BACKGROUND: In the absence of clear guidelines for facial aesthetic surgery, most surgeons rely on expert intuitive judgement when planning aesthetic and reconstructive surgery. One of the most famous theories regarding “ideal” facial proportions is that of the golden proportion. However, there are conflicting opinions as to whether it can be used to assess facial attractiveness. The aim of this investigation was to assess facial ratios of professional black models and to compare the ratios with the golden proportion. METHODS: Forty photographs of male and female professional black models were collected. Observers were asked to assign a score from 1 to 10 (1 = not very attractive, 10 = very attractive). A total of 287 responses were analysed for grading behaviour according to various demographic factors by two groups of observers. The best graded photographs were compared with the least well-graded photographs to identify any differences in their facial ratios. The models’ facial ratios were calculated and compared with the golden proportion. RESULTS: Differences in grading behaviour were observed amongst the two assessment groups. Only one out of the 12 facial ratios was not significantly different from the golden proportion. CONCLUSIONS: Only one facial ratio was observed to be similar to the golden proportion in professional model facial photographs. No correlation was found between facial ratios in professional black models with the golden proportion. It is proposed that an individualistic treatment for each ratio is a rather better method to guide future practice.
Beauty ; Demography ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Methods ; Surgeons

Background: What we think we see consists of models constructed in our brains, which may be constrained, limited and perhaps modified at a cerebral level. Patients may view their mirror image differently to how others and the clini‑ cal team view them. Understanding potential variations in perception between real and mirror images is important in clinical practice. The aims were to assess differences in self-perception between frontal facial and mirrored photo‑ graphs, comparing the results with selfie photographs. Methods: Facial photographs were taken by one investigator under standardized conditions for preclinical and clini‑ cal students. Each student took a selfie photograph at rest and smiling using his/her smartphone. A mirror image was generated for each image. Each student was shown his/her original and mirror image, without being informed which was which. For each pair of images, students were asked to choose which photograph they perceived as more attractive. A set of photographs of a male volunteer was shown to all participants, to choose either the original or mir‑ ror image as the more attractive. Results: Most observers preferred the true image of the volunteer (P < 0.05), which may be evidence that most people prefer the true image of others, which is how they normally view them. Most observers preferred their own original photograph in frontal view at rest and smiling (P< 0.05), but preferred the mirror image of their selfie photo‑ graph at rest and smiling (P < 0.05). Conclusions Significant differences in perceptions of attractiveness between true and mirror-reversed frontal and selfie images were found. Observers preferred their image the way they view themselves in a mirror. The selfie is how other people view an individual. If a selfie is flipped horizontally, that is how an individual sees themselves in a mirror. Most observers preferred the mirror image of their selfie, which is how they would view themselves in a mirror.

BACKGROUND: To test the hypothesis that in profile smiling view, for ideal aesthetics, a tangent to the labial face of the maxillary central incisor crowns should be approximately parallel to the true vertical line and thereby perpendicular to the true horizontal line. METHODS: An idealized female image was created with computer software and manipulated using the same software to construct an “ideal” female profile image with proportions, and linear and angular soft tissue measurements, based on currently accepted criteria for idealized Caucasian profiles. The maxillary incisor labial face tangent was altered in 5° increments from 70 to 120°, creating a range of images, shown in random order to 70 observers (56 lay people and 14 clinicians), who ranked the images from the most to the least attractive. The main outcome was the preference ranks of image attractiveness given by the observers. RESULTS: The most attractive inclination of a tangent to the labial face of the maxillary incisor crowns in profile view in relation to the true horizontal line was 85°, i.e. 5° retroclined from a perpendicular 90° inclination. The most attractive range appears to be between 80 and 90°. Excessive proclination appeared to be less desirable than retroclination. Beyond 105° most observers recommend treatment. CONCLUSION In natural head position, the ideal inclination of the maxillary incisor crown labial face tangent in profile view will be approximately parallel to the true vertical line and thereby approximately perpendicular to the true horizontal line.