Bruce Wayne
Super Freak
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Messages
- 827
- Reaction score
- 7
I think it's fine. The are a lot of factors contributing to the length.
First the expression. The grit of the teeth causes the nostrils to slant upward and the nose tip to dip down giving the impression of length. It's also the lighting of the work file. From that angle and lighting, both the fullness around the nose bridge and the bottom of the nostrils/tissue area where it meets the philtrum(mustache area) are washed out in the light also giving the impression of length. The columella(tissue area between the nostrils just above the philtrim) is shadowed from all angles due to the nose tip dipping down. Another factor.
All of that whereas the nose looks more natural and full when viewed from the front.
From that test print they posted earlier this month, the nose looked fine. I can't imagine they made it longer since then. Looks about right...
First the expression. The grit of the teeth causes the nostrils to slant upward and the nose tip to dip down giving the impression of length. It's also the lighting of the work file. From that angle and lighting, both the fullness around the nose bridge and the bottom of the nostrils/tissue area where it meets the philtrum(mustache area) are washed out in the light also giving the impression of length. The columella(tissue area between the nostrils just above the philtrim) is shadowed from all angles due to the nose tip dipping down. Another factor.
All of that whereas the nose looks more natural and full when viewed from the front.
From that test print they posted earlier this month, the nose looked fine. I can't imagine they made it longer since then. Looks about right...