Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)

[djsbelgium]

I recently stumbled upon these bimax results: https://imgur.com/a/1mE6bGP

What causes them to look so unnatural? Is it too much advancement?

My theory is that the midface deficiency becomes prominent after bimax which makes the midface look 'set-back'.

Would cheekbone augmentation solve the issue? Regarding those cases.

[GJ]

My theory is that the midface deficiency becomes prominent after bimax which makes the midface look 'set-back'.

That's a good theory.

Though, I really doubt if you saw either of those people walking down the street you'd have any idea they had jaw surgery, so not sure "unnatural" is the right word.

[ODog]

I recently stumbled upon these bimax results: https://imgur.com/a/1mE6bGP

What causes them to look so unnatural? Is it too much advancement?

My theory is that the midface deficiency becomes prominent after bimax which makes the midface look 'set-back'.

Would cheekbone augmentation solve the issue? Regarding those cases.

I wouldn’t say the first case or either for that matter look unnatural. What you’re perceiving is uneven forward growth of the jaws and infraorbital area down to the nose. If the jaws grew forward naturally, in most cases it would tend to pull the midface forward as well. Jaw surgery only pulls the philtrhum area forward. Zygo augmentation won’t do anything to harmonize this discrepancy, the second guy actually did have something done to his cheeks. Only extended infraorbital implants to buffer out the area below the eyes down to the sides of the nose would harmonize the face.

That said, I never think harmonious recession or symmetrical flatness should preferred over forward jaws with midface flatness, as long as the bi-max isn’t overdone. And you can always buff out the midface later.

[Dogmatix]

I'm not sure how you mean unnatural. I think both cases have improved aesthetic. If they look unnatural after, you could probably say they looked unnatural before as well? Everyone have different features and jaw surgery will only make someone look like a different version of them self.

Jaw surgery is often a medical procedure to get the bite in class I with good occlusion, and aesthetically trying to line the profile up to an orthognathic profile.

[Lazlo]

The girl was a lot prettier before jaw surgery.

That guy just looks weird either way.

[PloskoPlus]

The guy has a long midface and close set eyes. His much improved jawline does not divert attention from that.

[kavan]

IMO, What causes something to look 'unnatural' to SOME people is the expectation (and that expectation can be subconscious) that the person look 'IDEAL' afterwards or have little to NO aesthetic deviations after a surgery. Probably due to looking at too many models who have a LOT to EVERYTHING going right or ideal on their faces.

The brain is actually HARD WIRED to 'want to see' a lot of distance relationship ratios on the face where even if we don't know what they are (technically, mathematically), we KNOW them when we SEE them. For example, MODELS are chosen for having them all (or most of them) and most people would agree they have the aesthetic 'ideals' we like to look at. So, I do think that WANTING TO SEE many distance relationships change to close to ideal after a surgery can actually CLOUD one's perception of what the surgery was aimed at doing.

In the case of the MALE in the photos, his surgery was aimed at correcting his SLEEP apnea (which it did). His Lefort 1 advanced his lower midface. So, he got some upper midface augmetation to counter possibility of that area looking MORE recessed to him AFTER the L1 needed to maximize lower jaw advancement. What people often critique in that guy's case is something the surgery CAN'T change which is the CLOSE SET eyes. So, it's actually the eye distance that CAN'T be changed which predjudices your appreciation of what the surgery actually was AIMED at correcting.

That said to really SEE the favorable changes in the guy's over all aesthetic, one needs to COVER UP the eyes. Put your finger over them in both photos so you don't see them and then you will see this is a very good aesthetic result given the CORRECTION he needed for the APNEA.

As to the FEMALE in the photo, well she did NOT get the upper midface augmentation the male got. Since her eyes are NOT close set, if she had same upper midface augment the male got, she would have looked better given her upper midface area looks RELATIVELY more recessed because the L1 area was brought forward.

In short, WANTING TO SEE on the total GESTALT of the face all the distance relationships that would make the total gestalt IDEAL or idealized resolves to wanting to see something that the surgeries are NOT aimed at doing or can't or just don't do.

The results don't look 'unnatural' to ME because I analyze them, look at them in TERMS OF what the surgeries done actually DO as their AIM and I look at them with NO expectation that they make ideal non ideal distance relationships the person might start with for which those surgeries are NOT aimed at changing.

[jusken]

This look is really familiar to me now, I think almost everyone who gets jaw surgery has some % of this present in the post.  The guy in this example is certainly closer to the extreme end of this.  I think with the right movements, the tradeoffs can be mostly favorable.  Functional issues aside(as kavan has pointed out), the aesthetics are better in the before.  In the after, his features are closer to the 'model' jawline, but don't harmonize with his midface/eye region.  It could be that the functional improvements have improved his life though.

I'm pointing this out for this reason: all of you thinking about going through surgery, this is the reality.  Unless your problem is totally isolated, your best case scenario is a better jaw position, at the expense of a small amount of harmony.  If you lose a certain amount of harmony, I think the look is what the op is calling 'unnatural' - or an unlikely facial growth pattern.

