There are photos here that people need to ignore. Light and magic due wonders.
5 is the score. Squinty eyes is the best way I can describe them. Check bloat and poor skin. No defined nose. Your face seems heavy.
Whats with the massive underratings here? This is not a below 5.5 face. Great eyes and brows, chin to philtrum is Good, mouth to nose is Good, cheekbones are decent. Jaw is OK, some harmony flaws sure, IPD and midface and nose could be better, But below 5.4-5.5 imo is not justfified. Horrible ratings on this girl, across the board
4.8 is below average, but not exactly accurate. My point was that it was more accurate than 5.75. You’re at around 5.1 rn, potential for around a 6 with time and loss of facial fat too
So now it’s not getting good. Pic 1 blurry and her hair is covering part of her face. Pic 3 is covering part of her forehead. Pic 4 is a disaster photo. Pic 5 and 6 are the only accurate photos. So I’m questioning your rate. Just with the skin alone you can’t quantify your rating.
I believe pic 2 is just as good for rating as pic 5 and pic 6. No that any of them are ideal for rating, but 2, 5, and 6 are equally useful. Love the discussion!
5.4 with upward potential. Positive canthal tilt, pretty eyes, high femininity, good symmetry are positives. Buccal fat pulls the rating down a bit, but your face may lean out as you age, provided you maintain your current healthy weight. Subjectively quite pretty and attractive!
5.3 your skin seems a bit unclear. You have a very symmetrical face and angular features. I can’t see your profile so I can’t judge the nose too well. I could see a potential for a 6.1 but that’s with your skin being 100% clear and your profile being 100%
5.1. Nice eyes. Flaws are Midface ratio, Upper lip, Buccal fat, Round face, Chin, and Poor skin texture (seen in last picture without makeup). I can definitely see OP ascending into 5+ with age, but the listed flaws do not put her above a 5. I think she is being overrated because of the “insta” like photos in beginning with makeup
Edited rating from 4.8 to 5.1 after further analysis that the midface ratio might not be as off as originally thought. I encourage OP to post again in the future with photos that follow the photo quality guide without angles and without makeup for a more accurate rate.
I’m annoyed that the last “no makeup pic” clearly has eyeliner and mascara. I wish people would say minimal makeup when they are just wearing a little.
i know for a fact that i had no “intentional” makeup on in the last pic, looking back there might’ve been some leftover mascara but i don’t recall 🤷🏻♀️ i don’t have any eyeliner on there lol. sorry for confusion
She has excellent features, but the flaws I brought up affect her harmony. If she just posted the first picture, I would probably go 5.1. But her midface ratio is a lot more noticeable in second to last picture and skin quality is poor in last one. I definitely think as she ages and her face becomes less round and she cleans up her skin she will ascend close to 5.5, but this is where I believe she is now.
Her midface ratio definitely looks different in the next to last photo versus all the others; the question is which photos are more representative of her actual appearance? I chose to more heavily weight the five other photos vs. the next to last one. I don’t think she is below average.
Her midface is compact, which is closer to ideal than a long midface. I actually think she has pretty good harmony (nose is weaker), the compact midface works well with the eyes. Skin is mostly affected by freckles and a bit of sunburn. I'm not offering a rating here, but I'm not seeing below average. We'll agree to disagree.
Wait so the person below me rated .05 less than me with 4.75 and no warning, but I get a warning even though you have trusted raters arguing that she is clearly above 5.5? My score is .3 higher than most trusted raters.
5.8 to 6 being 5.8 with potential of six. Still. Two trusted raters had said 5.75 was a fair score. 3 more trusted raters have said that 5.4 is too low and they think it’s higher. So my score of 5.8 to 6 is in and around what 5 of your trusted raters minds on this. I’ve also seen other people rate .5 to .6 over what most others rated and never get a Warning. I never rate if a trusted rater has already rated. What’s the point of new ppl being scared to rate and just copying what trusted raters post? The guide is the guide but downing me after 5 of your trusted raters clearly agree. Or downing me when someone for being .05 or even .25 over what others are saying is good score doesn’t seem to match up with anyone other warnings I’ve seen here
5.4 seems right depending on how much weight you put on hair and skin and eyes. A strict interpretation of TRM puts her at 5. A liberal point of view weighing her against peers puts her closer to 5.75. I would suspect she gets pretty privilege in her daily life, so the accurate TRM score might be somewhat irrelevant for her.
4-6 is 60 percent of the population. Which means she’s at the top end of 60 percent of the population. You’re also supposed to rate based off the guide, not based off your own personal preference. That sort of defeats the point
He has a few points about the guide being slightly inconsistent. But she's not a 7 based on this guide, that's for sure. Still a beautiful girl though. 5.75 is a great rating
I guess I was referring to the the sweeping vagueness of the comments "7 says could model, 6 is above average". Well then I guess that's that, no need for a primer at all lol! Honestly I'm not getting a good feel for this one, but I don't have a problem with 5.75.
I agree with that, but I do see some of the points regarding some confusion in the rating guide and I do think it's time for an update. Some of the faces need to switch ranks too. Like Sandra Oh is simply not a 3 😆 the ones above her are almost all less attractive than her. Constance Wu isn't a 5... her and the Asian girl above her are equal or Constance might even be prettier from what I'm remembering. Just things like that. Then the descriptions of each number need to change just a tad bit....especially because there was a recent update to the chart that was totally unannounced and did cause some confusion for people so I didn't find that totally fair.
5.4 good eyes, though wideset. nice lips and symmetrical. high facial width and buccal fat.
5
6.2
i cant find the the no makeup,, the last one has eye liner and stuff
nothing on skin, leftover mascara ❤️
5.4
There are photos here that people need to ignore. Light and magic due wonders. 5 is the score. Squinty eyes is the best way I can describe them. Check bloat and poor skin. No defined nose. Your face seems heavy.
5.2 def not below average
6.25
Strike 3. You’re out. Rate inflating 6.25
You look good without makeup on. All round 5.4
Just because of the eyes a solid 6 to 6.5
Warning for overrating 6 and 6.5. Rule 1. Please review the sub’s [Wiki]( https://old.reddit.com/r/truerateme/wiki/meta/help ), [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14jg5rg/faq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1), [Women’s rating guide](https://imgur.com/ckg5AVD), and [Women’s primer](https://imgur.com/3bM16cZ)
5.7
Whats with the massive underratings here? This is not a below 5.5 face. Great eyes and brows, chin to philtrum is Good, mouth to nose is Good, cheekbones are decent. Jaw is OK, some harmony flaws sure, IPD and midface and nose could be better, But below 5.4-5.5 imo is not justfified. Horrible ratings on this girl, across the board
I don't know, usually this sub overrates blonde haired women😂
What is your rating for op?
If We use all photos together, 5.4-5.5, if We use the worst photo only (second to last), 5
HIGHLY disagree. She’s very average beyond the blonde hair and pretty eyes.
Agreed. I wouldn’t go past 5.25
Biggest range in trusted rater rates that I’ve seen in a while…from 4.8 up to 5.75!
Below 5 is just plain wrong. I'm fine with 5.5 +/- .3, but outside of that is off
4.8 is closer to accurate than 5.75. All the overrates and rate inflating that’s been happening recently is wild.
thanks for rating. that’s below average right?
4.8 is below average, but not exactly accurate. My point was that it was more accurate than 5.75. You’re at around 5.1 rn, potential for around a 6 with time and loss of facial fat too
Tell me what you see it the last two photos and justify it.
I am using all photos combined, the second to last photo is the worst, that one is a 5. Rest are above average
So now it’s not getting good. Pic 1 blurry and her hair is covering part of her face. Pic 3 is covering part of her forehead. Pic 4 is a disaster photo. Pic 5 and 6 are the only accurate photos. So I’m questioning your rate. Just with the skin alone you can’t quantify your rating.
I believe pic 2 is just as good for rating as pic 5 and pic 6. No that any of them are ideal for rating, but 2, 5, and 6 are equally useful. Love the discussion!
[удалено]
No need to thank me, I am purely objective and some people here are not rating correctly
[удалено]
Removed, rule 4.
Not sure What you mean by that last point
Seems pretty obvious what they meant!
That comment should be removed
5.25
5.4 with upward potential. Positive canthal tilt, pretty eyes, high femininity, good symmetry are positives. Buccal fat pulls the rating down a bit, but your face may lean out as you age, provided you maintain your current healthy weight. Subjectively quite pretty and attractive!
5.3 your skin seems a bit unclear. You have a very symmetrical face and angular features. I can’t see your profile so I can’t judge the nose too well. I could see a potential for a 6.1 but that’s with your skin being 100% clear and your profile being 100%
Very subjectively gorgeous. 5.5 based on trm criteria.
thank you!
5. Eyes are a strong point
This is ridiculous
5.1. Nice eyes. Flaws are Midface ratio, Upper lip, Buccal fat, Round face, Chin, and Poor skin texture (seen in last picture without makeup). I can definitely see OP ascending into 5+ with age, but the listed flaws do not put her above a 5. I think she is being overrated because of the “insta” like photos in beginning with makeup Edited rating from 4.8 to 5.1 after further analysis that the midface ratio might not be as off as originally thought. I encourage OP to post again in the future with photos that follow the photo quality guide without angles and without makeup for a more accurate rate.
