Is there a way we could computer generate an unnaturally attractive

File: dfhhfhf.png (627KB, 1470x701px) Image search: [Google]

627KB, 1470x701px

tall, oval face shape with a tall, not receding forehead and a receding jaw based on profile(the forehead must always be more prominent than the lips/jaw/chin/mouth)

broad, narrow nose

light eyes

light skin

freckles

zero protruding brow ridge with eyebrows that are vertical on the inside and slowly tilt down with the eye on the outside

take paul newman for example. he has most of those features. if you looked at a female paul newman, it'd probably be one of the most attractive women to ever exist and I'm sure we would be able to easily create something to filter women that had those features and it would work because those are objectively attractive features.

As far as I know we know what makes people beautiful. I would say it would be pretty easy, if you have the right people working on it.

>>8722126
I think a slightly protruding brow can look cool and masculine.

File: 1488591206277.png (266KB, 402x586px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 402x586px

>>8722246
but it doesn't. you just think it does, but in reality it's a big indicator of unintelligence, and this is why it's objectively considered unattractive.

pic related is not a protruding brow, and neither is >>8722126

>>8722238
The interesting thing is if you understand what constitutes an attractive face, can you take it up to 11 and design something attractive in an abnormally excessive way?

Like a normal attractive face would be nice to look at, but taking advantage of the basic design of it and using computer technology to enhance it could be visually addictive to look at. Well that's just my idea.

File: beautiful-faces.jpg (35KB, 620x387px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 620x387px

Yes

It's been done several time. Oddly each time they get a different face.

>>8722276
That is not attractive at all.
>>8722080
Do one thing OP. Gather a set of women who you find attractive. Use a Recurrent Neural net to fit it for those set of pictures. Now remove the final dense layer and extract the features. Now take the mean of all these images and feed it at the output. And check your input for the perfect face of your choice.

>>8722333
It's subjective. What is attractive to you may not be attractive to someone else. And people's preference changes.

>>8722363
no, it isn't. there are people who are models because they are objectively attractive, and then there are people who aren't because they aren't objectively attractive. unless you're into weird shit like anime girls only or something, there are objective attractive features, and >>8722126 outlines that

File: attr.png (547KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

547KB, 500x500px

>>8722333
>That is not attractive at all.
??

Apart from the fact that it's a computer generated picture, the woman is extremely good looking. The man seems almost too soft to me, be he's also clearly above average.
I guess Scott Eastwood or the 50 Shades of Gray guy can serve as example for pure handsomeness.
Or most people in Smallville, that show consistent to 20% of closeups of flawless faces.

>>8722276
The woman is too tan, a bit paler would be good.

>>8722276
I referred this as not attractive as it being biased by the person who generated it as mentioned by this gentleman here >>8722363
It is subjective that is why I asked OP to take a set of pictures and follow the RNN method

File: 1455360075017.jpg (176KB, 682x1024px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 682x1024px

>>8722464
Sure, tastes are different, some men even like fat girls, there is no best looking person.
But if you propose to a man
>you can fuck this girl today and experience pleasure, and tomorrow this day starts and nobody remembers and it's as if nothing happened
and 90% would do it with a particlar healthy looking woman, then you can count this woman as "best looking". In that sense it's not subjective, even if all men would never agree on a single face.

File: Perelman,_Grigori_(1966).jpg (14KB, 400x293px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 400x293px

>>8722268
>A protruding brow is an indicator of low intelligence

Brainlet detected.

>>8722363
>>8722464

Yet there are traits that are universally regarded as attractive.

>>8722506
are you implying he is intelligent? he can't even look in a mirror and realize he needs a fucking haircut, shave, and a fucking eyebrow trim.

>>8722517
>needs
He doesn't do it for the bitches, why would he "Need' to do anything lmao

>>8722517
He doesn't need to do shit. He realized that math is superior.to any other pursuit. What are your accomplishments?

I'm sure if someone had the software on this thread they could experiment with this idea.

>>8722425
>Or most people in Smallville, that show consistent to 20% of closeups of flawless faces.
Different times...

>>8722080
no
apart from very base features that are more instinctual, attraction is entirely to do with what society you were raised in and what you were exposed to. Even the base features can be ignored for a lot of people.

>>8722556
>>8722574
lol so he's just autistic then

>>8724750
no it isn't. those are restrictions. a society that lets you choose whatever you want, you will get stuff like >>8722491
>>8722425
>>8722276
>>8722268
>>8722126
>>8722080
because that's what humans actually consider attractive without being told some bias.

science imitates art
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6yPvKjwntQ