[ODog]

This look is really familiar to me now, I think almost everyone who gets jaw surgery has some % of this present in the post.  The guy in this example is certainly closer to the extreme end of this.  I think with the right movements, the tradeoffs can be mostly favorable.  Functional issues aside(as kavan has pointed out), the aesthetics are better in the before.  In the after, his features are closer to the 'model' jawline, but don't harmonize with his midface/eye region.  It could be that the functional improvements have improved his life though.

I'm pointing this out for this reason: all of you thinking about going through surgery, this is the reality.  Unless your problem is totally isolated, your best case scenario is a better jaw position, at the expense of a small amount of harmony.  If you lose a certain amount of harmony, I think the look is what the op is calling 'unnatural' - or an unlikely facial growth pattern.

I see what you’re saying, but I disagree that his aesthetics are better in the before. Not even close. When judging a man’s attractiveness you must always take the perspective of women. Do you think the before would do better with women in a club than the after? The after would do at LEAST equally well and more likely better than the before.

Harmony loses its importance when the harmony you’re referring to is general unattractive features everywhere. IMO it then becomes irrelevant. You are deemed “not attractive”  anyway so what’s the difference? Having less unattractive features overall is always better because you move closer and closer to the “fixable” category. You are advertising yourself as someone whose genetic flaws can be fixed more quickly and in fewer generations given favourable pair bonding, as opposed to someone whose accumulated genetic flaws have reached a point where the likelihood of subsequent generations climbing out of the “not attractive to women” category to “attractive” is very low.

[jusken]

I see what you’re saying, but I disagree that his aesthetics are better in the before. Not even close. When judging a man’s attractiveness you must always take the perspective of women. Do you think the before would do better with women in a club than the after? The after would do at LEAST equally well and more likely better than the before.

Harmony loses its importance when the harmony you’re referring to is general unattractive features everywhere. IMO it then becomes irrelevant. You are deemed “not attractive”  anyway so what’s the difference? Having less unattractive features overall is always better because you move closer and closer to the “fixable” category. You are advertising yourself as someone whose genetic flaws can be fixed more quickly and in fewer generations given favourable pair bonding, as opposed to someone whose accumulated genetic flaws have reached a point where the likelihood of subsequent generations climbing out of the “not attractive to women” category to “attractive” is very low.

This is a very reductionist line of reasoning. Picking up girls at the club isn't the total picture here.  To me, facial harmony is one of the core aspects of how we perceive people (perhaps not in a short term setting like a club).  I think the guy in the before picture is definitely not ugly compared to mean, and while I would consider more conservative movements to correct his weak lower third - I'd personally much rather choose that as a starting point.  This obsession over perfect jaw position is deeply short sighted imo - not considering how a person looks in animation or in normal situations.

[ODog]

To me, this is a very reductionist line of reasoning. Picking up girls at the club isn't the total picture here.  To me, facial harmony is one of the core aspects of how we perceive people (perhaps not in a short term setting like a club).  I think the guy in the before picture isn't ugly compared to mean, and while I would consider more conservative movements to correct his weak lower third - I'd personally much rather choose that as a starting point.  This obsession over perfect jaw position is deeply short sighted imo - not considering how a person looks in animation or in normal situations.

I didn’t say he was ugly btw or unattractive, I intentionally use the phrase “not attractive” as in regards to how women rate men. It’s either you’re attractive or you aren’t. I use the club setting as an example, pick any setting, doesn’t matter. Will women respond to his after less favourably if he asks for a number at a coffee shop? Highly doubtful. Will men treat the after with less respect in a work situation? Doubtful. Who would you rather hire as your lawyer, accountant, salesperson, the before or after? In many situations in life I just can’t see how his after won’t improve his results.

I also believe we’re misusing the term “harmony” in this case. Maybe not, but I feel we are. Harmony refers more to size relationships between objects. So two areas of the face can be attractive when taken in isolation, e.g a small nose and a big jaw, but put together it can look weird.

What people are judging in this picture by saying he has close set eyes and a long midface are areas of the face that are unattractive in themselves. His eye area is unattractive irrespective how of it relates to his jaws. By arguing for harmony in this case, It’s basically like saying “You’re not attractive in this area, so you should be not attractive in this other area to balance it out,” or “You have a crooked nose so you shouldn’t get jaw surgery to correct your crooked jaw or the crooked nose will be more obvious.” Both a misshapen nose and jaw are unattractive in isolation. To conclude that getting jaw surgery will throw off the harmony of the crooked nose is misguided and highly exaggerated .

