Sample Report — Face Rater

This is a sample report generated from demo data. It does not describe a real person. Every number below is illustrative. The structure — what you receive after a one-time $6.99 purchase — is exactly what a real report contains.

Score summary

• Reference score: 74 / 100 — tier: Balanced
• Tier scale: 85–100 Harmonious · 70–84 Balanced · 55–69 Developing · below 55 Starting Point

This score is a custom photo-geometry reference score defined by this site. It reflects measurements taken from one photo, and it shifts with lighting, camera angle, and device. It is not a judgment of your appearance or your worth, and it is not a ranking against other people.

Your three measurements, fully explained

1. Facial symmetry — 78 / 100

What it is. How closely paired landmarks on the left and right sides of your face mirror each other around an estimated central axis.

How it was calculated. We estimate a mid axis from the midpoint between your eye centers, the nose bridge, and the philtrum — never from the nose tip alone. We then compare paired points (outer eye corners, inner eye corners, cheeks, brows, mouth corners) against their mirror positions across that axis, after correcting for head tilt (in this photo: 2.1° roll, corrected before scoring).

Your numbers (demo data). Mean mirror deviation: 1.8% of visible face width. Largest single pair: left eye sits ~1.2% higher than the right (relative to face width). Overall symmetry falls inside the reference band.

Reference band. Mean deviation under ~2.5% of face width currently scores in the top range. Reference bands are initial values pending calibration — treat them as orientation, not fact.

What this cannot tell you. Everyone's face is asymmetric to some degree; small deviations are normal and usually invisible in person. This number says nothing about health, genetics, or attractiveness in absolute terms.

2. Visible face proportions — 71 / 100

What it is. The shape ratios of the face visible in the photo: overall width-to-height, and how the visible upper, middle, and lower face compare.

How it was calculated. Visible face height runs from the top-of-face landmark (MediaPipe point 10 — note this is not the hairline) to the chin (point 152); visible width spans the cheek landmarks. Segment ratios use brow-to-nose-base and nose-base-to-chin distances. All distances are converted to a consistent pixel scale before comparison.

Your numbers (demo data). Width-to-height ratio: 1.34. Upper-to-middle segment ratio: 0.97. Lower-to-middle ratio: 1.06.

Reference band. A width-to-height ratio between roughly 1.2 and 1.5 is currently treated as the balanced zone. This is an initial, wide band pending calibration against a licensed sample set.

What this cannot tell you. A photo flattens three-dimensional structure. Lens focal length and camera distance can stretch or compress these ratios by several percent — the same face can score differently on two phones.

3. Eye-area harmony — 73 / 100

What it is. Spacing and balance within the eye region: the distance between the inner eye corners relative to face width, and how similar the two eyes are in width.

How it was calculated. Inner-canthal distance ÷ visible face width, plus the percentage difference between left and right eye widths.

Your numbers (demo data). Inner-canthal distance: 31% of face width. Eye-width asymmetry: 2.4%.

Reference band. Roughly 28–34% currently scores as balanced. Initial value, pending calibration.

What this cannot tell you. Eye spacing photographed up close with a wide-angle (selfie) lens reads wider than it looks in person.

Calibrated observations (demo data)

A real report contains 5–8 observations like these. Anything we cannot measure from your photo is stated plainly instead of being scored.

1. Symmetry is your strongest of the three measurements (78), driven mainly by well-matched brow and mouth-corner pairs.
2. Your lower face runs slightly longer than the middle segment (1.06 ratio), which places more visual weight below the nose.
3. Eye spacing sits near the middle of the reference band — neither close-set nor wide-set in this photo.
4. Head tilt was minor (2.1°) and was corrected before scoring, so it did not materially affect your result.
5. Jawline contour: not scored. Jaw definition depends on angle and lighting more than any other region; from this single front photo we cannot measure it reliably, so we report it as not scored rather than guessing.
6. Profile (side-view) features: not scored — needs a side photo. Nasal projection, chin projection, and forehead slope are invisible in a front-facing photo. The current product analyzes front photos only.
7. Photo quality note. Mild blur was detected (sharpness variance near the acceptance threshold). A sharper photo could move individual measurements by 1–3 points.

Suggestions (demo data)

Three suggestions, prioritized. Each is non-medical, optional, and written with its basis, conditions, limits, and upkeep. Suggestions adapt to the preferences you share at purchase (hair length, hair texture, daily styling time, current goal); anything you skip is marked as "limited" rather than guessed.

1. Try a slightly stronger camera distance for future photos — Low effort

• Basis. Your inner-canthal and width-to-height readings are consistent with mild wide-angle distortion typical of arm's-length selfies.
• Applies when. You take self-portraits with a phone front camera.
• Limits. This changes how the photo reads, not your face. It does not change your score's meaning.
• Maintenance cost. None — step back and zoom, or ask someone to take the shot from 1.5–2 meters.

2. If you style hair: volume at the sides balances a longer lower face — Medium effort

• Basis. Your lower-to-middle ratio of 1.06 places visual weight low; added width near the cheekbones counterbalances it in photos.
• Applies when. You indicated medium-to-long hair and at least 10 minutes of daily styling time in your preferences. (In this demo, those preferences were provided.)
• Limits. A styling suggestion, not a rule — skip it if you prefer your current look. Effect varies with hair texture.
• Maintenance cost. Roughly 5–10 extra minutes on styling days; a trim every 6–10 weeks to keep the shape.

3. Re-test in even, frontal daylight before drawing conclusions — Low effort

• Basis. This photo's mild blur and single source of side lighting can shift measurements by a few points.
• Applies when. Always — our scores are photo-specific.
• Limits. Even a perfect photo yields a reference score, not an objective truth about your face.
• Maintenance cost. None.

How your preferences shaped this report (example)

You told us (demo preferences): hair length medium, texture wavy, daily styling time 10 minutes, goal "look sharper in photos for profiles." Suggestion 2 was selected and worded for those constraints; with a "0 minutes" styling preference, it would have been replaced with a no-maintenance alternative. Preferences you leave blank produce a visible "limited" note on the affected suggestions — we do not fill gaps with assumptions.

What this report is not

• Not a medical, dermatological, or cosmetic-surgery consultation.
• Not an objective measure of attractiveness, and not a percentile ranking against any population.
• Not an inference about your intelligence, trustworthiness, personality, age, or health. We do not make those inferences, from any photo, for anyone.

Sample report generated from demo data. Delivered reports are private, tied to your account, and include a downloadable PDF with the same content.