Limb Lengthening Forum
Limb Lengthening Surgery => Height & Proportions => Topic started by: abdoali5672 on September 11, 2018, 03:11:58 PM
-
Well, my inseam is 82 cm , SH is 83-85 i can't measure correctly, height is 168 , how will i look like at 178 cm (5 femur 5 tibia)?
-
Well, my inseam is 82 cm , SH is 83-85 i can't measure correctly, height is 168 , how will i look like at 178 cm (5 femur 5 tibia)?
Put it like this I have an inseam of 78 and I’m 5’10 so if I had your inseam then I’d be 5’11-6’0 lol life really isn’t fair 😂
-
Pump
-
Well, my inseam is 82 cm , SH is 83-85 i can't measure correctly, height is 168 , how will i look like at 178 cm (5 femur 5 tibia)?
82 inseam at newly discovered 5'9 crew checking in,op you would look very disproportionate,with an added 10cm's of leg length.6'4 leg length at 5'10 pretty much.
-
You are already inside the spectrum of long legs but in the limit of the medio nivel and long leg.
168cm height for sewing 82cm you are on legs: torso = 48:52
At 10cm you stay in
178cm high for sewing 92cm
their ratio lies in (legs: torso = 51:49) which is still within normal for the standard long legs there are many people with this relationship.
just to leave a comparison I have
178cm high for sewing 83cm
my relationship is legs: torso = 46:54
if I do 7cm femur I go to legs: torso = 48:52 which is the beginning of the long legs spectrum
-
Put it like this I have an inseam of 78 and I’m 5’10 so if I had your inseam then I’d be 5’11-6’0 lol life really isn’t fair 😂
78cm of true inseam ? crotch to floor not crotch to ankle ?
for comparison mine is 76.5cm, 171 cm height
-
78cm of true inseam ? crotch to floor not crotch to ankle ?
for comparison mine is 76.5cm, 171 cm height
To floor yeah I have short legs for my height
-
Is an inseam slightly over 50% even that bad? After I'm finished I'll be somewhere around 49.2-50% Atm I'm at 45.6%.
-
That would look bad, yes. Anything over 48% looks bad.
-
Ignore what these people say. You will look normal. Proportions are bs. There's been so many studies to show that. If anything, I recently saw a study of women finding the man with a longer lower body compared to upper body more attractive than a man who is exactly the same size but more proportionate.
Long legs gets you the ladies. (evolution bro)
If you look weird to yourself, instead of wearing your trousers and boxers just below the belly button, wear them around pubic range. This is a good 10-20cm difference depending how your body. (Athletic looking men tend to do this anyways, shows the V).
You can literally gain 15cm in height and keep the same proportions as before by adjusting your clothes. Thought enough people would know that from wearing lifts/elevator shoes alone.
-
http://speedtheory.co.nz/the-difference-between-boys-girls-part-1/
47.6% is average, so there are more than enough people naturally above that. Men with 5% longer legs than average are more attractive.
https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/10/28/men-slightly-longer-legs-are-more-attractive-women-12044
-
He might look the same wearing clothes, but what about when hes nked, or wearing a bathing suit? His proportions would be noticeably off at 50%.
-
There is this Korean celebrity who is known for his long legs, standing at 180cm his leg (outer) was measured to be around 107cm so its safe to assume his inseam is 90~95cm which would put him at 50%+
Personally think he looks fine, and some people like long legs)(but some may not). If I got LL I would definitely pass 50% at just a few cm but personally I don't think my legs look "long" long (not short, but nothing "wow your legs are long")
Here is a picture from his Instagram that shows him in a tailored suit (+ some platforms so would look even longer) https://www.instagram.com/p/BsIECdug2YR
I hope posting links to other people was not against the forum rules if so I will take it down asap.
-
You can hide bad proportions with clothes, so of course hes no going to look bad. A ratio like that at when you're nked will look bad, though.