william2605
Master
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2023
- Posts
- 1,739
- Reputation
- 1,051
I don't understand all these videos dedicated to Matt Bomer saying that he has superior harmony than Chico.
Vs
Vs
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Why all on tik tok says that’s bomer has higher harmony?Obviously chico
I DON'T KNOWWhy all on tik tok says that’s bomer has higher harmony?
View attachment 2509127
I mean why you think that’s Chico is better ?I DON'T KNOW
Kill yourself retarted graycelI don't understand all these videos dedicated to Matt Bomer saying that he has superior harmony than Chico.
View attachment 2509096
View attachment 2509101
Vs
View attachment 2509103
View attachment 2509107
explain chico harmony right fucking now you cowardI DON'T KNOW
Shut up that’s you thinks Matt mog LOLexplain chico harmony right fucking now you coward
well obviouslyShut up that’s you thinks Matt mog LOL
In another post you said that’s Matt has better harmony lmaowell obviously
matt bomer is gay, chico is straight
homos >>>>>>>>>>> straights to oblivion
Can tell me what features are better in Chico?Bomer just looks like generic Chad
Prime Chico has ethereal halo
Cephalometric analysisI DON'T KNOW
They should analize this pictureCephalometric analysis
i wouldn’t say they’re worthlessThose analysis are worthless anyway
i wouldn’t say they’re worthless
A lot of it does make sense. But the rating part is always gonna be subjective because ppl put different ‘weights’ in certain features. So there is no perfect formula, even if there are researched ideals for a lot of ratios that do in fact hold up imo.
This guy for example, which does good analysis videos, rated this mfer 1 in a million, which I don’t see at all:
i wouldn’t say they’re worthless
A lot of it does make sense. But the rating part is always gonna be subjective because ppl put different ‘weights’ in certain features. So there is no perfect formula, even if there are researched ideals for a lot of ratios that do in fact hold up imo.
This guy for example, which does good analysis videos, rated this mfer 1 in a million, which I don’t see at all:
It’s not useless, it’s just deceptive because it can look more objective than it isI mean its a completely arbitrary "forumula" where a guy rates ratios and features and just adds them all up or something jfl (im guessing havent seen it properly)
It's useless tbh, if someone used this in some sort of a debate i'd just laugh it off (it's happened before)
The guy on the video doesn’t have top tier features.It’s not useless, it’s just deceptive because it can look more objective than it is
everyone rates differently, so if you’re in a debate abt aesthetics with someone you guys have to be in some sort of agreement about what constitutes ‘good’ and ‘bad’ otherwise it makes no sense to even debate.
harrierdubois is an example of someone who rates more based on ‘prescriptive ideals’. he doesn’t measure ratios i dont think so, but he heavily penalizes whenever a feature that he deems ideal is not present, which is kind of what this ‘harmony score’ thing does too.
Tiktokcels saying matt bomer psl is 9.7 and chico 9.0I don't understand all these videos dedicated to Matt Bomer saying that he has superior harmony than Chico.
View attachment 2509096
View attachment 2509101
Vs
View attachment 2509103
View attachment 2509107
what features would you say he’s lacking?The guy on the video doesn’t have top tier features.
Too wide foreheadwhat features would you say he’s lacking?
You what do you thinkTiktokcels saying matt bomer psl is 9.7 and chico 9.0
I mean if bomer gets 98% or whatever he gets "harmony score" then it's extremely flawed. I can pick apart his face so easily and im not even good at it. And using harmony score as some sort of "proof" someone is better looking is wrongIt’s not useless, it’s just deceptive because it can look more objective than it is
everyone rates differently, so if you’re in a debate abt aesthetics with someone you guys have to be in some sort of agreement about what constitutes ‘good’ and ‘bad’ otherwise it makes no sense to even debate.
harrierdubois is an example of someone who rates more based on ‘prescriptive ideals’. he doesn’t measure ratios i dont think so, but he heavily penalizes whenever a feature that he deems ideal is not present, which is kind of what this ‘harmony score’ thing does too.
Exactly why he’s get so higher harmony score ? LolI mean if bomer gets 98% or whatever he gets "harmony score" then it's extremely flawed. I can pick apart his face so easily and im not even good at it. And using harmony score as some sort of "proof" someone is better looking is wrong
Chico mogs ofc matt bomer looks attractive but also uncannyYou what do you think
Any face can be picked apartI mean if bomer gets 98% or whatever he gets "harmony score" then it's extremely flawed. I can pick apart his face so easily and im not even good at it. And using harmony score as some sort of "proof" someone is better looking is wrong
no bro his flaws are objective ,for this guy chico has 89% of harmony ,but the reality is Chico doesn’t have flaws and all of his features are top tierAny face can be picked apart
The guy in your avi, ballou
fucking anyone
but yes I agree that portraying it as ‘proof’ is wrong. The subjectiveness of the rater is embedded in the rating
For what reason chico mogs ?Chico mogs ofc matt bomer looks attractive but also uncanny
it’s the model (the formula)Exactly why he’s get so higher harmony score ? Lol
chico has flaws toono bro his flaws are objective ,for this guy chico has 89% of harmony ,but the reality is Chico doesn’t have flaws and all of his features are top tier
Only ears ,but doesn’t have huge flaws like Matt bomerchico has flaws too
he has many more lolOnly ears ,but doesn’t have huge flaws like Matt bomer
I agree (ive done it with gandy) but bomer's flaws are so prominent and significantAny face can be picked apart
The guy in your avi, ballou
fucking anyone
but yes I agree that portraying it as ‘proof’ is wrong. The subjectiveness of the rater is embedded in the rating
Tell me his flawshe has many more lol
Name his flaws? The only flaw is his neuracranium ( temple ) and he frauds it with hair lolI agree (ive done it with gandy) but bomer's flaws are so prominent and significant
And theres so many features that we cant articulate or describe, or describe well enough to use in a forumula, and then to ascribe a certain value to them in addition to that, so these harmony scores are very far away from calculating beauty accurately
1.8 fwhr for startersTell me his flaws
yes one of the best examples of this is eye separationI agree (ive done it with gandy) but bomer's flaws are so prominent and significant
And theres so many features that we cant articulate or describe, or describe well enough to use in a forumula, and then to ascribe a certain value to them in addition to that, so these harmony scores are very far away from calculating beauty accurately
Also narrow jaw ( 83% of byzygo )Tell me his flaws
objectively, they would be medium set brows, nose to mouth, slightly weak maxilla compared to mandible (in side view)Tell me his flaws
He cant fraud his narrow frontal bone in combination with his wide parietal bone gives him a trapezoid head shape (unideal). His forhead is also too forward projectedName his flaws? The only flaw is his neuracranium ( temple ) and he frauds it with hair lol
i wouldn’t say they’re worthless
A lot of it does make sense. But the rating part is always gonna be subjective because ppl put different ‘weights’ in certain features. So there is no perfect formula, even if there are researched ideals for a lot of ratios that do in fact hold up imo.
This guy for example, which does good analysis videos, rated this mfer 1 in a million, which I don’t see at all:
Gandy have harmonious face, i analized Travis fimmel with Creatting Attractive formulaI agree (ive done it with gandy) but bomer's flaws are so prominent and significant
And theres so many features that we cant articulate or describe, or describe well enough to use in a forumula, and then to ascribe a certain value to them in addition to that, so these harmony scores are very far away from calculating beauty accurately