Told that I don't need infraorbital implants and to get fat grafting instead? (skull pics included)

[LTN]

Went to consult with a blackpilled surgeon a few months ago. Originally, I was going to get infraorbital implants for weaker undereye projection, hollows, and negative vector.

The surgeon turned me away after seeing the CT telling me to get undereye fat grafting instead --- but after I measured the infraorbital vector itself afterwards via the standard method (globe and corneal plane), the result comes out as objectively, mildly negative (across every attempt).

Anyone have any insight here? Should I still try to get infraorbitals with another surgeon at some point or am I in the clear just to do fat grafting?

I attached the frankfort-aligned pics below:

 

[M1nordragon]

Fat grafting is 10x better and more natural-looking

 

[LTN]

Fat grafting is 10x better and more natural-looking

I think you're right, but there seems to be a cautionary tale among some people on here that fat grafting over a negative orbital vector is a bad idea

 

[doublegrey]

I think you're right, but there seems to be a cautionary tale among some people on here that fat grafting over a negative orbital vector is a bad idea

its worth

 

[chris182]

how do you measure it