Eduardo DOV
Kraken
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2019
- Posts
- 9,215
- Reputation
- 8,555
You may have already seen this image around the internet when lurking lookism things:
or threads like this:
looksmax.org
Well, thinking about cheekbones and fwhr, I thought how is it possible that brad pitt has a high fwhr when he apparently has weak cheekbones (even though he has a wide ipd, I found it strange that he has a fwhr 1.9+ like they say around the internet).
Turns out he has less than 1.8 FWHR:
Zoom in if you want to see the rule tool:
712/396 = 1.79
I use the top of the midface as the middle of the eyebrows, is it correct?
if you use the bottom of eyebrow you get 1.9:
Let's compare with bradley cooper, which in that image indicates 1.74. I dont think that image is ideal because he is smiling there, which would increase the fwhr, right? So lets use a pic like the brad pitts one where is a professional pic and facial expression is more neutral and the head position seems neutral.
The best one i found was this, its hard to find cause he is always smiling:
so we have 270/149 = 1.81 FWHR.
in face its higher, because notice that I didn't advance the ruler inside the hair when measuring the width. With Brad Pitt in the photo above we don't have this problem because you can see the skin, there's only the beard covering the skin, and if I made a mistake with pitt I made it higher because I put the ruler almost at the end of the beard. And with cooper I made a mistake of course, and made his fwhr SMALLER.
So cooper has higher fwhr than pitt.
Also cooper has lower set eyebrows, which makes the fwhr higher.
and try measuring other pics of pitt, you'll never get it above 1.8:
What are your thoughts on this? Did I do something wrong?
or threads like this:
Brad Pitt measurments
Picture i used so nobody will blame me that im using disorted picture (like it was with Ian Somerhalder) Midface ratio: 0.988 FWHR: 1.92 Total midface lenght (pupil-upper lip): 62.07mm Bizygomatic width: 132.16mm IPD: 61.3mm PFL: 26.48mm Nasal width: 38.2mm Lips width: 48.5mm If u want more...
looksmax.org
Well, thinking about cheekbones and fwhr, I thought how is it possible that brad pitt has a high fwhr when he apparently has weak cheekbones (even though he has a wide ipd, I found it strange that he has a fwhr 1.9+ like they say around the internet).
Turns out he has less than 1.8 FWHR:
Zoom in if you want to see the rule tool:
712/396 = 1.79
I use the top of the midface as the middle of the eyebrows, is it correct?
if you use the bottom of eyebrow you get 1.9:
Let's compare with bradley cooper, which in that image indicates 1.74. I dont think that image is ideal because he is smiling there, which would increase the fwhr, right? So lets use a pic like the brad pitts one where is a professional pic and facial expression is more neutral and the head position seems neutral.
The best one i found was this, its hard to find cause he is always smiling:
so we have 270/149 = 1.81 FWHR.
in face its higher, because notice that I didn't advance the ruler inside the hair when measuring the width. With Brad Pitt in the photo above we don't have this problem because you can see the skin, there's only the beard covering the skin, and if I made a mistake with pitt I made it higher because I put the ruler almost at the end of the beard. And with cooper I made a mistake of course, and made his fwhr SMALLER.
So cooper has higher fwhr than pitt.
Also cooper has lower set eyebrows, which makes the fwhr higher.
and try measuring other pics of pitt, you'll never get it above 1.8:
What are your thoughts on this? Did I do something wrong?
