what is considered bad pfl? and what is considered subhuman pfl?

[Warlow]

most male models i've measured ranging from barrett to de poot range from 27-33 mm pfl. what are your thoughts?
i think sub 26mm= bad
sub 25mm= over tier

 

[fras]

Everything below 40mm is subhuman tbh

 

[Warlow]

Everything below 40mm is subhuman tbh

it's over for many men

 

[Deleted member 8941]

@16tyo @thecel

 

[recessed]

most male models i've measured ranging from barrett to de poot range from 27-33 mm pfl. what are your thoughts?
i think sub 26mm= bad
sub 25mm= over tier

sub 30mm = bad
sub 28 = it's over just LDAR

 

[Warlow]

sub 30mm = bad
sub 28 = it's over just LDAR

so i guess barrett, chico, and hunter should ldar. 30 mm is pretty high, if you think rulers are the correct way to measure pfl however then you're correct

 

[Carl-o]

Pfl is profile line? Where can i get all the short terms?

 

[recessed]

so i guess barrett, chico, and hunter should ldar. 30 mm is pretty high, if you think rulers are the correct way to measure pfl however then you're correct

aren't they all above 28 though? i heard that chico is 29

 

[Warlow]

Pfl is profile line? Where can i get all the short terms?

palpebral fissure length, how wide your eyes are basically

 

[Warlow]

aren't they all above 28 though? i heard that chico is 29

no, chico is 27.5, barrett is 28, and broderick hunter is like 27 mm

 

[Warlow]

online measuring tools paint more accurate numbers

 

[recessed]

no, chico is 27.5, barrett is 28, and broderick hunter is like 27 mm

source on that information?

 

[Warlow]

source on the information?

me, i measured it using Photoshop

 

[Carl-o]

Is 34mm ok?

 

[recessed]

me, i measured it using Photoshop

and how did you do that

 

[Warlow]

Is 34mm ok?

you used a ruler i presume? 34 mm is exceptional

 

[Warlow]

and how did you do that

iris method

 

[needsolution]

Sorry to break it to you... PFL doesnt matter unless you have really shit ES ratio, even people with low ES ratio and low pfl manage to look good... if you look bad then your other features must sucks, pfl doesnt matter as long as its pretty proportionate to your head.

 

[Deleted member 6475]

cry for my 68mm pfl

 

[Warlow]

Sorry to break it to you... PFL doesnt matter unless you have really shit ES ratio, even people with low ES ratio and low pfl manage to look good... if you look bad then your other features must sucks, pfl doesnt matter as long as its pretty proportionate to your head.

i agree with this, 16tyo made a post about overall proportions, how wide the eyes look in relation to the rest of the face. That's why broderick hunter's eyes look so wide even though their average pfl

 

[Deleted member 8941]

Sorry to break it to you... PFL doesnt matter unless you have really shit ES ratio, even people with low ES ratio and low pfl manage to look good...

Like who?

 

[hairyballscel]

sub 30mm = bad

chico is sub 30

 

[nvck_pilled]

how

 

[Warlow]

View attachment 594298

how

god-like eye area
28.44 mm pfl in this pic

 

[Deleted member 8941]

i agree with this, 16tyo made a post about overall proportions, how wide the eyes look in relation to the rest of the face. That's why broderick hunter's eyes look so wide even though their average pfl

I don't think @16tyo method is really accurate, since it doesn't take IPD into account and IPD affects how your eyes look in relation to your face.

Outercanthal distance to bizygomatic width ratio is more reliable in my opinion.

https://forum.****************/threads/outer-canthal-distance-to-bizygomatic-width-ratio.3895/

 

[needsolution]

Like who?

Zac Efron, Zayn Malik, Ian Somerhalder, Rob Lowe, DiCaprio in non disorted pictures had pretty low pfl and es ratio too but its debatable, Brad Pitt (his ES ratio was pretty ok but pfl sucked), Chris Hemsworth and his brother Liam, prime Jared Leto and i could probably find lot more

as always i will leave quote from some study:

The palpebral fissure width is 24.81mm in Average Koreans, whereas it is 26.78mm and 28.1mm in attractive Koreans and attractive Asians, respectively. This shows that attractive faces have a greater palpebral fissure width. In other words, Asians tend to view that eye openings with a greater vertical length to be more beautiful. On the other hand, Caucasians or Blacks showed opposite trends in terms of palpebral fissure width. It was 28.94mm and 31.02mm in average Caucasians and Blacks, respectively, whereas it was 27.45mm and 28.58mm in attractive Caucasians and attractive Blacks, respectively. This shows that Caucasians and Blacks tend to find smaller palpebral fissure width to be more attractive.

what does it mean? most users here are retards obsessed over "muh you need to have everything big" "muh size over proportions" meanwhile their alien looking idols have no appeal to women and they are considered as freaks everywhere outside modeling industry and psl forums

 

[thecel]

sub 30mm = bad
sub 28 = it's over just LDAR

sub 28 = bad

sub 26 = it’s over just LDAR

 

[thecel]

even people with low ES ratio and low pfl manage to look good

lmao keep coping

There was a thread where a guy morphed Jordan Barrett’s and David Gandy’s ES ratios narrower by 0.04—yes, only 0.04 less—and they lost all their facial harmony.

