M
MemorableMoron
Iron
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2026
- Posts
- 4
- Reputation
- 2
HIGH EFFORT -
Ive always found the way we measure facial projection to be terrible.
Its understandable as its all proportional and relational so its hard to measure on a 2d image. Using faces that appear visually to have ideal forward growth used as a refrence ive simailry created my own angles to measure which seem consistent. By doing this ive seen to have had some intresting discoveries.
Disclaimer- This grey, may just be an ignorant moron who claims to have invented fire and this being grass. But well from my targeted searching here. Such discourse is not present...
First of all to measure forward growth itself. I suggest using similarly the way we measure exterior and anterior forward growth with the divider being betwen the malar eminence.
Then the ratio between them. Exterior/anterior. A lower ratio will always mean greater forward growth. Head tilit can somewhat skew it, But the later measurements will filter out the fruads anyway (o pry) just be consistent.
Men will have higher ratios.this is less important than the later measurements but if you have higher than 6 you have sub optimal anterior forward growth.
Now we take the second measurements which are all angles. These will calculate how harminous the said forward growth is.
Now the first measurment i suggest is an angle taken from where the lips end with the bottom point following straight through the upper lip and the upper point flowing through the subnasal. I unfortunately have a very small sample size of ideal faces. But the only real variance is philtrum size. I would estimate the ideal for women is 19-23, for men i would estimate around 23-27
Remember these are perfect Ideals.
This is one is the major unspoken halo especially in combo with the previous measurment.
Now to isolate the second area the nasion and the alar base should ideally be vertically parrell. This does not only look most asthetic from the side, its actually the Mathematical angle that maximises your midface and relative midface projection from any angle and especially from the front view. If you look at delons front profile or chico you will notice how projected their nose appears. This is far more common in women than in men.
How its measured
What it looks like
The final angle i propose, anchoring at the laterial canthus, with the upper line being the horizontal continuation of the frankfurt plane and the lower line going through the subnasal region. Lower angles will always mean your maxilla juts forward more sharply. Ideal for this is 36-40 ( any lower and you need a cave man brow ridge to retain harmony, or you would be encroaching upon canine territory)
The way I see it is. Facial ratios harmony are Disqualifiers . Facial forward growth and harmonious forward growth is what drives insane irl appeal and attraction.
Anyway if you actually did read all of it, reveal to this grey, if im just an ignorant moron.
Ive always found the way we measure facial projection to be terrible.
Its understandable as its all proportional and relational so its hard to measure on a 2d image. Using faces that appear visually to have ideal forward growth used as a refrence ive simailry created my own angles to measure which seem consistent. By doing this ive seen to have had some intresting discoveries.
Disclaimer- This grey, may just be an ignorant moron who claims to have invented fire and this being grass. But well from my targeted searching here. Such discourse is not present...
First of all to measure forward growth itself. I suggest using similarly the way we measure exterior and anterior forward growth with the divider being betwen the malar eminence.
Then the ratio between them. Exterior/anterior. A lower ratio will always mean greater forward growth. Head tilit can somewhat skew it, But the later measurements will filter out the fruads anyway (o pry) just be consistent.
Men will have higher ratios.this is less important than the later measurements but if you have higher than 6 you have sub optimal anterior forward growth.
Now we take the second measurements which are all angles. These will calculate how harminous the said forward growth is.
Now the first measurment i suggest is an angle taken from where the lips end with the bottom point following straight through the upper lip and the upper point flowing through the subnasal. I unfortunately have a very small sample size of ideal faces. But the only real variance is philtrum size. I would estimate the ideal for women is 19-23, for men i would estimate around 23-27
Remember these are perfect Ideals.
This is one is the major unspoken halo especially in combo with the previous measurment.
Now to isolate the second area the nasion and the alar base should ideally be vertically parrell. This does not only look most asthetic from the side, its actually the Mathematical angle that maximises your midface and relative midface projection from any angle and especially from the front view. If you look at delons front profile or chico you will notice how projected their nose appears. This is far more common in women than in men.
How its measured
What it looks like
The final angle i propose, anchoring at the laterial canthus, with the upper line being the horizontal continuation of the frankfurt plane and the lower line going through the subnasal region. Lower angles will always mean your maxilla juts forward more sharply. Ideal for this is 36-40 ( any lower and you need a cave man brow ridge to retain harmony, or you would be encroaching upon canine territory)
The way I see it is. Facial ratios harmony are Disqualifiers . Facial forward growth and harmonious forward growth is what drives insane irl appeal and attraction.
Anyway if you actually did read all of it, reveal to this grey, if im just an ignorant moron.
Last edited:
