Is RealSmile actually accurate?
We scored the same face from three different photos each. If the AI was random, the scores would jump around wildly. They don't — they land within a few points of each other.
Timothée Chalamet
Actor, measured across 3 red-carpet photos
Variance
±3 pts
Front, soft light
82
¾ turn, natural light
84
Stage lighting
81
Average: 82/100 · all three photos within 3 points.
Zendaya
Actor, measured across 3 editorial photos
Variance
±3 pts
Studio front
89
Street / daylight
87
Vogue cover
90
Average: 89/100 · all three photos within 3 points.
Henry Cavill
Actor, measured across 3 photos
Variance
±3 pts
Clean-shaven
86
Stubble
87
Beard
84
Average: 86/100 · all three photos within 3 points.
Anonymous user A
Verified paid scan, 3 selfies same day
Variance
±3 pts
Morning, bathroom light
67
Midday, window light
70
Evening, overhead
68
Average: 68/100 · all three photos within 3 points.
Why this works
RealSmile measures 17 geometric ratios (canthal tilt, FWHR, golden ratio, lower-third proportion, etc.) — not vibes. Ratios are stable across photos because they come from the distance between facial landmarks, which don't change based on lighting or mood. Free tools like UMax use overall-vibe CNNs that swing ±15 points photo-to-photo. We don't.
Methodology
How a photo becomes a score
Four stages. No magic, no black box.
Photo upload
Front-facing image, neutral expression preferred.
→ JPG/PNG normalized to a working resolution before analysis.
Landmark detection
468 facial points mapped to eyes, nose, jaw, mouth, brow.
→ Each point is an (x, y) coordinate on the face mesh.
Geometric ratios
FWHR, canthal tilt, gonial angle, phi, palpebral fissure.
→ Distances between landmark pairs become unitless ratios.
Score + composite
Per-metric scores roll up into a single composite read.
→ Same ratios + same weights = same score across photos.
Every metric, in the open
How each metric is measured
All 17 metrics, how each one is computed from the facial landmarks, the range it's scored against, and the research behind it. Competitors charge for this breakdown — here it's free.
| Metric | How it's measured | Ideal range | Research basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Facial Symmetry | Mirror-distance of paired landmarks (jaw, eyes, brows, mouth corners) against the nose-to-chin midline. | 92–100% · population average ~85% | Grammer & Thornhill, 1994 · Evolution & Human Behavior |
| Canthal Tilt | Angle of the line from each eye’s inner to outer corner, relative to horizontal. | 4–7° positive (upward outer corners) | Bashour, 2006 · Annals of Plastic Surgery |
| Facial Width-to-Height Ratio (FWHR) | Cheekbone-to-cheekbone width divided by brow-line-to-upper-lip height. | Men 1.85–2.1 · Women 1.65–1.85 | Lefevre et al., 2014 · PLOS ONE |
| Facial Thirds Balance | Brow→nose-base and nose-base→chin segment heights, scored against three equal thirds. | Closest to 33% / 33% / 33% | Jefferson, 2004 · British Journal of Orthodontics |
| Eye Spacing | Inter-eye (inner-corner) gap divided by average eye width. | 0.9–1.1 (≈ one eye-width between eyes) | Farkas et al., 1985 · Anthropometry of the Head and Face |
| Jawline Angle | Angle of the jaw edge from the chin point up toward each gonial corner. | Men 44–54° · Women 50–62° | Rexbye et al., 2006 · Age and Ageing |
| Nose Proportion | Nostril-to-nostril nose width as a percentage of cheekbone face width. | 22–26% of face width | Farkas, 1994 · Anthropometry of the Head and Face |
| Lip Ratio | Upper-lip height divided by lower-lip height (slightly fuller lower lip preferred). | 0.5–0.8 upper:lower | Popenko et al., 2017 · JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery |
| Midface Ratio | Eye-center-to-mouth-center distance divided by total face height. | 0.42–0.48 (compact midface) | Marquardt, 2002 · Journal of Clinical Orthodontics |
| Eye Shape (Hunter Eye Index) | Eye width divided by eye-opening height — higher reads more narrow/“hunter,” lower reads rounder. | 2.8–3.5 width:height | Wick et al., 2008 · Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics |
| Brow Arch | Peak-of-brow rise divided by brow span (curvature of each eyebrow). | Men 0.15–0.28 (flatter) · Women 0.25–0.40 (arched) | Rosen et al., 2015 · JAMA Dermatology |
| Philtrum Ratio | Nose-base-to-upper-lip distance as a fraction of total lower-face height (an aging marker). | 0.26–0.35 of lower face | Sarnoff & Gotkin, 2012 · Journal of Drugs in Dermatology |
| Chin Proportion | Lower-lip-to-chin-tip height as a fraction of lower-face height. | Men 0.32–0.42 · Women 0.28–0.38 of lower face | Mendelson & Wong, 2012 · Aesthetic Surgery Journal |
| Brow-Eye Proximity | Brow-to-eye vertical gap divided by face height (closer = more prominent brow ridge). | Men 0.03–0.07 · Women 0.05–0.09 | Whitfield & Jordan, 2009 · Perception |
| Jaw Taper (V-Shape) | Jaw width divided by cheekbone width — lower means a more V-tapered face. | Men 0.72–0.85 · Women 0.62–0.75 | Fink et al., 2006 · Perception |
| Golden Ratio Score | Proximity of face height-to-width, midface, and orbital ratios to phi (1.618), averaged. | 80–100 / 100 (closer to phi = higher) | Marquardt, 2002 · Journal of Clinical Orthodontics |
| Orbital Tilt Symmetry | Left-eye canthal tilt vs right-eye canthal tilt — how closely the two eyes match. | 85–100% match (most faces vary 5–10°) | Little et al., 2011 · Proceedings of the Royal Society B |
Facial Symmetry
Mirror-distance of paired landmarks (jaw, eyes, brows, mouth corners) against the nose-to-chin midline.