 

[Deleted]

most male models i've measured ranging from barrett to de poot range from 27-33 mm pfl. what are your thoughts?
i think sub 26mm= bad
sub 25mm= over tier

Pfl is much less important than pfh
What’s important is ur pfh to pfl ratio aslong as pfl is above like 24 mm

 

[Deleted]

lmao keep coping

Hemsworth bad lowish esr and lowish pfl

 

[Warlow]

Pfl is much less important than pfh
What’s important is ur pfh to pfl ratio aslong as pfl is above like 24 mm

smoldering eyes do in fact mog

 

[needsolution]

lmao keep coping

There was a thread where a guy morphed Jordan Barrett’s and David Gandy’s ES ratios narrower by 0.04—yes, only 0.04 less—and they lost all their facial harmony.

do you know how fucking much 0.04 is when it comes to ES ratio?

"yes, only 0.04"

it sounds silly, i thought you are really inteliigent guy who will make some great threads but you became autist who even made some funny morphs with list of surgeries which nobody will ever get on here...


second... Barrett es ratio is low to begin with and Gandy midface is longish so naturally it will look bad just lol

next as i said there are people who manage to look good despite low pfl and low es ratio, did i say "all people who have low ipd and low pfl can look good"? no i didnt... i just said its not death sentence as people trying to paint it... its just failo which can be compensated by other features... if you have no good features so naturally you will look subhuman... dont blame your ipd or pfl only for it... you most likely suck on most fields in this case...

also i mentioned examples of people, i can mention and find many more...

also there are people with good pfl and good es ratio who look bad and opposite... there is nothing like golden rule which will make people automatically good looking


another thing you made fucking thread where you tried to debunk that ipd is more important than pfl yeah?
do you really think that if u spaced your eyes by 4-5mm you would look good? do you really think that your problem is laying in orbital spacing?
no its problem with small orbitals which cause low pfl therefore your ipd is shit... most people with good pfl have good ipd, only people who are out of proportions have good pfl and good ipd... this what i have said about good proportions over size still stands... there are people with low pfl and high pfl who look bad and people with high pfl and low ipd which look bad but still if you got good pfl you are more likely to have good ipd...

in your thread you made someone's pfl higher to debunk that its all about ipd but u know what? u did sneaky trick... because as much as you increase pfl there is ipd increase too... you made them looking like some cross-eyed shit because their iris remained in same place... if you increase pfl you should increase ipd too because eyeball is moving as orbitals get horizontally longer...

even if your ipd sucks then slighty better pfl can create illusion of better spaced eyes if you squint a little bit

good pfl in most cases means good ipd therefore pfl is more important to have good proportions

you can still look good with low pfl and low es ratio, no doubt on that, i mentioned people who look good with that, you cant debunk it, simple thing

i will make thread on this to debunk this bullshit as soon as my internet will work properly because now i have problems with loading this site through vpn and tor

 

[needsolution]

i made some mistakes cuz im sleepy

no its problem with small orbitals which cause low pfl therefore your ipd is shit... most people with good pfl have good ipd, only people who are out of proportions have good pfl and bad ipd... this what i have said about good proportions over size still stands... there are people with low pfl and high ipd who look bad and people with high pfl and low ipd which look bad but still if you got good pfl you are more likely to have good ipd...

fixed this line

 

[Deleted member 7076]

My theory is that the perceived length of the eye is solely dependent on three factors:

1. PFL
2. IPD
3. Face width

An increased PFL, a decreased face width, and an IPD which makes sure the eyes are not too close together is what makes this effect. Barret doesn't have it because of his trash face width. Gandy does though. I don't think there is an 'ideal' number for each of these variables but the people who tend to have striking eyes have what I said:

increased PFL, decreased face width, suitable IPD​

 

[Deleted member 7076]

I don't think @16tyo method is really accurate, since it doesn't take IPD into account and IPD affects how your eyes look in relation to your face.

Outercanthal distance to bizygomatic width ratio is more reliable in my opinion.

https://forum.****************/threads/outer-canthal-distance-to-bizygomatic-width-ratio.3895/

you're totally correct I noticed this flaw quickly after posting that thread

im working on a better ratio that accounts for IPD, face width, and PFL

 

[toolateforme]

lmao keep coping

There was a thread where a guy morphed Jordan Barrett’s and David Gandy’s ES ratios narrower by 0.04—yes, only 0.04 less—and they lost all their facial harmony.

Can you find the thread for me?

 

[thecel]

Can you find the thread for me?

Wide IPD > Narrow

Reminder that wide set eyes are dimorphic and an ES ratio above .47 is not a death sentence. Wide IPD allows for a “compact” midface and long PFL. If you have a small IPD and long PFL, it will most likely look shit.

looksmax.org

Wide IPD > Narrow

Reminder that wide set eyes are dimorphic and an ES ratio above .47 is not a death sentence. Wide IPD allows for a “compact” midface and long PFL. If you have a small IPD and long PFL, it will most likely look shit.

looksmax.org

 

[brainded]

PFL by itself doesn't mean anything tbh. More about the PFL-PFH ratio (length and height), the idea is you want a narrow eye shape. As long as you're PFL isn't subhuman and your ratio is good, then you're good to go.

 

[aesthetic beauty]

lmao keep coping

There was a thread where a guy morphed Jordan Barrett’s and David Gandy’s ES ratios narrower by 0.04—yes, only 0.04 less—and they lost all their facial harmony.

Was it this thread?

Wide IPD > Narrow

Reminder that wide set eyes are dimorphic and an ES ratio above .47 is not a death sentence. Wide IPD allows for a “compact” midface and long PFL. If you have a small IPD and long PFL, it will most likely look shit.

looksmax.org