For 2.5 inches what method is most aesthetically pleasing?

For bi-lateral, not quadrilateral;

Internal v.s. external? Femur v.s. tibia?

Proportions are normal starting.

Femurs with internals would be the most aesthetic. Less scars can hide femurs with pants because most don’t know where the femurs start unlike the tibias where it’s more obvious. It would also keep you the most proportional.

I think longer tibias may be more aesthetically pleasing (it's very subjective) but you may have more noticeable scars than femurs. Internals would give you fewer scars overall.

Quote from: Going-For-Three on May 27, 2021, 04:51:51 AMI think longer tibias may be more aesthetically pleasing (it's very subjective) but you may have more noticeable scars than femurs. Internals would give you fewer scars overall.

No, it's not subjective. It's pretty much a fact that longer tibias are more aesthetically pleasing. With tibias lengthening, your knees will be higher, whereas with femurs lengthening, your knees stay the same height.

Scars aren't really a big deal. No one's really paying attention to your tibias. Just wear long pants all the time, get a tan or cover it with tattoos.

Personally, there is no way I lengthen femurs without tibias first.

The only advantage of femurs lengthening, from what I hear, is that you can gain more height. But then again, femurs aren't straight, so the real gains might be less that what you initially expect.

Femurs aren’t straight, but I’ve seen a few calculations done here already that show that 8cm of lengthening yields about 7.8 to 7.9cm of height.  You lose at most less than 2mm at the full 8cm from angle, realistically less.  At 5cm it would be less than a millimeter disparity.  The femur angle is low enough that the hypotenuse vs rise of the leg-femur triangle has very little difference.

I think tibias looking better is highly subjective, like most areas of attraction.  I find long femurs hot on women, in theory male models look better with long tibias but that’s highly disputable since male models don’t necessarily represent what is “desirable” among other women or men.  Plus, you can see how you look with long tibias by adding shoe inserts.  I personally don’t like the high tibia look, it takes a lot of calf bulking to look good IMO.  Long femurs are also much easier to hide.

Ultimately as long as nothing looks too weird, the height increase is the most important part.  So femurs giving more height is highly important for those who want fast and large changes.  Some surgeons will even lengthen them up to 4 or 5 inches.  Obviously that’s not possible or safe for tibias.

Wouldn't internal tibia more likely to cause knee pain later?

Ik plenty girls with long femurs, it looks god tier.
If you lengthen your tibia (consider your tibia/femur is well proportioned before the surgery) you'll most likely end up being a dwarf in stilts.

Jokes aside, if you lengthen your tibia, you can pull the look off. But if you wear let's say,  3 cm heel shoes and sitting with your friends (who are taller than you) people will suspect it so badly.

ANNDD THE MOST IMPORTANT THING NOONE MENTIONED HERE IS:

When you lengthen your femurs, you can allwayyys wear 1-2 inch shoes so your knee height will appear taller, and NOBODY will suspect anything

Tibia's are the most aesthetically pleasing, there is no question about this.
The problem is that lengthening Tibias is more complicated and are more likely to give permanent loss of mobility.

The Femurs are naturally longer than the Tibias, the Tibias are connected to the ankle and there is another bone alongside the Tibia called the Fibular.
The internal methods don't adjust the Fibular while lengthening the Tibia and it is just a giant mess in my opinion. I would go for 3-4 cm max on Tibias using pure externals.

Definitely femur. No question about it.

For example look at dunghyunh, posted here. He looks amazing with just a few scar from external. But his proportion looks normal if not better from before. From Doing ex tibia