Facial Ratios Calculator — FWHR, Midface, Thirds & Every Ratio, On-Device
Measure every ratio in one run: upload a front-facing photo and this calculator reads your facial thirds, FWHR, jaw width, midface ratio, face height-to-width, mouth-to-nose and eye spacing — entirely on your device. Reference values included; a grid, not a verdict.
🔒 Free measuring runs on your device; the AI readout can optionally attach your photo — generation-only, never stored.
What facial ratios actually measure
A facial ratio is one distance divided by another — the geometry of your face reduced to comparable numbers. Ratios survive photo scale (a face twice as far away yields the same numbers) and roll-corrected landmarks keep them stable. This calculator reads every ratio the full FaceRuler engine scores, plus the midface ratio the community asks for most.
Two honest clarifications before the numbers:
The golden-ratio myth. The internet's "1.618 law" is not what measured faces do. Decades of facial anthropometry (the Farkas datasets) find real faces average a height-to-width of about 1.46 — not 1.618 — and controlled studies find only weak, inconsistent links between golden-ratio proximity and rated attractiveness. We reference the measured bands, not the myth (the full φ story lives in the golden ratio face calculator).
The FWHR double scale. This tool reports FWHR on its own measurement scale, where the population centers near 2.75 — not the literature's 1.85–1.9. Same geometry, different anchor convention; the page and your result card both use the tool scale, so compare like with like.
The seven ratios this calculator reads
1. Facial thirds — reference ≈ 33% / 33% / 33%
Face height split at the nose bridge (nasion) and nose base (subnasale): upper / mid / lower thirds. Equal thirds read as balanced; a heavy lower third reads long-jawed, a heavy upper third reads forehead-dominant.
2. FWHR — tool scale ≈ 2.75
Bizygomatic width (cheekbone to cheekbone) ÷ brow-to-lip height. Higher values read wider, more dominant; the community tracks it as a masculinity cue. Compare your reading against 2.75 on this tool's scale (the literature's 1.85 uses different anchors — see the note above).
3. Jaw / face width — reference ≈ 0.88
Bigonial width (jaw angle to jaw angle) ÷ bizygomatic width. Higher reads square, lower reads tapered toward heart-shaped.
4. Midface ratio — community ideal 1.0 – 1.1
Interpupillary distance ÷ midface height (nasion to subnasale). The community's favorite "compact vs long midface" number: below ~0.9 reads as a long midface, above ~1.1 as compact. One honest flag: this is a community convention — the surgical literature does not use this metric, and the full engine does not score it. It is shown because everyone asks for it.
5. Face height / width — reference ≈ 1.46 (± 0.12)
Vertical face length ÷ face width. The number the golden-ratio myth gets wrong: measured faces cluster near 1.46, not 1.618.
6. Mouth / nose width — reference ≈ 1.55 (± 0.25)
Mouth width ÷ nose width. Wide of the band reads broad-smiled, narrow reads tight.
7. Intercanthal / nose width — reference ≈ 1.0
The gap between your eyes ÷ nose width. Near 1.0 means your eye gap roughly equals your nose — the classic "one eye-width apart" rule, actually measured.
Reading your midface number
| Your reading | What the community calls it |
|---|---|
| Below 0.90 | Long midface |
| 0.90 – 1.00 | Slightly long |
| 1.00 – 1.10 | The community ideal band |
| Above 1.10 | Compact midface — often read as youthful |
Two camps exist inside the community (some argue 0.95–1.00 is the true sweet spot, citing actor-face analyses), and no clinical literature validates any of it. Treat the band as vocabulary for describing geometry, not a grade.
See it run: the same engine, seven ratios
Preparing the example study — it measures itself as you reach it…
How to take a photo the calculator can measure
- Face the camera straight on — rotation distorts width-vs-height ratios more than any other reading.
- Neutral expression, mouth closed — a smile widens the mouth and shortens the lower third.
- Relax your brows — FWHR's height anchor runs brow-to-lip; raised brows change the denominator directly.
- Hair off the forehead — the thirds need the hairline anchor.
- Even, front-facing light — shadows blur the jaw and nose base landmarks.
Related tools and guides
Measure something else:
- Attractiveness test — the full 1–10 rating, percentile and 8-metric breakdown
- Golden ratio face calculator — the three φ ratios, honestly framed
- Canthal tilt calculator — each eye's angle in degrees
- Face shape detector — oval, round, square and four more
- PSL calculator — the full 8-metric calculator
Read next:
- PSL scale — the full scale, tiers and methodology
- What is PSL? — where the 0–8 scale comes from
- Looksmaxxing dictionary — midface, FWHR and the rest of the vocabulary
- Am I pretty test — the question behind the numbers
- Methodology — every reference value and weight we use
References
Farkas LG. Anthropometry of the Head and Face. 2nd ed. New York: Raven Press; 1994 — the source of the thirds, width and intercanthal reference bands used above.
Lefevre CE, Lewis GJ, Perrett DI, et al. Telling facial metrics: facial width is associated with testosterone levels in men. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2013;34(4):273–279. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.03.005 — the FWHR method and anchor convention behind the literature scale.
Looksmaxxing community threads on the midface ratio (ideal bands 1.0–1.1 and the 0.95–1.0 minority position), and a surgeon's honest guide noting the metric does not appear in surgical literature — cited as community convention, not clinical evidence.
Rhodes G. The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology. 2006;57:199–226. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208 — averageness, symmetry and dimorphism carry attractiveness; single-ratio ideals do not.
Measure all seven ratios — one photo, seconds
On your device, no sign-up — every ratio the engine reads, plus the midface number, with honest reference bands.
Run the free calculator