Prime Matt bomer vs prime chico

william2605

william2605

Luminary
Joined
Mar 16, 2023
Posts
7,485
Reputation
5,578
I don't understand all these videos dedicated to Matt Bomer saying that he has superior harmony than Chico.
IMG 2571

IMG 2572

Vs
IMG 1810

IMG 2564
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Tobirama and orbitalrim
Obviously chico
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 76335, Beastchodecode, HarrierDuBois and 1 other person
Chinko mogs boomer
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
khvirgin said:
well obviously
matt bomer is gay, chico is straight

homos >>>>>>>>>>> straights to oblivion
Click to expand...
In another post you said that’s Matt has better harmony lmao
 
Cumskin incel vs hapa bvll
 
  • +1
Reactions: Zikel_Nut and Krakowski
Bomer just looks like generic Chad
Prime Chico has ethereal halo
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Tobirama, horizontallytall and HarrierDuBois
cytoplasm said:
Those analysis are worthless anyway
Click to expand...
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:

 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: fuse and cytoplasm
DelonLover1999 said:
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:

Click to expand...

I 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)
 
DelonLover1999 said:
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:

Click to expand...

these analyzes are not accurate, Matt Bomer does not have as good harmony as they say,
flat maxilla, flat lips, too wide jaw, he had surgeries this is how he looked before
IMG 2678

-bloated
-small ipd don’t goes well with his overly wide jaw
-short eyebrows
-extremely small nose
-overly round and big ears
-eyes are meh
 
  • +1
Reactions: horizontallytall
Bomer mogs

And that are also Chicos best Pictures with fraudmax
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster and Zikel_Nut
cytoplasm said:
I 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)
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • +1
Reactions: fuse and borismonster
DelonLover1999 said:
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.
Click to expand...
The guy on the video doesn’t have top tier features.
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
  • +1
Reactions: fuse
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
DelonLover1999 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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 wrong
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
cytoplasm said:
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 wrong
Click to expand...
Exactly why he’s get so higher harmony score ? Lol
 
  • +1
Reactions: cytoplasm
cytoplasm said:
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 wrong
Click to expand...
Any 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
 
  • +1
Reactions: fuse, borismonster and cytoplasm
DelonLover1999 said:
Any 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
Click to expand...
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 tier
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
william2605 said:
Exactly why he’s get so higher harmony score ? Lol
Click to expand...
it’s the model (the formula)

You could make a different model with different weights and his score would be different

although it will always be high, because he is obv good looking
 
  • +1
Reactions: fuse
william2605 said:
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 tier
Click to expand...
chico has flaws too
 
  • +1
Reactions: fuse
DelonLover1999 said:
Any 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
Click to expand...
I 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
Reactions: DelonLover1999
cytoplasm said:
I 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
Click to expand...
Name his flaws? The only flaw is his neuracranium ( temple ) and he frauds it with hair lol
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
cytoplasm said:
I 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
Click to expand...
yes one of the best examples of this is eye separation

the es ratio itself is good but there are factors which can influence perceived eye separation greatly which won’t be accounted for, and no one knows how to calculate how much they affect it (like eyebrow length)

but then again, the significance of bomer’s flaws tie into that subjective rater thing. to another person they might not seem that important as they are to you, which makes them rate him higher
 
  • +1
Reactions: fuse and cytoplasm
william2605 said:
Tell me his flaws
Click to expand...
objectively, they would be medium set brows, nose to mouth, slightly weak maxilla compared to mandible (in side view)

i prefer to rate intuitively tho
 
  • +1
Reactions: fuse, borismonster and T50 Mogger
zDadun said:
Name his flaws? The only flaw is his neuracranium ( temple ) and he frauds it with hair lol
Click to expand...
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 projected
He has flat zygos and midface, flat mouth and thin lips, his eye area is htn tier with coloring halo
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
DelonLover1999 said:
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:

Click to expand...

The guy in video is me, delete this please
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
cytoplasm said:
I 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
Click to expand...
Gandy have harmonious face, i analized Travis fimmel with Creatting Attractive formula
looksmax.org

My first facial analysis

Travis Fimmel eye spacing/ipd not big falio, the ideal range is 0.44 to 0.47, he's only on the lower end masculine, 0.46 like Cavill or Pitt is more ideal Midface ratio a little longer than ideal, range of 0.93 to 1.01 is the male ideal, but it is not a big flaw, men have longer faces than...
looksmax.org looksmax.org
Him dont have big falios according to this, but other things influence perception such as the fact that he doesn't have good, thick eyebrows, obviously harmony isn't everything
 
  • +1
Reactions: borismonster
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

iamnotaracist
Discussion Facial Averageness Explained - It is not Facial Harmony, which is a common misunderstanding.
Replies
10
Views
169
p0lishsubhuman
p0lishsubhuman
Antonlord7
Phenotype is everything
Replies
11
Views
217
kisslessvirgin
K
UnidentifiedGenes1
Serious Why JBG mogs Foids (MUST READ)
Replies
9
Views
292
murked
murked
pheenon
Matt Bomer is undeniably adam
Replies
11
Views
245
LTNUser
LTNUser
6ft4
David Laid is one of the few guys who's prime looks better in hindsight than at the time (imo)
Replies
14
Views
449
Polish_Looksmaxer
Polish_Looksmaxer

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (Looksmaxers: 0, Bluepillers: 2)
Back
Top