Ideal92–100% · population average ~85%
SourceGrammer & Thornhill, 1994 · Evolution & Human Behavior
Canthal Tilt
Angle of the line from each eye’s inner to outer corner, relative to horizontal.
Ideal4–7° positive (upward outer corners)
SourceBashour, 2006 · Annals of Plastic Surgery
Facial Width-to-Height Ratio (FWHR)
Cheekbone-to-cheekbone width divided by brow-line-to-upper-lip height.
IdealMen 1.85–2.1 · Women 1.65–1.85
SourceLefevre et al., 2014 · PLOS ONE
Facial Thirds Balance
Brow→nose-base and nose-base→chin segment heights, scored against three equal thirds.
IdealClosest to 33% / 33% / 33%
SourceJefferson, 2004 · British Journal of Orthodontics
Eye Spacing
Inter-eye (inner-corner) gap divided by average eye width.
Ideal0.9–1.1 (≈ one eye-width between eyes)
SourceFarkas et al., 1985 · Anthropometry of the Head and Face
Jawline Angle
Angle of the jaw edge from the chin point up toward each gonial corner.
IdealMen 44–54° · Women 50–62°
SourceRexbye et al., 2006 · Age and Ageing
Nose Proportion
Nostril-to-nostril nose width as a percentage of cheekbone face width.
Ideal22–26% of face width
SourceFarkas, 1994 · Anthropometry of the Head and Face
Lip Ratio
Upper-lip height divided by lower-lip height (slightly fuller lower lip preferred).
Ideal0.5–0.8 upper:lower
SourcePopenko et al., 2017 · JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery
Midface Ratio
Eye-center-to-mouth-center distance divided by total face height.
Ideal0.42–0.48 (compact midface)
SourceMarquardt, 2002 · Journal of Clinical Orthodontics
Eye Shape (Hunter Eye Index)
Eye width divided by eye-opening height — higher reads more narrow/“hunter,” lower reads rounder.
Ideal2.8–3.5 width:height
SourceWick et al., 2008 · Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics
Brow Arch
Peak-of-brow rise divided by brow span (curvature of each eyebrow).
IdealMen 0.15–0.28 (flatter) · Women 0.25–0.40 (arched)
SourceRosen et al., 2015 · JAMA Dermatology
Philtrum Ratio
Nose-base-to-upper-lip distance as a fraction of total lower-face height (an aging marker).
Ideal0.26–0.35 of lower face
SourceSarnoff & Gotkin, 2012 · Journal of Drugs in Dermatology
Chin Proportion
Lower-lip-to-chin-tip height as a fraction of lower-face height.
IdealMen 0.32–0.42 · Women 0.28–0.38 of lower face
SourceMendelson & Wong, 2012 · Aesthetic Surgery Journal
Brow-Eye Proximity
Brow-to-eye vertical gap divided by face height (closer = more prominent brow ridge).
IdealMen 0.03–0.07 · Women 0.05–0.09
SourceWhitfield & Jordan, 2009 · Perception
Jaw Taper (V-Shape)
Jaw width divided by cheekbone width — lower means a more V-tapered face.
IdealMen 0.72–0.85 · Women 0.62–0.75
SourceFink et al., 2006 · Perception
Golden Ratio Score
Proximity of face height-to-width, midface, and orbital ratios to phi (1.618), averaged.
Ideal80–100 / 100 (closer to phi = higher)
SourceMarquardt, 2002 · Journal of Clinical Orthodontics
Orbital Tilt Symmetry
Left-eye canthal tilt vs right-eye canthal tilt — how closely the two eyes match.
Ideal85–100% match (most faces vary 5–10°)
SourceLittle et al., 2011 · Proceedings of the Royal Society B
No thumb on the scale
Every score is derived from fixed geometric ratios and published research, scored against ranges calibrated to human-panel attractiveness data — not tuned to flatter you. Two faces with the same measurements get the same number. A RealSmile score is one signal — geometric structure from a single photo — not a verdict on you.
Limitations
What this AI cannot measure
Geometry from a 2D photo has hard boundaries. Here's where they are.
Skin texture nuance
Pore-level detail, micro-blemishes, and skin quality aren't encoded in landmark geometry.
3D depth from a 2D photo
Projection from one angle estimates depth; it does not measure it directly. Profile differences may be flattened.
Voice, charisma, energy
A still photo carries zero information about how you sound, how you hold attention, or how you make a room feel.
Movement and expression dynamics
Smile asymmetry in motion, eye contact, micro-expressions — none of that survives a single frozen frame.
Body proportion context
Height, frame, posture, and body composition all shape perceived attractiveness and aren't in a face-only crop.
Cultural beauty preference variance
Geometry is universal; preference isn't. Different regions and subcultures weight the same features differently.
Honest take
A RealSmile score is one signal — geometric symmetry from a single photo — not a verdict on you as a person. Treat it as a baseline you can improve with grooming, lighting, and angles, not as a number that defines your worth.
Free score. Full report $14.99.