Aesthetics_III
Luminary
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2020
- Posts
- 4,971
- Reputation
- 13,130
Heavy upper eyelid exposure is without a doubt one of the worst traits you can have, however, when one has death tier UEE the major problem is often their orbital structure, under eye support and their fat pads.
Under eye support
Take, for example, these two. One has a tired, defeated look and the other has a alert, focused look (hence “hunter eyes”)
One can point to the UEE as the main difference (and the reason why the first eye area is shit) but that doesn’t accurately surmise the disparity between the two.
However, the reason he looks tired and defeated is more due to his under eye support than his UEE. Case in point:
Same (rough) level of UEE, but no tired, dead look since he has a tight rather than droopy lower eyelid.
You can see that the first guy has a better eye area but there is no significant difference in expression (as compared to the striking difference between O’Pry and the cuck)
Orbital structure and fat pads:
This is really easy to spot. The examples above of heavy UEE both have high set orbitals and completely depleted fat pads.
From the examples above, you can see that one pair of eyes have completely hollowed out upper eyelids and the other still has fat pads. Fat in the upper eye essentially gives a youthful look.
This lack of fat is also exaggerated by high set orbitals
Great lateral orbital rims can also lessen the effects of a hollowed out upper eyelid I believe.
Slight UEE
So is some UEE a flaw like many believe? Tbh, I don’t know. I’m inclined to say yes, and that you will look better with no UEE but I can see the argument that as long as you have good undereyes and fat pads it doesn’t matter much
So no, it is not just “muh harmony” that makes someone with UEE look good. It is a combination of factors the most important being under eye support so stop using that stupid fucking phrase as a cop out.
What it essentially boils down to, is just have small/narrow eyes theory.
Under eye support
Take, for example, these two. One has a tired, defeated look and the other has a alert, focused look (hence “hunter eyes”)
One can point to the UEE as the main difference (and the reason why the first eye area is shit) but that doesn’t accurately surmise the disparity between the two.
The first guy has high set orbitals, neutral tilt, completely depleted upper eyelid fat pads, terrible eyebrows (colour), eye shape, under eye support, IPD and PFH/PFL ratio
However, the reason he looks tired and defeated is more due to his under eye support than his UEE. Case in point:
Same (rough) level of UEE, but no tired, dead look since he has a tight rather than droopy lower eyelid.
You can see that the first guy has a better eye area but there is no significant difference in expression (as compared to the striking difference between O’Pry and the cuck)
Orbital structure and fat pads:
This is really easy to spot. The examples above of heavy UEE both have high set orbitals and completely depleted fat pads.
From the examples above, you can see that one pair of eyes have completely hollowed out upper eyelids and the other still has fat pads. Fat in the upper eye essentially gives a youthful look.
This lack of fat is also exaggerated by high set orbitals
Great lateral orbital rims can also lessen the effects of a hollowed out upper eyelid I believe.
Slight UEE
So is some UEE a flaw like many believe? Tbh, I don’t know. I’m inclined to say yes, and that you will look better with no UEE but I can see the argument that as long as you have good undereyes and fat pads it doesn’t matter much
So no, it is not just “muh harmony” that makes someone with UEE look good. It is a combination of factors the most important being under eye support so stop using that stupid fucking phrase as a cop out.
What it essentially boils down to, is just have small/narrow eyes theory.
