UPDATE: How to measure forward growth v2

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

In the last forum post (link here: https://looksmax.org/threads/new-po...d-growth-facial-depth-to-height-ratio.137834/) I talked about how a good way to measure forward growth would be to make a ratio of the width and height of the side view of the face. As it turns out, my width variable can give an advantage to those with less recessed nasions, instead of fully gauging the forward growth. Here is my new proposal:

Height: Nasion until most protruding part of chin
Depth: Tragus until top of philtrum

By making the depth ending at the philtrum rather than nasion, we can fully measure the forward growth.

Ideal is 1.12 fDHR (Facial depth to height ratio)

Measurements of models/celebrities:

Margot Robbie: 1.17 fDHR

Jordan Barrett: 1.14 fDHR

Brad Pitt: 1.158 fDHR

Sean O'Pry: 1.03 fDHR

Henry Cavill: 1.118 fDHR

 

[FrothySolutions]

Nasian? This some YongYea shit or...??????

 

[retard]

It is impossible to quantify something like forward growth since the slightest angle change can make a massive difference, there are already a million different ways to arbitrarily judge forward growth using ratios but you need to look at soft tissue profile for an actually accurate way to judge like eye vector and cheekline

 

[Deleted member 5349]

The Mew indicator line is the best way other than a CT scan to determine the Maxillas position

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

It is impossible to quantify something like forward growth since the slightest angle change can make a massive difference, there are already a million different ways to arbitrarily judge forward growth using ratios but you need to look at soft tissue profile for an actually accurate way to judge like eye vector and cheekline

The Mew indicator line is the best way other than a CT scan to determine the Maxillas position

this is good enough guys lmao, just put it on frankfurt plane

 

[john2]

Damn, good thread.

Mines 10.25 cm x (1/9.75) cm which gives me 1.05.

Is that good enough OP? Is it acceptable?

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

Damn, good thread.

give it a reaction hehe

Is that good enough OP? Is it acceptable?

tbh im not sure about the ranges but it seems fine, o'pry got 1.03 and hes the highest paid male model in the world

 

[john2]

give it a reaction hehe


tbh im not sure about the ranges but it seems fine, o'pry got 1.03 and hes the highest paid male model in the world

That means my 1.05 is definitely acceptable since O'Pry doesn't look like a truecel with a 1.03 FDHR.

 

[Deleted member 5701]

Can somebody please tell me how the fuck I am supposed to put shit on the frankfurt plane when I do not know the precise location of my orbital bones without an xray?

The alignment system I use currently is bottom of earlobe to midpoint of philtrum, but that seems to be slightly different and more dependant on soft tissue.

 

[Htobrother]

The Mew indicator line is the best way other than a CT scan to determine the Maxillas position

Jew indicator line

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

Can somebody please tell me how the fuck I am supposed to put shit on the frankfurt plane when I do not know the precise location of my orbital bones without an xray?

The alignment system I use currently is bottom of earlobe to midpoint of philtrum, but that seems to be slightly different and more dependant on soft tissue.

top of tragus meeting the bottom of ur eyebag

 

[Deleted member 5701]

top of tragus meeting the bottom of ur eyebag

I have no eyebags jfl

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

I have no eyebags jfl

eyebag/aegyo sal/etc or just guess

 

[Deleted member 5701]

1.107

Definitely a cope measurement but still lifefuel

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

i got 1.28 on this pic of sean o pry
View attachment 397430

i get 1.125 on it, but the example pic i used was proper posture

 

[Deleted member 5701]

Different pics get different values, I got 1.17 on a different image

 

[Darkstrand]

How is it that Barrett's maxilla still looks like it gigamogs Margot? Is it his chin giving the illusion or his orbitals?

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

1.107

Definitely a cope measurement but still lifefuel

put it on proper posture, if it is then its not ideal but its decenr

How is it that Barrett's maxilla still looks like it gigamogs Margot? Is it his chin giving the illusion or his orbitals?

both

 

[Deleted member 5701]

put it on proper posture, if it is then its not ideal but its decenr

both

I rotated the image until I got the smallest value I could, probably coincides with the frankfurt plane

I appreciate high effort contributions to facial aesthetics analysis dude, interesting ratio concept.

 

[her]

Higher value = higher forward growth?

 

[Jimsonbobson505]

In the last forum post (link here: https://looksmax.org/threads/new-po...d-growth-facial-depth-to-height-ratio.137834/) I talked about how a good way to measure forward growth would be to make a ratio of the width and height of the side view of the face. As it turns out, my width variable can give an advantage to those with less recessed nasions, instead of fully gauging the forward growth. Here is my new proposal:

View attachment 397377
Height: Nasion until most protruding part of chin
Depth: Tragus until top of philtrum

By making the depth ending at the philtrum rather than nasion, we can fully measure the forward growth.

Ideal is 1.12 fDHR (Facial depth to height ratio)

Measurements of models/celebrities:

View attachment 397385
Margot Robbie: 1.17 fDHR

View attachment 397388
Jordan Barrett: 1.14 fDHR

View attachment 397399
Brad Pitt: 1.158 fDHR

View attachment 397407
Sean O'Pry: 1.03 fDHR

View attachment 397409
Henry Cavill: 1.118 fDHR

What's mine g

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

Higher value = higher forward growth?

yes

What's mine g

i adjusted it to frankfurt plane and u got 1.192, good shit damn

 

[Caligula]

Scored 1.3

 

[TheEndHasNoEnd]

Scored 1.3

ye ok

 

[majorcope]

Jew indicator line

 

[bobsmith03]

In the last forum post (link here: https://looksmax.org/threads/new-po...d-growth-facial-depth-to-height-ratio.137834/) I talked about how a good way to measure forward growth would be to make a ratio of the width and height of the side view of the face. As it turns out, my width variable can give an advantage to those with less recessed nasions, instead of fully gauging the forward growth. Here is my new proposal:

View attachment 397377
Height: Nasion until most protruding part of chin
Depth: Tragus until top of philtrum

By making the depth ending at the philtrum rather than nasion, we can fully measure the forward growth.

Ideal is 1.12 fDHR (Facial depth to height ratio)

Measurements of models/celebrities:

View attachment 397385
Margot Robbie: 1.17 fDHR

View attachment 397388
Jordan Barrett: 1.14 fDHR

View attachment 397399
Brad Pitt: 1.158 fDHR

View attachment 397407
Sean O'Pry: 1.03 fDHR

View attachment 397409
Henry Cavill: 1.118 fDHR

1.1-1.16 with normal posture.