[jusken]

I didn’t say he was ugly btw or unattractive, I intentionally use the phrase “not attractive” as in regards to how women rate men. It’s either you’re attractive or you aren’t. I use the club setting as an example, pick any setting, doesn’t matter. Will women respond to his after less favourably if he asks for a number at a coffee shop? Highly doubtful. Will men treat the after with less respect in a work situation? Doubtful. Who would you rather hire as your lawyer, accountant, salesperson, the before or after? In many situations in life I just can’t see how his after won’t improve his results.

I also believe we’re misusing the term “harmony” in this case. Maybe not, but I feel we are. Harmony refers more to size relationships between objects. So two areas of the face can be attractive when taken in isolation, e.g a small nose and a big jaw, but put together it can look weird.

What people are judging in this picture by saying he has close set eyes and a long midface are areas of the face that are unattractive in themselves. His eye area is unattractive irrespective how of it relates to his jaws. By arguing for harmony in this case, It’s basically like saying “You’re not attractive in this area, so you should be not attractive in this other area to balance it out,” or “You have a crooked nose so you shouldn’t get jaw surgery to correct your crooked jaw or the crooked nose will be more obvious.” Both a misshapen nose and jaw are unattractive in isolation. To conclude that getting jaw surgery will throw off the harmony of the crooked nose is misguided and highly exaggerated .

Nope, harmony is exactly the right word.  Again, you're being highly reductionist in your reasoning.  While we greatly prefer certain features, how they look together is deeply important.  I think his jaw looks fantastic after, but the relationship between these features is off balance now.  Having close set eyes is not preferred, but there are plenty of people who still look good with these features.  His nose is way too wide given his inner-canthal distance now and the curve of his face (from eye position to chin) appears distorted.  You can't just mix and match 'ideal' features from different people and expect a good outcome.  It is inherently true to me that harmonious/mediocre features are generally preferable to this - otherwise our brains continually flag this as 'not right'/uncanny valley.

I'll conclude this idea by saying that we live in a time where asking for perfection isn't reasonable though, and I'm sure this guy gets by just fine.

EDIT:  I attached a quick visualization of what I'm talking about - the left picture is now a quick paintover I did to show a more conservative and much better/more harmonious result in my opinion.  Obviously, I grabbed his hair from his after since that looks far better than before.

[ODog]

Nope, harmony is exactly the right word.  Again, you're being highly reductionist in your reasoning.  While we greatly prefer certain features, how they look together is deeply important.  I think his jaw looks fantastic after, but the relationship between these features is off balance now.  Having close set eyes is not preferred, but there are plenty of people who still look good with these features.  His nose is way too wide given his inner-canthal distance now and the curve of his face (from eye position to chin) appears distorted.  You can't just mix and match 'ideal' features from different people and expect a good outcome.  It is inherently true to me that harmonious/mediocre features are generally preferable to this - otherwise our brains continually flag this as 'not right'/uncanny valley.

I'll conclude this idea by saying that we live in a time where asking for perfection isn't reasonable though, and I'm sure this guy gets by just fine.

EDIT:  I attached a quick visualization of what I'm talking about - the left picture is now a quick paintover I did to show a more conservative and much better/more harmonious result in my opinion.  Obviously, I grabbed his hair from his after since that looks far better than before.

Wow that’s a little nit picky of a morph don’t you think. I literally cannot see any difference. Extremely negligible. Also, he hasn’t entered uncanny valley yet. A stranger wouldn’t think twice about his jaws, he’d simply think his eyes look a little goofy, that’s it. In the before, a stranger would think that his eyes look a little goofy and he also looks weak and nerdy. In fact, I believe your morph demonstrates that lesser movement doesn’t affect anything.

Edit: I’ve see people in real life with this proportion of weak orbitals and strong jaw. In fact I worked with one. I highly doubt he had jaw surgery but I guess it’s possible. His strong jaw and long mandible made him look healthy, higher class, and like he got the nutrition he needed as a child. His dark circles from his retruded suborbitals seemed like an entirely separate issue that wouldn’t have looked any better if he had a weak jaw. If he had a weak jaw, I certainly would have certainly perceived him less favourably.

[jusken]

Wow that’s a little nit picky of a morph don’t you think. I literally cannot see any difference. Extremely negligible. Also, he hasn’t entered uncanny valley yet. A stranger wouldn’t think twice about his jaws, he’d simply think his eyes look a little goofy, that’s it. In the before, a stranger would think that his eyes look a little goofy and he also looks weak and nerdy. In fact, I believe your morph demonstrates that lesser movement doesn’t affect anything.

I'd GREATLY prefer my morph, however subtle or 'weaker' it looks to someone else.  Again, unless we can one day control for every aspect of facial development, I'm all about going conservative to preserve overall harmony.

[ODog]

I'd GREATLY prefer my morph, however subtle or 'weaker' it looks to someone else.  Again, unless we can one day control for every aspect of facial development, I'm all about going conservative to preserve overall harmony.

Fair enough, but what if he simply got fillers in the suborbitals extending down the sides of his nose? Problem solved, and he keeps his stronger jaw. Or he could opt for a subtle custom midface implant.