Join 3,514 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Data-Driven Enhancement of Facial Attractiveness
September 8, 2008 8:44 AM   Subscribe

Data-Driven Enhancement of Facial Attractiveness
posted by phrontist (39 comments total) 8 users marked this as a favorite

 
I guess I'm a little surprised that one can't submit one's own portrait for "beautification". Or am I just missing the link?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 8:50 AM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


Application Demo (ZIP) - Coming Soon !
posted by phrontist at 8:52 AM on September 8, 2008


Warning: Use of this product may attract people who use this product.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 8:57 AM on September 8, 2008 [3 favorites]


I guess I'm a little surprised that one can't submit one's own portrait for "beautification".

You can get started on whipping up your own beautifier with the sinister and intriguing sounding Aleix Face Database.
posted by shothotbot at 8:59 AM on September 8, 2008


I wonder what the results would be if any number of people famed for their looks were "beautified". Idiosyncratic beauty transformed into Abercrombie and Fitch models, I guess.

You have to download the video if only for the disco soundtrack that is dropped in over a large set of before and afters. Cheese^3.
posted by maudlin at 9:02 AM on September 8, 2008


I see lips that are more even and straighter in the corners, eyes that are wider set, eyebrows that are level, a squarer jaw on the male and longer chin on the female.

Scrolling down and seeing those other faces one thing is for certain: expect to see this used in most print ads (and porn!) in the coming years.
posted by furtive at 9:03 AM on September 8, 2008


Well, they'll have to build a new set of 2D warp fields for porn, won't they?
posted by maudlin at 9:10 AM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


The auto-beautification seems fairly minimal (if negative) in post cases. But the face DB interests me. I wonder if it's broken out by age, race, sex and orientation of the voter. That could be pretty interesting. Ooh, and then apply the beautification for each subgroup and see how they'd each "like" to see people.

I see a future in targeted image-based advertising.
posted by DU at 9:13 AM on September 8, 2008


An invaluable tool for plastic surgeons, I'm sure...
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 9:13 AM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


I see lips that are more even and straighter in the corners

I think the real key there is that frowns have been removed. Happy people are hotter!

The improved faces are much more symmetrical as well.
posted by CaseyB at 9:17 AM on September 8, 2008 [2 favorites]


Another thing to add to the long list of things mefites can frown on. (pun intended)
posted by Zambrano at 9:26 AM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


I skimmed the paper and it seems as if they did 3 things: 0) restrict themselves to using neutral frontal views and only analyzing facial geometry. 1) develop an algorithm to analyze facial geometry on about 80 points (outline of face, eyebrows, eyes, nose, mouth) 2) map faces to attractiveness 3) do some optimization to move a given face toward a more attractive geometry while staying in the realm of possible faces.
posted by shothotbot at 9:42 AM on September 8, 2008


Well, what really struck me as interesting about this is the possibilities in could some day provide for video. Any kid with a copy of photoshop could do these manipulations manually, but it raises the (still distant) possibility that you could enhance someone's appearance in film automatically. The simulacrum of celebrity image management could reach new heights.

Imagine an "enhance" button on your facebook profile.
Cameras could have it built in!
Yearbook photos?
"Mirrors"?
posted by phrontist at 9:46 AM on September 8, 2008


(Hell, you could wear a head mounted binocular display to make everyone around you beautiful... like an expensive, nerdy, side effect free booze)
posted by phrontist at 9:50 AM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


Oh, joy. Just wait until this hits Craigslist.
posted by Samizdata at 9:59 AM on September 8, 2008


phrontistPoster: "(Hell, you could wear a head mounted binocular display to make everyone around you beautiful... like an expensive, nerdy, side effect free booze)"

For some reason, and I know it's not directly on point, I'm reminded of this.
posted by WCityMike at 10:01 AM on September 8, 2008


I'd hit it. And by 'it', I mean the Support Vector Regression-algorithm, of course.
posted by signal at 10:06 AM on September 8, 2008


This will only be useful when they can combine it with the "Myspace Pose".
posted by mkultra at 10:13 AM on September 8, 2008


I guess I'm a little surprised that one can't submit one's own portrait for "beautification". Or am I just missing the link?

Please, flap, it would be impossible to make either of us more beautiful. Now, grab your brandy and cigar and let's head to the harem room for tonight's entertainment.
posted by jonmc at 10:18 AM on September 8, 2008


To this software, I say: BRING IT ON
posted by Mach5 at 10:19 AM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


Oh, joy. Just wait until this hits Craigslist.

If you are making dating decisions based on photos posted to Craigslist, then you have problems that this software doesn't yet address.
posted by DU at 10:32 AM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


Oh, yeah, Mach5? It could be worse.
posted by jonmc at 10:34 AM on September 8, 2008


I almost always like the ones on the left better. Does this mean I'm attracted to unattractiveness?
posted by Tehanu at 10:45 AM on September 8, 2008


WCityMike: I love that story, but I don't think you can really compare. What I'm talking about wouldn't actually change anyone, just how people elected to see them. So you could still be as true to yourself as you'd like.
posted by phrontist at 10:48 AM on September 8, 2008


jonmc: I see your ugliness and raise you this.
posted by Mach5 at 10:49 AM on September 8, 2008


Eh, its a little hit or miss.
posted by delmoi at 11:21 AM on September 8, 2008


Let's hope this works out better than that whole Auto-tune thing has.
posted by eritain at 11:35 AM on September 8, 2008


Aaargh signal, the cooter timer was ten days in!
posted by Pronoiac at 11:48 AM on September 8, 2008


In the future we'll all look like Scarlett Johansson and speak like t-pain.
posted by phrontist at 11:50 AM on September 8, 2008


Apparently all you really need to be more beautiful is a better brow wax.
posted by availablelight at 12:15 PM on September 8, 2008


Apparently all you really need to be more beautiful is a better brow wax.

heh. I was in a bar (that was once owned by Al Qaeda, long story) and some incredibly drunk woman told me that I had 'pretty eyes' but I 'needed to wax my eyebrows.' She also later offered to give me her dress in exchange for the Partridge Family t-shirt I was wearing, but i demurred.
posted by jonmc at 12:28 PM on September 8, 2008


related.
posted by yonation at 2:04 PM on September 8, 2008


I think the real key there is that frowns have been removed. Happy people are hotter!

What's interesting is that nearly all of the faces are changed from relatively neutral (or frowning slightly) to smiling a little bit, except the last example where a smile has been turned into a more neutral expression. To me, the before photo for the last guy is clearly more attractive than the after photo. It seems that a lot of the effect might be due to frown reduction.
posted by ssg at 2:34 PM on September 8, 2008


attractive = large forehead. So it seems.
posted by Nothing at 4:06 PM on September 8, 2008


attractive = large forehead.

here you go.
posted by Pronoiac at 5:02 PM on September 8, 2008


attractive = large forehead.

Up to a point, maybe.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 5:12 PM on September 8, 2008


Up to a point?
posted by Pronoiac at 5:16 PM on September 8, 2008 [1 favorite]


meh. they just reversed the wiring on a driver's licence camera.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:40 PM on September 8, 2008 [2 favorites]


The attractive people all have easier to read faces. There's not much to read, but it's not conflicted in any way.

For faces that don't photograph well, how would this work? I guess if you can't be on TV, you just don't rate.

Did they thin the readheads eyebrows? Or is she just a bit lighter overall with more open eyes? I got cross-eyed trying to figure that out.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 9:58 PM on September 8, 2008


« Older MSNBC is removing Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthe...  |  As simple as a typo. Your vot... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments