Henry Cavill again

Now, it's clearly visible in this photo that the man who stands beside Cavill has much longer arms. Look where Cavill's hands end compared to that guy's hands. Their shoulder level is the same. There seems to be at least 6 cm difference between their arm length, which brings 12 cm armspan disadvantage for Cavill. I think that his armspan should be around 172 cm max compared to his 184 cm height.

Edit: it's clearly more than 6 cm IMO.

https://scontent.ftbs10-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/37357339_1862745873793819_7724133794319433728_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5f2048&_nc_ohc=WZNTKvTI25UQ7kNvgHAY48f&_nc_ht=scontent.ftbs10-1.fna&oh=00_AfBKrz2U7ynwmRwoJDmh97NZAHwv6jsThSP8Kk8H6w60fw&oe=6658B2E3

I don't know if he lengthened his legs or not but what is clearly visible is that his legs are very long compared to his torso and his arms are noticeably short which is apparent when he stands besides someone who is 182-185 cm range. His arms always hang much higher than other men at that height range.

IMO if he was 5'7 or something with the same arm length but shorter legs his attractiveness would decrease dramatically. It's the same if Tom Cruise were at least 5'10. He would be much acceptable at that height and much attractive to women IMO.

Anything less than solid 5'10 is considered not tall enough by most women.

That's why it's better to get double LL (5 inches) at 5'5-5'7 range in order to become 5'10-6 ft range. At least if you have large and wide upper body as Cavill's you will look much better with slightly shorter arms post double LL at 5'10 from 5'5.

One of the most obvious signs that look off in someone's proportions is hand size.

Compare Henry's tiny hands to that of the brunette girl's standing besides him and it's immediately noticeable that the man has baby hands.

Not only baby hands, but he also have underdeveloped forearms that significantly shortened his arm length relative to his stature resulting in -5 inches of ape index (IMO his armspan is 172 cm max).

This is the photo I'm talking about:

https://ibb.co/GTsrWbC

I myself have small hands at 5'5 but imagine someone like Cavill who is legit 6'1/2 having the same size hands as me. My hand length measured from wrist line to tip of the middle finger is 17.5 cm long. I think that I lose at least 1.5 cm arm length from hand length alone, thus 3 cm wingspan. If I had 19 cm long hands, my wingspan should have been at least 170 cm but is 167 cm which is my morning height.

The more I look at Cavill standing with other people, the more I become aware how each cm of lengthening matters and anything above 5 inches of lengthening will result in a comical appearance. Even that is stretching it and I think that 11.5 cm (5 cm tibia and 6.5 cm femurs for ideal proportions) is the max tolerable limit where one can still look decent. The irony of LL is that the lower the starting height the lower you can lengthen in order to appear acceptable in terms of proportions. IMO guys 5'5 have a limit of 4.5 inches of total lengthening.

This guy did exactly 4.5 inches on both segments (IMO 4 cm tibia and 7.5 cm femurs). He looks acceptable at 5'9.5 but if he did even 2 cm more on any segment, he would start to look suspicious.

https://ibb.co/n0QRy9J

IDK what's important: lengthen the lowest amount per segment (4 cm in tibia, 5 cm in femurs) to appear as natural or push the limits and lengthen the highest safest limits per segment (6 cm in tibia, 8 cm in femurs).

Obviously, with the first option, it's not only remaining much more proportionate, but also is easier to achieve without major complications, thus rehab will be smoother and quick.

With the second option, you're pushing the limits for your body for that additional 5 cm total gain from both segments. In the end you gain more height but appear more leggy and proportions might look weird nked. Also, rehab will be much longer and complications might drag you down a lot.

Another option is something like 4.5 cm in tibia and 6.5 cm femurs for 12 cm total gain. That additional 3 cm (compared to 4 cm tibia and 5 cm femur option) means a lot when you're below 180 cm. With this option you're still in the relatively safe ranges for both segments and rehab will be more or less smooth.

In the end what do you suggest for someone who is 5'5 and is going to lengthen both segments consecutively? 4 cm in tibia and 5 cm in femurs is the lowest one should when doing both segments IMO. How much would you push above those figures? Would you go all in for solid 5'10 total height? Or would you prefer 4 cm in tibia and 5 cm femurs or 4.5 cm tibia and 6.5 cm femurs route for safety and better proportions?

You will still be able to put your hands in the pocket the same way you put it before the lengthening. No matter how much you lengthen, you'll still be able to put the hands in the pockets. That doesn't mean anything because in the end what matters is arm length to upper body length ratio and arm length to leg length ratio.

Arm length to upper body ratio doesn't change after LL but arm length to leg length ratio changes and the more you lengthen, the more you deviate from natural range and end up looking weird, especially nked.

If one has  ty arm length to upper body ratios i.e. Artem Lobov tier arms where it's clearly visible that arms are relatively short compared to torso then he will look weird after any amount of lengthening.

But, if one has relatively normal arm length to upper body proportions and doesn't look like t-rex then one can get away with 3.5-4.5 inches in total lengthening and still look decent, especially if he had shorter legs compared to upper body pre-surgeries.

So, unless one looks like a t-rex, he can get away with lengthenings up to 4.5 inches and still look normal. The shorter your legs are compared to upper body pre lengthening, the better the outcome as legs to upper body ratios are much more important than wingspan (unless disproportional arms to upper body).

Check out these pics of him:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/nintchdbpict000263160892.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/474x/88/8f/f9/888ff9f7f146d03c85cb20d8441523b0.jpg

His arms look suspiciously short. Not only his forearms are short but also his humerus is short too for someone standing at 6 feet tall. I'm not even mentioning his baby hands anymore.

