Author Topic: Soft tissue vs bones  (Read 3972 times)

PloskoPlus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3044
  • Karma: 140
Soft tissue vs bones
« on: December 30, 2016, 10:31:05 PM »
A&G are of the opinion that skin, hair, features are just as, if not more, important than jaws when it comes to looks. Yet I have friend who works at a computer game company.  They start with a photo of the character they want, then they create a 3d virtual skull, slap on muscle, skin, hair. Then their boss comes in and says "doesn't look right". They rip off the soft layers, tweak the jaw a few mm, slap the soft layers back on and the face looks completely different. I'm sort of sceptical and I think the tweaks they do, while minor, have degrees of freedom that no surgeon does.

screwsandplates

  • Private
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 87
  • Karma: 7
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2016, 12:04:36 AM »
I consulted with them a long time ago and heard the same thing. Gunson told me that he thinks eyes, hair, and lips are extremely important when it comes to facial beauty (he didn't mention skin in my case because my skin is f**ked lol).

I would rate it:
1. Bone structure
2. Soft tissue
3. Skin quality
29. Hair

Honestly I've seen bald girls who just blew me away. I think bone structure is the most important closely followed by soft tissue which can severely enhance or destroy that foundation. I don't think that anything can replace good bone structure.

ppsk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
  • Karma: 39
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2016, 03:02:15 AM »
of course they will say its more important, because the amount of s**t you can sell to people on the basis of soft tissue changes (throw "coloring" and complexion etc in here as well) is huge compared to the amount of s**t you can sell people on bone, for which procedures are limited and very invasive. It is after all, a business, and one and done approaches will always bring in less money overall than having people constantly come in for little tune ups.

You see this in the plastic surgery industry all the time, 90% of their customer base is people going in for goofy procedures like nip and tuck jobs, fat injections, etc.

I dont see how you could ever make the case that soft tissue is more important that bone structure, since everything that results in a major improvement in looks is the result of major changes to the bone structure. Soft tissue is dependent on hard tissue, and never vice versa.

Very few people look significantly better after fat grafts/injections, lifts or tans. Most people do look better after major surgery. Most of the "soft tissue" looks people are after are a result of bone structure, the "hollow" or "model" cheeks for example, are the product of wide and high cheekbones and wide mandibles, and the soft tissue only approach of removing the buccal fat pad NEVER looks that good.

MrFox

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
  • Karma: 21
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #3 on: December 31, 2016, 06:46:38 AM »
Most of the "soft tissue" looks people are after are a result of bone structure, the "hollow" or "model" cheeks for example, are the product of wide and high cheekbones and wide mandibles, and the soft tissue only approach of removing the buccal fat pad NEVER looks that good.

Well said!

The Quest for Aesthetics

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 21
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #4 on: December 31, 2016, 07:23:34 AM »
It's not as simple as 'soft tissue v. bones' though. Facial ratios for instance play a significant part. Different elements of the face matter to different degrees, whether soft tissue of bone. There's no logic into drawing a distinction between soft tissue and bone when constituent parts of those two categories vary widely in effect and importance. For instance the formation of the soft tissue of the eyes is critical in creating the exotic sense of beauty, aswell as proportions and dimensions of the lips. This may matter a lot more than something bony related such as forehead angulation.

kjohnt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
  • Karma: 26
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2016, 01:36:00 PM »
All are important, bone is most important.  A house is useless without a solid foundation.

PloskoPlus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3044
  • Karma: 140
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2016, 01:43:10 PM »
It's not as simple as 'soft tissue v. bones' though. Facial ratios for instance play a significant part. Different elements of the face matter to different degrees, whether soft tissue of bone. There's no logic into drawing a distinction between soft tissue and bone when constituent parts of those two categories vary widely in effect and importance. For instance the formation of the soft tissue of the eyes is critical in creating the exotic sense of beauty, aswell as proportions and dimensions of the lips. This may matter a lot more than something bony related such as forehead angulation.
Fundamental ratios are extremely hard to change, if not impossible in most cases.

