Posted on Nov 19, 2022, 1:36 pm
#1
I have long legs and wanted to do quadrilateral limb lengthening to push for 6'2 - 6'3.
I think I will look disproportionate. I knew I had long legs, but after doing a bit of photo editing (for 6'3) I looked freakish with 12 cm longer legs. I'm a bit sad since despite being close to 5'10 I have height dysphoria.
22 years old.
6'3 wingspan, 20.5' shoulders.
Any advice? money is not an issue. Wearing a longer shirt would not help since I have a big butt.
I was thinking of still doing quadrilateral (I think it helps with biomechanics) but to reach 6'?
Or maybe just do femurs for 2"?
Any hopes of 6'1?
I added an anonymized (to the best of my ability) picture of myself at roughly 186 cm or 6'1 for a total quadrilateral increase of roughly 9 cm (about half femur and half tibia).
My tibia/femur ratio is roughly 0.8 so every bilateral lengthening i mock up looks bad IMO.
with pants 186cm: https://imgur.com/a/5iKOoJD
without pants 186cm: https://imgur.com/a/mYcGvYI
without pants 181.5cm (4.5 cm tibia lengthening): https://imgur.com/a/lSzCnPf
without pants 181.5cm (4.5 cm femur lengthening): https://imgur.com/a/RgJJqDf
side by side: https://imgur.com/a/EiPcoWo
EDIT:
According to this study: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325172553_The_influence_of_leg-to-body_ratio_arm-to-body_ratio_and_intra-limb_ratio_on_male_human_attractiveness
You seem to still be somewhat attractive despite 2 standard deviation from the norm, but the way they measure leg length is different. I don't know if anyone has any info on standard deviation of sitting height or inseam... I couldn't find data.
I think I will look disproportionate. I knew I had long legs, but after doing a bit of photo editing (for 6'3) I looked freakish with 12 cm longer legs. I'm a bit sad since despite being close to 5'10 I have height dysphoria.
22 years old.
6'3 wingspan, 20.5' shoulders.
Any advice? money is not an issue. Wearing a longer shirt would not help since I have a big butt.
I was thinking of still doing quadrilateral (I think it helps with biomechanics) but to reach 6'?
Or maybe just do femurs for 2"?
Any hopes of 6'1?
I added an anonymized (to the best of my ability) picture of myself at roughly 186 cm or 6'1 for a total quadrilateral increase of roughly 9 cm (about half femur and half tibia).
My tibia/femur ratio is roughly 0.8 so every bilateral lengthening i mock up looks bad IMO.
with pants 186cm: https://imgur.com/a/5iKOoJD
without pants 186cm: https://imgur.com/a/mYcGvYI
without pants 181.5cm (4.5 cm tibia lengthening): https://imgur.com/a/lSzCnPf
without pants 181.5cm (4.5 cm femur lengthening): https://imgur.com/a/RgJJqDf
side by side: https://imgur.com/a/EiPcoWo
EDIT:
According to this study: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325172553_The_influence_of_leg-to-body_ratio_arm-to-body_ratio_and_intra-limb_ratio_on_male_human_attractiveness
You seem to still be somewhat attractive despite 2 standard deviation from the norm, but the way they measure leg length is different. I don't know if anyone has any info on standard deviation of sitting height or inseam... I couldn't find data.