why some gals are more photogenic?
- Thread starter Paul_Yeo
- Start date
- Status
it is actually very scientific and geometrical. Beauty can be defined but a simple golden ratio 1:1.618
How does this work. A when a face is divided into nice sub sections, each adjacent section is exactly 1:1.618 to the next.
Easiest to measure is the teeth. Get a model with nice teeth. The front tooth is in ratio 1.618 times bigger then the one next to it and so on.
http://tlc.discovery.com/convergence/humanface/articles/mask.html
There's a "mask" you can download from the above link. Nicely divided into 1.618 sections. Any model male/female will fit nicely into the mask.
You can use photo shop and resize the model face to fit the mask then overlay the mask. The eyes, nose, mouth, will all fall into place.
Enjoy!
1.618 also gave rise to the rule of thirds. 1.618 is approx 1/3 in the screen.
How does this work. A when a face is divided into nice sub sections, each adjacent section is exactly 1:1.618 to the next.
Easiest to measure is the teeth. Get a model with nice teeth. The front tooth is in ratio 1.618 times bigger then the one next to it and so on.
http://tlc.discovery.com/convergence/humanface/articles/mask.html
There's a "mask" you can download from the above link. Nicely divided into 1.618 sections. Any model male/female will fit nicely into the mask.
You can use photo shop and resize the model face to fit the mask then overlay the mask. The eyes, nose, mouth, will all fall into place.
Enjoy!
1.618 also gave rise to the rule of thirds. 1.618 is approx 1/3 in the screen.
For those who just want to apply the beauty mask
http://www.beautyanalysis.com/mba_reposefrontalmaskapplication_page.htm
Trust me.. all famous celebs will fit into this mask. Magically..
http://www.beautyanalysis.com/mba_reposefrontalmaskapplication_page.htm
Trust me.. all famous celebs will fit into this mask. Magically..
jOhO
Senior Member
I think it's due to a few things.
Perspective distortion. it matters if you shoot from far, or near. from high, or low. it is NOTHING to do with your focal length. you shoot from 10 m with a 85mm or shoot from THE SAME LOCATION with a 28mm (then crop it) you will have the same photo (for argument's sake, let's just say the subject is dead centre of the frame)
another one is pose. chin down can get double chins, but can also make the chin look sharper. full frontal shots almost always look fatter.. and the list goes on. i guess if u shoot the SAME model enuff, u can get a feel of which angles suit him/her.
next comes lighting. full frontal lighting can almost kill ur portrait, not to mention a flat looking photo. try to induce some soft shadows by having side lighting or at least from top and bottom. in a studio, i've learnt that a "bao jiak" way to place your lights is main light on top (centre) and sub light at bottom (centre). but i dun shoot studio much, so can ask the studio experts here.
just sharing wat i (think i) know, hope it helps. :bsmilie:
Perspective distortion. it matters if you shoot from far, or near. from high, or low. it is NOTHING to do with your focal length. you shoot from 10 m with a 85mm or shoot from THE SAME LOCATION with a 28mm (then crop it) you will have the same photo (for argument's sake, let's just say the subject is dead centre of the frame)
another one is pose. chin down can get double chins, but can also make the chin look sharper. full frontal shots almost always look fatter.. and the list goes on. i guess if u shoot the SAME model enuff, u can get a feel of which angles suit him/her.
next comes lighting. full frontal lighting can almost kill ur portrait, not to mention a flat looking photo. try to induce some soft shadows by having side lighting or at least from top and bottom. in a studio, i've learnt that a "bao jiak" way to place your lights is main light on top (centre) and sub light at bottom (centre). but i dun shoot studio much, so can ask the studio experts here.
just sharing wat i (think i) know, hope it helps. :bsmilie:
:think: you must have used it wrongly.. :bsmilie:
Of course it's just a general guideline to defining beauty. Doesn't mean those who doesn't fit the mask are ugly. I'll try to get some superimposed done here to support the point.. how's andy lau and zeng zhiwei sound as a comparison?
Of course it's just a general guideline to defining beauty. Doesn't mean those who doesn't fit the mask are ugly. I'll try to get some superimposed done here to support the point.. how's andy lau and zeng zhiwei sound as a comparison?
seems like i'm the only active person in here...
anyway I did a beauty mask over Jolin. It's the only best pic of frontal portrait I could find.
Points to note:
-The camera angle was slightly elevated so couldn't get the chin part to fit in.
-Camera is also slightly angled to the right so the left cheek is showing more than the right (from the artiste's perspective)
-She was smiling so the parts of the mouth didn't match the mask
By and large, most of her face features fitted into the gridlines of the mask.
Notice the diagonal line from her nose defining her cheeks? Fitted in nicely.
