6 ms·

The 'beautify a face' transformation should be renamed 'normalize a face' or something slightly less subjective then beauty. Although, I suppose 'normalize' is

by wmat 15y ago

The 'beautify a face' transformation should be renamed 'normalize a face' or something slightly less subjective then beauty. Although, I suppose 'normalize' isn't any less subjective. Suggestions? Perhaps 'standardize' or 'anglicize' or 'fashionize'?

bh42222 15y ago
Human opinion of what's "beautiful" in other human faces is not entirely subjective. It has been know for a while that if you start averaging faces you end up with a "pretty" face. This is because we genetically like symmetry, and averaging out faces makes them very symmetrical.
- diiq 15y ago
  There was a paper here on HN a few months back that compared averaged faces to faces with unchanged bone structure but smoothed skin; the differences in rated attractiveness were apparently negligible (and average faces with bad skin faired poorly). Averaging removes blemishes. Cartoonists and animators have long contended that some small asymmetries enhance the emotional connection we have with a character --- think of a puppy with one ear that points up, or with a spot over one eye. Sympathy isn't beauty, I admit; I think it might contribute to attraction, though.
  - sliverstorm 15y ago
    some small asymmetries enhance the emotional connection Small asymmetries. Which, by design must be built on top of something that is otherwise relatively perfect. Otherwise the asymmetry does not stand out, and the whole thing is just a mess. For example, a mangy old cur with one ear that points up, or a spot over one eye.
- wmat 15y ago
  Perhaps, but the use of a term like "we genetically like symmetry" bugs me. Has it actually been scientifically proven that humans have a genetic predisposition toward preferring symmetry? My google-fu turned up nothing. Isn't opinion naturally subjective, albeit informed by societal influences one way or the other?
  - bh42222 15y ago
    My google-fu also fails me. This is the best I found: http://www.metafilter.com/62173/The-hypnotic-beauty-of-the-average-face http://www.metafilter.com/62173/The-hypnotic-beauty-of-the-a... I based my initial opinion on a documentary about someone who had tried to find the "typical criminal" face by averaging the mugshots of criminals. But to his shock, the resulting face kept turning out beautiful. But again, my google-fu fails me.
  - jessriedel 15y ago
    This isn't symmetry per se, but the study referred to here does suggest that beauty is mostly innate: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6355-babies-prefer-to-gaze-upon-beautiful-faces.html http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6355-babies-prefer-to-... (They didn't do any averaging.) This article says that symmetry specifically has also be found to be attractive to babies: http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html Not sure if that was separate from the averaging mentioned.
  - jallmann 15y ago
    >Has it actually been scientifically proven that humans have a genetic predisposition toward preferring symmetry? http://www.grajfoner.com/Clanki/Perrett%201999%20Symetry%20Attractiveness.pdf http://www.grajfoner.com/Clanki/Perrett%201999%20Symetry%20A... seems to imply so. (I'm sure you can find something else stating the opposite though.) That paper was cited as a reference in the original beautification paper, which can be found here http://www.leyvand.com/research/beautification2008/attractiveness2008.pdf http://www.leyvand.com/research/beautification2008/attractiv....
  - matthew-wegner 15y ago
    The explanation I heard once was that childhood illnesses have a large impact on symmetry. In general, symmetry implies health/fertility, so it makes sense that we're attracted to it.
  - LucioTato 15y ago
    "beauty" relates to desire and reproduction. Simmetry means healthy genes. A gene that makes you see "beauty" on external signs of good genes is a gene that gets naturally selected. So I guess most of the actual population have it and see beauty on simmetry.
- TeMPOraL 15y ago
  I remember an art teacher who demonstrated me that we actually don't like symmetry in faces - he shown us a picture of a woman face composed of one half, and its mirror image. This face was completely symmetric (vertically), but didn't feel quite "right".
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    That seems a good deal less scientific than the numerous studies that have strongly suggested the opposite.
    - TeMPOraL 15y ago
      You are right, of course. I was just providing a data point.
- bitwize 15y ago
  But the face on the left is more beautiful. She has large eyes and lips and a strong jaw -- outstanding features which arrest the gaze. The "beautified" version of her face was just kind of "meh".
  - gnaritas 15y ago
    I think most people would disagree with you on that.
joeyespo 15y ago
> [from the description on the site] There is no written rule to define whether a face is beautiful or if it is not, then the creators followed the principle that what is more closer to the common is better. I initially thought this was the same experiment done a while ago where people rated different faces according to their preferred beauty. Then the algorithm would normalize an input face based on those preferences. Normalizing just to the common face and having it become more beautiful is kind of unintuitive to me. For instance, I wonder what it would look like to run that algorithm on an already generally-accepted beautiful face and see if it became less so.
- amouat 15y ago
  I honestly think you could make that argument for the pictures shown. But that's just my subjective opinion...
wmat 15y ago
I see now that the details state that "It is possible through an algorithm for a computer to process a photo or video and produce a modified image, possibly improved." So the use of "possibly improved" makes me happy. I suppose the naming of the algorithm with 'beautify' helps to describe what it typically would be used for.

