ZBrushCentral

The perfect face..... the link to beauty

For visual pleasure everything works in threes. Everything is a triangle…from spheres through to painting compositions (one point of interest indicated by two lesser points of interest). For the uniformity to exist to take a character or scene to the a high degree one must work on this principle.

People say I model beautiful faces, great proportions etc. Mmmm I could disagree. When I was about 12yrs old I discovered what made things work for drawings, what proportions looked right for beauty. I couldn’t put a name to this, I just knew it was right. It was what I saw. And it was easy to do. All things must relate (this includes colour) to the whole in the most pleasing way.

A few million years later I now find there is a method to the perfect face. Somebody calculated mathematically what beauty is. And it works!!! To long have I looked at heads on Zbcentral…none except for possibly 2 in all my years there have even come close to the perfect face. Most I couldn’t bear looking at.

Here is the solution… http://www.beautyanalysis.com/index2_mba.htm

In the perfect face (or beauty in general)everything conforms to the principle 1:1.618 for instance the bottom of the nose is a certain width in this case we shall say the width 1 the width of the mouth below it in repose will then be in width 1.618 as will the length of the nose up to the middle of the eyes …or the mouth is 1.618…then the distance from mouth end to the side of face on both sides will each be the width of 1. Symmetry defines beauty.

Click the link to download the masks which work on the mathematical principle. The masks do work…I checked them on some of my models…and myself :rolleyes:

Paul

If you wish to improve modelling skills check out the link…IT WORKS

Many thanks for the link.
Strange I don’t remember this
photo being taken?

I will definately take your advice…any and all help from you is greatly appreciated. I am working on a model now…will post it with your permission when I get more done. As always you have helped me achieve something worth posting. :wink:

Thanks for the link, it is definitely an interesting subject, especially for people who are interested in creating images that are esthetically pleasing.

I thought most people already knew about the “Golden Ratio” and Fibonacci numbers, if you do a little searching, you will find that many things in nature, confine to this ratio, from how your body is built, to plants, and various animals.

As for the perfect face, that one is harder to nail down, as it is different for each person. Most of it relates to genetics and who your ideal mate is, which lends greatly to your personal preference for the opposite sex (or same in some cases)

Very interesting…

“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”

Truth?..or a door for ugly people? Who knows. I myself believe this to be very subjective. Attractive, yes, but by the standards of whom? Not the world by any assumption. I’ll need my boots for this. Don’t get me wrong. I am sure it works. Pretty?..yes. Perfect, well, nothing is perfect save the word. Like many a thing on this lovely plane, it is…just another mask.

And yes, I am ugly…lol…by my standards.
My mother would say otherwise. :smiley: :wink: :+1:

Oh yeah, isn’t this a community forum post? :roll_eyes:

Yes very interesting indeed…
Sprite no need to ask :slight_smile:
Community post no…the effort to produce heads…I would think a strong presence would be necessary…you could use this MTB, as with a lot of people. Still who knows.
Philosophically… with no agenda to follow…we are talking mathematical beauty…symmetry, I thought that was obvious.
Worth a look

LOL. So can we all in some ways. I can, you can, Davinci can…lol. :eek:
I am just pleased I can make heads. I don’t need it though. I like my head models outside the rules. Though, lol, I seem to be secretly in love with the cliche that is bitter beer face winks @ lon. Ah, c’est la vie hu? Of course who wouldn’t be an artist if they didn’t nit pick their own work. That’s why I haven’t tried it with any of my head models…in fear of the population explosion in SPOC. I am working on it though. :rolleyes:
So how did the map stack up to that head you use?

And then there is this…

faceless?

Sven

Man thats different. I couldn’t begin to imagine. Screw the map! At least I can SEE faces…wow.
Thanks Sven. :+1:

Hi Ed
It’s just the Golden number :slight_smile:
Pure artifact :slight_smile:
You can find the same proportion in a phone cabin :smiley:
Here an another The modulor :slight_smile:
And here some cosmic (and comic) variations :smiley:
Demystification here :slight_smile:
Pilou
Ps Another very serious demystification : Margueritte Neveux “Golden Number,Radiography of a myth, the divine proportion” Alas in french :frowning:
here :slight_smile:.html)
Marguerite Neveux, “Le nombre d’or : radiographie d’un mythe, la divine proportion” Coll. Points Sciences. Le Seuil

Her theory : we try by any manipulations to find a same proportion in any thing :slight_smile:

My theory : “Is beauty that please without concept” :cool:

ETA, thank you for providing this very useful information. As a complete non-artist, I know very very little about proper proportions even though I am a biology teacher (weird eh?).

