of the lower maxilla since the damage to the ligament that would've retained the soft tissue and elevated it is already done. You can completely fix it by getting the ligament tightened again by a plastic surgeon afterwards though.

What is the name of this ligament tightening surgery?

You could try measuring the height of your orbits to see if they are asymmetrical. 35mm is about average for caucasian men, 30-32mm is the ideal range. People are usually highly asymmetrical in minor ways. The thickness or fat pads, stage of malar fat pad descension etc, all way vary between the 2 sides of your face. Odds even are that maybe your orbits are of different heights.

Meh measuring that is too hard lol, besides i can already see the my right orbit is bigger and the infraorbital rim is lower, with less support in the area from cheekbone too, eye worse on that side especially under eye support.

No, that's the type of "hump" I mean, outside of lower maxillary recession there is a lot of other things that can give the appearance or worsen it. You already mentioned that you had a deeply set nose radix, that'd be one of the things that could worsen it by a lot.

Yes nasofrontal angle is about 110 which is like really fucking low afaik. Nose bridge compared to browridge is really lowset. I have a really minor almost unnoticeable nose bump, so when i change my nasofrontal angle somewhat into ideal range my nose literally becomes upturned, so how is the problem of lower maxilla? Or is the radix working in conjuction with the function that gives it?

 

[TheoRaven]

What is the name of this ligament tightening surgery?

It's not really a surgery by itself, its done as part of a midface lift or lower bleph usually, but you could likely just get that done on its own.

Yes nasofrontal angle is about 110 which is like really fucking low afaik. Nose bridge compared to browridge is really lowset. I have a really minor almost unnoticeable nose bump, so when i change my nasofrontal angle somewhat into ideal range my nose literally becomes upturned, so how is the problem of lower maxilla? Or is the radix working in conjuction with the function that gives it?

A deeper set nose radix in conjunction with a recessed lower maxilla will make the hump a lot worse, because your nasal bone pushes too far forward. The hump is created by a mismatch in angle between nasal bone and nose cartilage. The nose cartilage is mostly pushed forward by its connection to the lower maxilla a bit above the alveolar region.

Basically if you were to push the lower maxilla forward, the tip of your nose and a bit of your nosebridge would push forward and rotate up a bit. And then the angle of your nose cartilage and nasal bone would be more in line with each other. That is, if your surgeon gives a fuck about not compressing your nose.

 

[Alucard69]

It's not really a surgery by itself, its done as part of a midface lift or lower bleph usually, but you could likely just get that done on its own.

Yeah i'll probably get a lower bleph done too if i'm ever going to do a fat graft.

A deeper set nose radix in conjunction with a recessed lower maxilla will make the hump a lot worse, because your nasal bone pushes too far forward. The hump is created by a mismatch in angle between nasal bone and nose cartilage. The nose cartilage is mostly pushed forward by its connection to the lower maxilla a bit above the alveolar region.

Basically if you were to push the lower maxilla forward, the tip of your nose and a bit of your nosebridge would push forward and rotate up a bit. And then the angle of your nose cartilage and nasal bone would be more in line with each other. That is, if your surgeon gives a fuck about not compressing your nose.

No but like alot of the people with nose bumps, if you just changed their nose bridge higher, they'll have a straight nose, so why is the issue maxilla not nasion, if just by changing the nasion you solve the whole issue. the lf1 wouldn't touch radix right? So wouldn't the issue just remain.

If i eliminated my 'bump' with a lf1 and upturn my (already a bit higher end) nasolobial angle, and did the graft on top, i'd literally end up with a waterslide female nose.

But yeah tbh, i want my nose all around more projected too, i think it's a bit small from side view

 

[TheoRaven]

No but like alot of the people with nose bumps, if you just changed their nose bridge higher, they'll have a straight nose, so why is the issue maxilla not nasion, if just by changing the nasion you solve the whole issue. the lf1 wouldn't touch radix right? So wouldn't the issue just remain.

If i eliminated my 'bump' with a lf1 and upturn my (already a bit higher end) nasolobial angle, and did the graft on top, i'd literally end up with a waterslide female nose.

It really depends on the degree of hump and the difference in angle between the nasal bone and the cartilage below it. Essentially, by moving the lower maxilla forward you move the entire nose below the hump forward and angle it up. That would remove, or at least lessen, an angle discrepancy between those 2 areas. It'd straighten out the nose if you were supposed to grow into a straight nose but your lower maxilla just didn't grow forward enough.

If your nose was never supposed to be straight genetically the best it'd do is lessen the hump but you're still gonna need some sort of graft in the area above the nasal bone or even along the entire bridge to get to a completely straight nose.

 

[Alucard69]

It really depends on the degree of hump and the difference in angle between the nasal bone and the cartilage below it. Essentially, by moving the lower maxilla forward you move the entire nose below the hump forward and angle it up. That would remove, or at least lessen, an angle discrepancy between those 2 areas. It'd straighten out the nose if you were supposed to grow into a straight nose but your lower maxilla just didn't grow forward enough.

If your nose was never supposed to be straight genetically the best it'd do is lessen the hump but you're still gonna need some sort of graft in the area above the nasal bone or even along the entire bridge to get to a completely straight nose.

Like nicki minaj here has a minimal nose bump, idk how good it is but her maxilla has literally been worshipped here by some users lol.. if you just edit her nose above it a bit forward, it becomes almost completely straight looking, this is the case for a lot of people. So a recessed maxilla can not be the (only) cause for a nose bump, no way.

 

[TheoRaven]

Like nicki minaj here has a minimal nose bump, idk how good it is but her maxilla has literally been worshipped here by some users lol.. if you just edit her nose above it a bit forward, it becomes completely straight, this is the case for a lot of people. So a recessed maxilla can not be the (only) cause for a nose bump, no way.
View attachment 3285178

Yeah, its not the only reason, some people just genetically have low nosebridges, or just naturally strong angles in the nasal bone, but a recessed maxilla can absolutely contribute to a hump or make it worse. For a good amount of people if you were to advance their lower maxillas the hump would disappear as well.