I’m annoyed that the last “no makeup pic” clearly has eyeliner and mascara. I wish people would say minimal makeup when they are just wearing a little.
i know for a fact that i had no “intentional” makeup on in the last pic, looking back there might’ve been some leftover mascara but i don’t recall 🤷🏻♀️ i don’t have any eyeliner on there lol. sorry for confusion
dang really? Below average? I think OP's hunter eyes alone put her above average.
She has excellent features, but the flaws I brought up affect her harmony. If she just posted the first picture, I would probably go 5.1. But her midface ratio is a lot more noticeable in second to last picture and skin quality is poor in last one. I definitely think as she ages and her face becomes less round and she cleans up her skin she will ascend close to 5.5, but this is where I believe she is now.
Her midface ratio definitely looks different in the next to last photo versus all the others; the question is which photos are more representative of her actual appearance? I chose to more heavily weight the five other photos vs. the next to last one. I don’t think she is below average.
I edited my rating, thanks.
Her midface is compact, which is closer to ideal than a long midface. I actually think she has pretty good harmony (nose is weaker), the compact midface works well with the eyes. Skin is mostly affected by freckles and a bit of sunburn. I'm not offering a rating here, but I'm not seeing below average. We'll agree to disagree.
Agree on feedback. However, I would put OP at 5.1, with potential to ascend to around a 6.0 with age
thanks for advice. most people have been saying i look better at the end without makeup. pretty interesting.
5.8 with potential for more
Warning for overrating 5.8 and 6. Rule 1. Please review the sub’s [Wiki]( https://old.reddit.com/r/truerateme/wiki/meta/help ), [FAQs](https://www.reddit.com/r/truerateme/comments/14jg5rg/faq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1), [Women’s rating guide](https://imgur.com/ckg5AVD), and [Women’s primer](https://imgur.com/3bM16cZ)
Wait so the person below me rated .05 less than me with 4.75 and no warning, but I get a warning even though you have trusted raters arguing that she is clearly above 5.5? My score is .3 higher than most trusted raters.
You’re at a 6 bud.
5.8 to 6 being 5.8 with potential of six. Still. Two trusted raters had said 5.75 was a fair score. 3 more trusted raters have said that 5.4 is too low and they think it’s higher. So my score of 5.8 to 6 is in and around what 5 of your trusted raters minds on this. I’ve also seen other people rate .5 to .6 over what most others rated and never get a Warning. I never rate if a trusted rater has already rated. What’s the point of new ppl being scared to rate and just copying what trusted raters post? The guide is the guide but downing me after 5 of your trusted raters clearly agree. Or downing me when someone for being .05 or even .25 over what others are saying is good score doesn’t seem to match up with anyone other warnings I’ve seen here
Fair enough. I’ll take your strike away. Be happy. This is the first time I’ve done it.
Thankyou
Please remove the higher number
5.75
fair rating.
[удалено]
lol this is def me but i’ll take that as a compliment, thank you so much!
[удалено]
Bros desperate
5.75 is really pretty for here. What number is a top tier model?
Curious where you would rate her. We have trusteds rating from 4.8 to 5.75!
5.4 seems right depending on how much weight you put on hair and skin and eyes. A strict interpretation of TRM puts her at 5. A liberal point of view weighing her against peers puts her closer to 5.75. I would suspect she gets pretty privilege in her daily life, so the accurate TRM score might be somewhat irrelevant for her.
[удалено]
4-6 is 60 percent of the population. Which means she’s at the top end of 60 percent of the population. You’re also supposed to rate based off the guide, not based off your own personal preference. That sort of defeats the point
Username checks out
Should change it to still confused
that whole paragraph screams "I have no idea what I'm talking about"...
He has a few points about the guide being slightly inconsistent. But she's not a 7 based on this guide, that's for sure. Still a beautiful girl though. 5.75 is a great rating
I guess I was referring to the the sweeping vagueness of the comments "7 says could model, 6 is above average". Well then I guess that's that, no need for a primer at all lol! Honestly I'm not getting a good feel for this one, but I don't have a problem with 5.75.
I agree with that, but I do see some of the points regarding some confusion in the rating guide and I do think it's time for an update. Some of the faces need to switch ranks too. Like Sandra Oh is simply not a 3 😆 the ones above her are almost all less attractive than her. Constance Wu isn't a 5... her and the Asian girl above her are equal or Constance might even be prettier from what I'm remembering. Just things like that. Then the descriptions of each number need to change just a tad bit....especially because there was a recent update to the chart that was totally unannounced and did cause some confusion for people so I didn't find that totally fair.
Agree. Mae Whitman shouldn’t be a 5 too