by wmat 15y ago

bh42222 15y ago

Human opinion of what's "beautiful" in other human faces is not entirely subjective. It has been know for a while that if you start averaging faces you end up with a "pretty" face. This is because we genetically like symmetry, and averaging out faces makes them very symmetrical.

diiq 15y ago
There was a paper here on HN a few months back that compared averaged faces to faces with unchanged bone structure but smoothed skin; the differences in rated attractiveness were apparently negligible (and average faces with bad skin faired poorly). Averaging removes blemishes. Cartoonists and animators have long contended that some small asymmetries enhance the emotional connection we have with a character --- think of a puppy with one ear that points up, or with a spot over one eye. Sympathy isn't beauty, I admit; I think it might contribute to attraction, though.
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  some small asymmetries enhance the emotional connection Small asymmetries. Which, by design must be built on top of something that is otherwise relatively perfect. Otherwise the asymmetry does not stand out, and the whole thing is just a mess. For example, a mangy old cur with one ear that points up, or a spot over one eye.
wmat 15y ago
Perhaps, but the use of a term like "we genetically like symmetry" bugs me. Has it actually been scientifically proven that humans have a genetic predisposition toward preferring symmetry? My google-fu turned up nothing. Isn't opinion naturally subjective, albeit informed by societal influences one way or the other?
- bh42222 15y ago
  My google-fu also fails me. This is the best I found: http://www.metafilter.com/62173/The-hypnotic-beauty-of-the-average-face http://www.metafilter.com/62173/The-hypnotic-beauty-of-the-a... I based my initial opinion on a documentary about someone who had tried to find the "typical criminal" face by averaging the mugshots of criminals. But to his shock, the resulting face kept turning out beautiful. But again, my google-fu fails me.
- jessriedel 15y ago
  This isn't symmetry per se, but the study referred to here does suggest that beauty is mostly innate: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6355-babies-prefer-to-gaze-upon-beautiful-faces.html http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6355-babies-prefer-to-... (They didn't do any averaging.) This article says that symmetry specifically has also be found to be attractive to babies: http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html Not sure if that was separate from the averaging mentioned.
- jallmann 15y ago
  >Has it actually been scientifically proven that humans have a genetic predisposition toward preferring symmetry? http://www.grajfoner.com/Clanki/Perrett%201999%20Symetry%20Attractiveness.pdf http://www.grajfoner.com/Clanki/Perrett%201999%20Symetry%20A... seems to imply so. (I'm sure you can find something else stating the opposite though.) That paper was cited as a reference in the original beautification paper, which can be found here http://www.leyvand.com/research/beautification2008/attractiveness2008.pdf http://www.leyvand.com/research/beautification2008/attractiv....
- matthew-wegner 15y ago
  The explanation I heard once was that childhood illnesses have a large impact on symmetry. In general, symmetry implies health/fertility, so it makes sense that we're attracted to it.
- LucioTato 15y ago
  "beauty" relates to desire and reproduction. Simmetry means healthy genes. A gene that makes you see "beauty" on external signs of good genes is a gene that gets naturally selected. So I guess most of the actual population have it and see beauty on simmetry.
TeMPOraL 15y ago
I remember an art teacher who demonstrated me that we actually don't like symmetry in faces - he shown us a picture of a woman face composed of one half, and its mirror image. This face was completely symmetric (vertically), but didn't feel quite "right".
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  That seems a good deal less scientific than the numerous studies that have strongly suggested the opposite.
  - TeMPOraL 15y ago
    You are right, of course. I was just providing a data point.
bitwize 15y ago
But the face on the left is more beautiful. She has large eyes and lips and a strong jaw -- outstanding features which arrest the gaze. The "beautified" version of her face was just kind of "meh".
- gnaritas 15y ago
  I think most people would disagree with you on that.

joeyespo 15y ago

> [from the description on the site] There is no written rule to define whether a face is beautiful or if it is not, then the creators followed the principle that what is more closer to the common is better. I initially thought this was the same experiment done a while ago where people rated different faces according to their preferred beauty. Then the algorithm would normalize an input face based on those preferences. Normalizing just to the common face and having it become more beautiful is kind of unintuitive to me. For instance, I wonder what it would look like to run that algorithm on an already generally-accepted beautiful face and see if it became less so.

amouat 15y ago
I honestly think you could make that argument for the pictures shown. But that's just my subjective opinion...

wmat 15y ago

I see now that the details state that "It is possible through an algorithm for a computer to process a photo or video and produce a modified image, possibly improved." So the use of "possibly improved" makes me happy. I suppose the naming of the algorithm with 'beautify' helps to describe what it typically would be used for.