Why some people look normal despite low ES Ratios

[1360p]

I was looking at photos of people with low ES ratios, and i noticed that a significant influence on the appearence of close set eyes is actually the bigonial width.

ES ratio is of course measured by dividing IPD / Byzygomatic width. but i noticed that in attractive people who have low ES ratios, they almost always have zygos that are quite wide relative to their bigonial width. here is an example where i morphed marco jaric to have a smaller bigonial width (i also made his nose better and eyebrow / hooding modifications , but one can check for themselves that the ES ratio has not changed (it is 0.38-0.39)

here, marko jaric on the left looks significantly better (the morph still looks quite off and is a bit uncanny, im not so good at morphing) but just looking back and forth between the two photos the fact that his eyes are close set is significantly more noticable on the right photo, because his IPD is too small relative to his bigonial width as well.

take an example being chace crawford

here, if you measure his ES ratio, but instead of using byzygomatic width, use the bigonial width, then what you see is that it is 0.46 (which is considered the ideal). chance crawford does not give the obvious appearence of close set eyes, due to many reasons (one could argue that its due to his eyebrows as well) but a significant influence here is that he also has a relativeley narrow bigonial width.

the key idea here is that having a "bad" ES ratio can be caused by 2 things, having actually close eyes, versus having wider zygos. this is why asians tend to have lower ES ratios but not nessecarily have eyes that look as close set as white counterparts, becasue they tend to have a much narrower bigonial width relativeley speaking.

here is another example with theo james, and alex schlabb, here the IPD / bigonial comes out to 0.45-0.46 which is also considered in the ideal range :

but if you were to measure using their byzygomatic width, then their ES ratios would be considered significantly close set.

also note that if one has a low ES ratio, in order to not look wierd they must also have a midface that is longer, because otherwise that will make their entire face look "compressed" giving the charlie kirk look (charlie kirk has a midface that is way too compact and it makes his face look too small relative to his skull).

TLDR: if you want to look normal with low ESR, then you need to have IPD/Bigonial near the ideal range, and also have a longish midface in order to keep the FWHR related metrics good and stop you from looking like your entire face is too small. so basically low ESR becasue of wide zygos is not a significant falio.

 

[yushmaxx]

high iq grey
mirin

 

[1360p]

honestly i think the standard measurement for eye spacing should be IPD / Bigonial instead of IPD / Byzygomatic becasue this seems to give a much better correlation with the appearance of close set eyes. under the current standard defenition there are way too many attractive actors / models who have too low IPD. wide zygos are punished in these cases too heavily when trying to quantify harmony. but there is alot of other factors as well that go into it

 

[1360p]

here is another example with channing tatum. his ES ratio is unchanged here (about 0.4) but i narrowed his bigonial , and also his temples slightly, and he looks significantly better.

 

[Rylie]

i morphed marco jaric to have a smaller bigonial width (i also made his nose better and eyebrow / hooding modifications , but one can check for themselves that the ES ratio has not changed (it is 0.38-0.39)

ESRcels running to get masseter botox after seeing this

 

[Rylie]

A good term to describe this could be
Orbito-Lateral facial width.

 

[1360p]

View attachment 5286619
A good term to describe this could be
Orbito-Lateral facial width.

this kind of reminds me of temporal plane angle, im not sure how much that influences bigonial area though.

 

[1360p]

i did the same for ian somerhalder (his ESR comes out to about 0.42~0.43 in this photo), so i just narrowed his bigonial to give IPD / bigonial = 0.46, and even he looks better here IMO, though some may argue he looks better on the left.

 

[1360p]

same with kirk, still many issues with his face but he has a 0.39 ESR in both photos, again, only difference is narrower bigonial