His femurs look very long which makes him look like Betz patient who did 10-12 cm in his femurs.

I've made some meticulous calculations on the picture where he stands with a man in a blue suit who is just 3 cm shorter than him and found out the following:

The man on his left has a hairline of about 8 pixels lower than Henry's. It's about 3 cm difference in height. But, the difference between their knuckles is 28 pixels. Assuming 8 pixels = 3 cm which is their height difference, 28 / 8 = 3.5. 3.5 x 3 cm = 10.5 cm. Now, we have to subtract that 8 pixel height advantage Henry has over that guy and the difference between their knuckles becomes 20 pixels. 20 / 8 = 2.5. 2.5 x 3 cm = 7.5 cm difference between their knuckles if they stood at the same height.

Now, if Henry is 184 cm tall, that guy is 181 cm tall and has 7.5 cm longer arms at knuckle level. Since Henry has baby hands, I'm sure he has at least 1-1.5 cm shorter middle finger than that guy so he has about 8.5-9 cm shorter arms at middle finger level. 9 cm x 2 = 18 cm armspan difference. Assuming that guy has the same armspan as his height, it means that Henry has 181 - 18 = 162 cm armspan. Now, I think that the guy who stands besides him has about 2 inches longer armspan at 185-186 cm. 186 - 18 = 168 cm for Henry's armspan. Maybe add 2 cm from broader shoulders and it should be about 169-170 cm long.

Either he lengthened his femurs for about 10-12 cm or he's just a freak. His arm length disregarding his hand length is very short for someone who stands at 184 cm tall. It's ok for 5'6 guys at most. Their arm length difference is as dramatic as the famous pic of Dr. Mahboubian and 5'3 bald guy who lengthened 6 inches and has about 10-11 cm shorter arms than Dr. Mahboubian at the same height.

Another interesting metrics:

From ground to middle finger / total height ratio is dramatically higher for Henry.

The ratio is 0.4033 for the guy in blue suit but Henry has a ratio of 0.4489. Mine is 0.3939. The lower the ratio, the more arm length relative to total height. As you can see, my ratio is closer to the ratio that blue suited man has. That means that his armspan should be relatively closer to his height of 181 cm since my armspan is 166-167 cm at 165 cm since I have a lower ratio from ground to middle finger / total height.

0.4033 vs 0.4489 is a significant difference and means that Henry has very short arms and armspan in general.

If I multiply my height of 165 cm to 0.3939 it equals exactly 65 cm which is the distance from floor to middle finger.

If we multiply Henry's height of 184 cm to 0.4489 it equals 82.5 cm and that's the distance from ground to his middle finger.

Now, subtract 82.5 from 184 and we get 101.5 cm which is his length from middle finger to top of his head. Assuming the distance from his acromion bone to top of his head should be at least 30 cm, we get 101.5 - 30 = 71.5 cm from acromion bone to his middle finger which is his total arm length including hands and fingers. Mine is 72 cm from acromion bone to middle finger at 165 cm tall. It's insane.

So, his armspan should be closer to 166-167 cm since I have very broad shoulders and he can't have advantage from shoulder length, maybe just 1 cm and not more.

It's crazy for someone at 184 cm height to have an arm length of about 71-72 cm long which is normal for 5'5 guys. Either he was about 5'5-5'6 and did 7 inches LL or he was born with short arms.

I have nothing against Henry, it's just interesting to calculate his proportions since people on here speculated he had short arms relative to his height long ago.

I don't know which celebrity who did LL you're talking about and it's irrelevant here as we're talking about Henry's proportions.

Now, it's more likely that he was born that way because his arms are disproportional to his torso which is not the case for me. His humerus is very short relative to his torso and that's why. If I do 7 inches LL to become Henry's height, I will look much better nked since my humerus will be proportional to my torso.

Now, Henry has the same arm length as mine at 71.5 cm (I have 72 cm). The distance from ground to his middle finger is 82.5 cm while mine is 65 cm. That means he has 18 cm longer legs than me. It's crazy. 165 + 18 = 183 cm so 1 cm is from neck maybe. My trunk is the same length as his.

Now, I'm not going to lengthen 18 cm because one it's crazy and two it's dangerous but I'm going to lengthen about 8-10 cm in total (55% femurs and 45% tibia).

I've calculated Rob Paul's arm length from acromion bone down to radius bone bump and it's about 57.2 cm. Mine is 54 cm. He stands at 173.2 cm and I stand at 165 cm. If I lengthen 8 cm to become his height, I will have 3.2 cm shorter arms (disregarding hand length) and it won't be as noticeable as 8-10 cm difference Henry has over someone his height.

I don't want to look like that 5'3 bald guy who did 6 inches and has about 11 cm shorter arm length compared to Dr. Mahboubian. It's very noticeable when you stand besides someone who was born as that height you're post LL.

Now, that 5'3 bald guy had even shorter arms for his original height and his wingspan was already -3 or -4 inches shorter at 150-153 cm range. He gained 6 inches and now he stands at 175 cm with 150-153 cm wingspan and that's why Dr. Mahboubian has 11 cm longer arms, in total 22 cm longer wingspan than him. It's unacceptable aesthetically. Maybe maximum 3 inches over wingspan is ok and that's why I'm going to lengthen 9 cm max to become 174 cm and have 166-167 cm armspan. That's the limit IMO. I will have 3.5 cm shorter arm compared to someone who is naturally 174 cm like Rob Paul. That's more or less fine but anything above 4 cm arm length difference is starting to look suspicious.