Author Topic: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)  (Read 4430 times)

jusken

  • Private
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 186
  • Karma: 24
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #15 on: May 05, 2019, 03:22:53 PM »
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.

As someone with hollow, deepset eyes myself,  fillers are a terrible solution.  They are very temporary and can only partially correct the problem(your eyes will still be deepset).  Fat grafting is very risky.  I also really don't like the idea of implants, from how they are placed to longer term concerns.  It's all just an extra gamble at best.

In the current state of aesthetic options, I'd take a conservative jaw surgery and be done with it.  Perhaps some day we'll have far better options.

kavan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4010
  • Karma: 425
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2019, 03:31:50 PM »
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.

His nose base is wider which would be the case with L1 advancement and widening the maxilla which I think he got via multi-segment L1. I think Gunson also said (on where he show cased the patient) that the cheek area still had some swelling which goes down at a LATER time (than the photo was taken).

So, ya, you can make a morph showing a better aesthetic. But since we can assume he NEEDED the multi-segment lefort that both advanced and made WIDER the palate which, in turn makes wider the base of nose, that's just kind of an example of what I discussed in my prior post which is wanting to see something that the surgery DOES NOT DO. A multi segment L1 that both advances the maxilla AND makes area WIDER which he needed for the apnea and the bite is NOT going to keep his nose base as it was prior.

There is a certain 'PRACTICALITY' involved in maxfax such as correcting stuff like apnea and bite issues or other dysfunction issues. Then comes optimizing aesthetics with what HAS TO BE DONE to correct a dysfunction. It's not all about kicking up a result that would look better to one's eye in situations where addressing the dysfunction--and here where the person has the close set eyes--takes precedence.

In this case, IMO, this guy would look better to most people (and some of that could come from just feeling better from being able to sleep or having functional bite). Although your morph looks nice and you could say it looks more 'harmonious', in no way, would I personally judge his outcome negatively because it didn't come out like that. Some of these surgeries can't be expected to come out in accordance to what we would LIKE to see or what we think is more 'harmonious'especially when the aim of the surgery is to fix a significant dysfunction.

One COULD say, his cheek and jawline area are closer to what a male model has. Yet, UNLIKE some other guys who DO pursue surgery to have PARTS that a MM has, I have no reason to think this was this guy's motivation. So at most (at least?), I think this illustrates some of what you're saying (albeit from a strictly aesthetic only perspective) which is getting some PARTS, some 'ideal' parts can't be counted on to totally blend or harmonize with all the other parts of their face if other parts of face CAN'T also be made 'ideal'.
Please. No PMs for private advice. Board issues only.

Lazlo

  • Private
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3004
  • Karma: 174
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2019, 08:10:56 PM »
Jusken's morph makes the guy look a HUNDRED times handsomer. Holy f**k.

PloskoPlus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3044
  • Karma: 140
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2019, 09:36:36 PM »
Jusken's morph makes the guy look a HUNDRED times handsomer. Holy f**k.
Yep.

Freeways

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • Karma: 6
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #19 on: May 07, 2019, 04:38:57 PM »
Jusken's morph makes the guy look a HUNDRED times handsomer. Holy f**k.

Really? I think the right version (not the morph) looks clearly better. The morph made his face narrower and gave him less definition in the jaw, chin and cheekbones.

As to the results in the OP, I think both had a good outcome. The girl might look a bit strange because her skin is unusually clear, it's almost too perfect.

jusken

  • Private
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 186
  • Karma: 24
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #20 on: May 07, 2019, 04:57:46 PM »
Really? I think the right version (not the morph) looks clearly better. The morph made his face narrower and gave him less definition in the jaw, chin and cheekbones.

As to the results in the OP, I think both had a good outcome. The girl might look a bit strange because her skin is unusually clear, it's almost too perfect.

I'd call this undiscerning, but another way to look at it is we're all allowed our own subjective truths.  My morph intentionally used his features in the before, specifically to balance his features and make them more harmonious.  But, this certainly is an acceptable variance in personal preference - some people prefer advancement at all cost.

In the end, I'm just offering people without that preference an alternative suggestion.