Eyebrows and eyes.. perfect fit. Nose great. Forehead perfect.
Disclaimer: This photo was used solely as research material and the intent of the picture is not to deface, devalue or vandalise the artiste. All rights reserved and copyright of the original picture fully owned by owner.
Should anyone feel that the above is offensive or inappropriate, please contact me and I'll take the picture off immediately.
Thank you.
anyway I did a beauty mask over Jolin. It's the only best pic of frontal portrait I could find.
Points to note:
-The camera angle was slightly elevated so couldn't get the chin part to fit in.
-Camera is also slightly angled to the right so the left cheek is showing more than the right (from the artiste's perspective)
-She was smiling so the parts of the mouth didn't match the mask
By and large, most of her face features fitted into the gridlines of the mask.
Notice the diagonal line from her nose defining her cheeks? Fitted in nicely.
Eyebrows and eyes.. perfect fit. Nose great. Forehead perfect.
Disclaimer: This photo was used solely as research material and the intent of the picture is not to deface, devalue or vandalise the artiste. All rights reserved and copyright of the original picture fully owned by owner.
Should anyone feel that the above is offensive or inappropriate, please contact me and I'll take the picture off immediately.
Thank you.
yanyewkay said:
that's the problem lah.....by and large, most ppl's face can fit into the mask. from the examples shown on that website, and your example, many faces dun fit the mask perfectly, usually the side of the face which is not the perfect "guazi" or oval shape. perfect beauty needs to have more stringent compliance requirements methinks.
Zeckson Chow
Senior Member
If you guys don't me me kay poh here and try my luck again in posting some comments without turning people off and trigger some negative reactions, I'll like to add a bit to the so many already comments here.
To put this in simple layman terms, our eyes are actually the best camera lens that this world can ever offer. Automatic zoom, automatic aperture resizing, instant reaction due to over-exposed conditions, etc. When our eyes see things, it sees more than just an angle.
In this case, when we look at a pretty girl, that particular angle we look at was registered as good in our brains. We tend to move a little, thus causing the angle to change (even the slightest movement) and we access that girl again and re-register it onto our brain. We tend to walk around the girl, looking at different angles of the girl. We will notice that some angles they look very good but some angles they don't. This is versatile.
When we take a picture of the girl. That angle and plane is recorded fix onto the media, be it on film or in soft copy. When we look at that picture, the angle and plane is fixed and no matter how we see it, it remains the same. Therefore we deduce it as not good looking or good looking but when we actually see the girl with our eyes, because we tend to constantly move our heads and body and changing angles and planes differently, we may have different perception of the girl.
And thus the reason why we sometimes find that the girl looks fabulous on pictures and so so only when seeing her in actual real person and of course, vice versa.
Hope these comments will not get me slapped again.
To put this in simple layman terms, our eyes are actually the best camera lens that this world can ever offer. Automatic zoom, automatic aperture resizing, instant reaction due to over-exposed conditions, etc. When our eyes see things, it sees more than just an angle.
In this case, when we look at a pretty girl, that particular angle we look at was registered as good in our brains. We tend to move a little, thus causing the angle to change (even the slightest movement) and we access that girl again and re-register it onto our brain. We tend to walk around the girl, looking at different angles of the girl. We will notice that some angles they look very good but some angles they don't. This is versatile.
When we take a picture of the girl. That angle and plane is recorded fix onto the media, be it on film or in soft copy. When we look at that picture, the angle and plane is fixed and no matter how we see it, it remains the same. Therefore we deduce it as not good looking or good looking but when we actually see the girl with our eyes, because we tend to constantly move our heads and body and changing angles and planes differently, we may have different perception of the girl.
And thus the reason why we sometimes find that the girl looks fabulous on pictures and so so only when seeing her in actual real person and of course, vice versa.
Hope these comments will not get me slapped again.
yups.. i believe if i had a frontal shot like passport photo, all the features would fit in.
Important features like the cheek line, eyes, face-shape (gua-zi) and nose that fit in are generally considered pretty or beautiful.
Those who didn't fit in are not ugly but just lost out in that little bit of X factor why they just aren't as eye catching.
My experiment is just to show the little extra X-factor why some are just more photogenic or commonly described "beautiful".
Anyone want to submit a passport photo for me to mask?
Important features like the cheek line, eyes, face-shape (gua-zi) and nose that fit in are generally considered pretty or beautiful.
Those who didn't fit in are not ugly but just lost out in that little bit of X factor why they just aren't as eye catching.
My experiment is just to show the little extra X-factor why some are just more photogenic or commonly described "beautiful".
Anyone want to submit a passport photo for me to mask?
- Status
Similar threads
