James M Roth1, Stephen E Metzinger. 1. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, 533 Bolivar Street, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To devise a quantitative aesthetic model for the eyebrow arch position (EAP) in women. METHODS: Full-face frontal magazine photographs of 100 fashion models published between January and July 2001 were analyzed. Apparent EAP relative to a line through the medial canthus parallel to the midline was compared with eyewidth (EW). A similar comparison was made between the lateral limbus (LL) and the EW. Standardized full-face frontal photographs of 105 randomly selected women aged 21 to 61 years were taken after obtaining informed consent. The photographs were analyzed in the same manner as those of the fashion models. Both populations had the medial and lateral extents of their eyebrows analyzed. RESULTS: The mean +/- SD EAP:EW ratio for the fashion models was 0.978 +/- 0.131; the mean +/- SD LL:EW ratio was 0.735 +/- 0.0673. The mean +/- SD EAP:EW ratio for the randomly selected group was 0.929 +/- 0.146; the mean +/- SD LL:EW ratio was 0.762 +/- 0.0420. CONCLUSIONS: The EAP has been described as being above the LL. This does not reflect the EAP seen in both of our study groups. The EAP seems to be 93% to 98% of an EW in the aesthetic model derived from these data.
OBJECTIVE: To devise a quantitative aesthetic model for the eyebrow arch position (EAP) in women. METHODS: Full-face frontal magazine photographs of 100 fashion models published between January and July 2001 were analyzed. Apparent EAP relative to a line through the medial canthus parallel to the midline was compared with eyewidth (EW). A similar comparison was made between the lateral limbus (LL) and the EW. Standardized full-face frontal photographs of 105 randomly selected women aged 21 to 61 years were taken after obtaining informed consent. The photographs were analyzed in the same manner as those of the fashion models. Both populations had the medial and lateral extents of their eyebrows analyzed. RESULTS: The mean +/- SD EAP:EW ratio for the fashion models was 0.978 +/- 0.131; the mean +/- SD LL:EW ratio was 0.735 +/- 0.0673. The mean +/- SD EAP:EW ratio for the randomly selected group was 0.929 +/- 0.146; the mean +/- SD LL:EW ratio was 0.762 +/- 0.0420. CONCLUSIONS: The EAP has been described as being above the LL. This does not reflect the EAP seen in both of our study groups. The EAP seems to be 93% to 98% of an EW in the aesthetic model derived from these data.