ODog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Karma: 16
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #21 on: May 07, 2019, 08:19:30 PM »
I'd call this undiscerning, but another way to look at it is we're all allowed our own subjective truths.  My morph intentionally used his features in the before, specifically to balance his features and make them more harmonious.  But, this certainly is an acceptable variance in personal preference - some people prefer advancement at all cost.

In the end, I'm just offering people without that preference an alternative suggestion.

I don’t think your morph is bad or anything, it’s a good result, I just didn’t think he was hitting “uncanny territory” yet. In the before he had a long ramus already, when you look at the actual jaw change it’s really not *that* drastic. It was probably just a moderate bi-max. I think the zygo work adds to the unnatural result if that’s what one wants to call it, maybe that’s what’s exacerbating the undereye hollows more than the sharper jaw per se.

Your morph also polished up the area under his eyes (not sure you touched it up or original before just looked better than the after in that area), so along with the zygo reduction that could account for a good chunk of why people think your morph is better than his result, but the jaw change in your morph really isn’t all that much. To me it’s not his jaw projection that looks off, but the extreme sharpness and evenness of his jawline. Can we be sure this result is merely from a BSSO and not also an implant? In the caption below the girls results it says “orthographic surgery and custom titanium....”

april

  • Private
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 437
  • Karma: 44
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #22 on: May 07, 2019, 09:35:17 PM »
I think Gunson also said (on where he show cased the patient) that the cheek area still had some swelling which goes down at a LATER time (than the photo was taken).

Yeah just saw his pic here https://www.arnettgunson.com/facial-contour-grafting

I didn't realise he was only 7 weeks out. He probably looks a lot different now without the swelling.

"Nasal base grafts and malar grafts were placed and can be seen in the cone beam CT image. The after photo is 7 weeks post surgery. The graft material will condense a little more (10-20%) from its present size in the photo."

april

  • Private
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 437
  • Karma: 44
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #23 on: May 07, 2019, 10:23:24 PM »
Can we be sure this result is merely from a BSSO and not also an implant? In the caption below the girls results it says “orthographic surgery and custom titanium....”

I think he means custom titanium plates.

I think this is the same girl https://www.instagram.com/p/BrH3zKbhouj/

jusken

  • Private
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 186
  • Karma: 24
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #24 on: May 07, 2019, 10:24:35 PM »
Oh wow only 7 weeks?  Okay, that's too early to really judge then...

kavan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4010
  • Karma: 425
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #25 on: May 08, 2019, 06:13:55 AM »
I think Gunson also said (on where he show cased the patient) that the cheek area still had some swelling which goes down at a LATER time (than the photo was taken).

Yeah just saw his pic here https://www.arnettgunson.com/facial-contour-grafting

I didn't realise he was only 7 weeks out. He probably looks a lot different now without the swelling.

"Nasal base grafts and malar grafts were placed and can be seen in the cone beam CT image. The after photo is 7 weeks post surgery. The graft material will condense a little more (10-20%) from its present size in the photo."

Yes. That's the link where it mentioned he was early out and had swelling. Thanks for finding what I mentioned in an earlier post on this string about that guys case.
Please. No PMs for private advice. Board issues only.

Richards

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: 1
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #26 on: May 09, 2019, 11:27:55 AM »
As someone with hollow, deepset eyes myself,  fillers are a terrible solution.  They are very temporary and can only partially correct the problem(your eyes will still be deepset).  Fat grafting is very risky.  I also really don't like the idea of implants, from how they are placed to longer term concerns.  It's all just an extra gamble at best.


Fat grafting really isn't risky. Grafting up to the orbital rim is routine, grafting the lower lids and orbit are riskier and often not recommended. Implants can be placed to move forward deep set eyes, again not overly risky.

PloskoPlus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3044
  • Karma: 140
Re: Cause of unnatural looking results? (bimax)
« Reply #27 on: May 09, 2019, 01:10:27 PM »
Fat grafting really isn't risky. Grafting up to the orbital rim is routine, grafting the lower lids and orbit are riskier and often not recommended. Implants can be placed to move forward deep set eyes, again not overly risky.
Who does this?