Anyhow, any tips like you’ve given are really helpful.

~zero :slight_smile:

I guess I don’t get it.

I don’t understand how being able to make more beautiful heads equates with making more beautiful (or better) art.

MBA’s own site shows that plenty of people fall outside the mask, so not following it does not mean that a head model is intrinsically wrong in any way. This isn’t even a guide to proper proportions, only purported ‘ideal’ proportions for beauty.

Personally, I like the quirks of nature, the little deviations from the norm that make someone individual. So I suppose until they come up with masks that determine character I won’t be happy.

As for MBA itself, this is a corporation that has derived an application from other peoples’ theories and has a vested interest in promoting and selling that application. That doesn’t mean their application is wrong, but their evidence is very selective and relies on unstated assumptions about how beauty was percieved in the past and by different races. Having a scientific background I am also biased, but I would be more positive if they had put their application up for peer review in the appropriate journals, rather than just publishing in the popular media.

I would certainly do a lot more research before I laid my face upon the slab with the mask as a guide for the surgeons’ scalpels.

There you go Bone.
MBA says perfect under a preference of collective beauty. A face can be proportional and still fall well pasts the guides of the map. Does that mean its not perfect?..NO! Does that mean it is more like to be considered unattractive?..possibly but still no. Like I said earlier in a kinder way but shall again with more candor…its a load. An opinion, a belief…nothing more. I’ll stick with using the eye as a guide for heads and not an image map based on what is though to be socially attractive (which is largely media driven.
This is a great discussion, but like I said, this belongs in the community thread. Albeit art, this has nothing to do directly with ZBrush. Though that was obvious. :rolleyes:

A thread about beauty.
The question of proportions.
The relating of the making of great heads.
Boy do I feel left out.
At least with the Aliens, I felt a little
superior (except for that one who stood straddled)
Any ugly or homely links?

Well, symmetry do not exist in the real world, ying and yang¡¡
Will be interesting if there more head model representing the words say here¡
EMax

Mathematical proportion to produce pleasing line… forgetting the book burners for evermore.

Here is a model, profile view, I tried for the visually yum, it is not the perfect profile, but it I feel has pleasing form and line. So I checked it aginst the ratio 1:1.618. It comes close to those proportions… so in mathematical terms I have created a near perfect shape that works for all it contains.

The orange square is from nose tip to the beginning of the ear. The blue is the height fom bottom of chin to the bottom of the eye (this can be made into a triangle)The blue square has been rotated 90 degrees the rmainder of the yellow square on the left is approx .6 of the blue square.

I picked this profile at random, and did not alter the model in any way. The principle seems to work.

Every thing is food for thought, this post is intended to convey another way of looking at form…it could be it might help some people in their modelling and art understanding. Me I wouldn’t just dismiss it outright. Greater minds than mine have worked towards this solution. Right or wrong the idea persists in many avenues.

EDIT:

So I had a quick look at the proportions of this cartoony frontal…

The proportions on the left one needed altering to suit the ratio. I choose only the distance from chin to bottom of eye, and applied a rough 1.618 height above that to the top of the hair fringe. Now the head seems to have a more refined look and not as dumpy as the one on the left…It seems to my eye added a little sophistication to the righthand model…Mind you I still do not like the look of the model, but I may play further.

I read the other posts with interest and understand that many people don’t want to feel constrained by mathematics. Personally, I think the info. you’ve dug up is very useful to me. I’ve made some pretty crappy heads and haven’t yet got the chops to do up a good one. But guidelines like the ones you posted are extremely useful if the intention is to do models that are realistic.

I mean, I’ve already had a number of people comment on my models telling me I need to work on proper proportions and suggesting a detailed study of facial anatomy. So I for one go for the kind of data like this.

~zero :slight_smile:

trying to reply once more…hope it makes it…

ED…great thread…

i think while learning art symmetry is a necessity however in art as in life and life in mho is what makes art…its the story i want to know about…i think i would be more inclined to feel and want to know more about the face on the left of Ed’s last post than I would of the more perfect face on the right…right or wrong…it’s human nature to question the oddities than it is the beauty.

I can’t remember the last time someone asked my goddess friend about her or her life…but I can’t pass too many people without them asking about the scar on my face.

In art we strive for perfection but does perfection = symmetry…depends on what the artist i suppose is going for…but I’d take a lack of symmetry and a boat load of character over symmetry anyday and I think anyone that can capture character has achieved the ultimate in perfection in art.

but that is my ho in this darkening library from hell with some angry/pimply teen glaring at me hoping I leave ten minutes ago.

Keep up the great work and discussions guys…I wish I could visit more often!