The Quest for Aesthetics

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 21
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2016, 02:00:03 PM »
Fundamental ratios are extremely hard to change, if not impossible in most cases.

Sure, but that doesn't change how important they are. I just wish there was a way of making a short nose longer :(

PloskoPlus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3044
  • Karma: 140
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #8 on: December 31, 2016, 02:04:13 PM »
Sure, but that doesn't change how important they are. I just wish there was a way of making a short nose longer :(
And I wish for the opposite. Anyway the lower part of the nose (if it's upturned showing nostrils) can be built up with tons of cartilage. The nasion can be raised with a lefort iii (the full version).

The Quest for Aesthetics

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 21
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #9 on: December 31, 2016, 03:45:58 PM »
And I wish for the opposite. Anyway the lower part of the nose (if it's upturned showing nostrils) can be built up with tons of cartilage. The nasion can be raised with a lefort iii (the full version).

My issue is that the base of my nose (subnasale point in particular) is too high set. I know that the tip, the alar bases can be lowered. And I know that the alar rim can also be lowered (as with correction of alar retraction). But if I lower all of that stuff without lowering the subnasale point and the columella underneath the tip, it will look retarded. :(

earl25

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
  • Karma: 52
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #10 on: January 10, 2017, 07:37:16 AM »
Facial proportions, eye area and jaw matter the most by a large margin in my opinion.

It's crushing to see so many guys with well above average facial bones, but they have a s**tty haircut, are overweight, and dress like a 13-year-old. But they still look good.

Beauty is in the facial bones things like body, hair style (not hairline, style), clothing are very over rated and imo have little to now real value in terms of making  person good looking.

ppsk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
  • Karma: 39
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2017, 08:48:48 AM »
Beauty is in the facial bones things like body, hair style (not hairline, style), clothing are very over rated and imo have little to now real value in terms of making  person good looking.

absolutely this

The Quest for Aesthetics

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
  • Karma: 21
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #12 on: January 11, 2017, 02:56:26 AM »
Beauty is in the facial bones things like body, hair style (not hairline, style), clothing are very over rated and imo have little to now real value in terms of making  person good looking.

Not true at all. Height and shoulder-to-hip are consistently shown to be significant indicators of male sex appeal. Having the body of a fitness model whilst being at least average looking will significantly raise sexual attractiveness.

The end of this internet meme of facial bones being the overwhelming indicator of attractiveness to the exclusion of everything else, is long overdue.

earl25

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
  • Karma: 52
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #13 on: January 11, 2017, 06:11:51 AM »
Not true at all. Height and shoulder-to-hip are consistently shown to be significant indicators of male sex appeal. Having the body of a fitness model whilst being at least average looking will significantly raise sexual attractiveness.

The end of this internet meme of facial bones being the overwhelming indicator of attractiveness to the exclusion of everything else, is long overdue.


I dont agree. While ige never read those studies, curious is the people with good shoulder to hip ratio also had good faces. I have found that most of the times ppl with good looking faces have good proportions all over.

If a person has an average face, then theyre not ugly and dont have flaws, just not hot. A fitness model body likely would help but compared to what? An average lookin guy with a bad body, then yes def the body helps.

If someone has an amazing body and an ugly face theyre still ugly just have a great body. If someone has a gorgous face and fat theyre still gorgous , just theyre fat. Beauty is in the face.

stupidjaws

  • CFO
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
  • Karma: 46
  • The panic the vomit the yuppies networking
Re: Soft tissue vs bones
« Reply #14 on: January 11, 2017, 06:33:16 AM »

I dont agree. While ige never read those studies, curious is the people with good shoulder to hip ratio also had good faces. I have found that most of the times ppl with good looking faces have good proportions all over.

If a person has an average face, then theyre not ugly and dont have flaws, just not hot. A fitness model body likely would help but compared to what? An average lookin guy with a bad body, then yes def the body helps.

If someone has an amazing body and an ugly face theyre still ugly just have a great body. If someone has a gorgous face and fat theyre still gorgous , just theyre fat. Beauty is in the face.

i agree. for sure than everything else makes an impact, it's not black and white but one could go to the extent of saying beauty is in the face.