Why I think that tibial lengthening is better in terms of proportions

Edit Post

Hey all

  Well thinking about it, if you compare the lengthening of let's say 6cm or even 8cm of either tibia or femur, aesthetically tibial lengthening will be the best. Why? well because when you lengthen the femur, your body (and especially hands) are getting farther away from the kness while if you lengthen the tibia, the distance between your hands and body from the knees remain constant (if you look at tall folks, you will see that  their knees are at the same distance from their hands proportionally speaking as much as short folks) thus better "hiding" the lengthening and the disproportion that was created.

 What you guys think?

Edit Post

Quote from: Penguinn on February 17, 2016, 02:02:56 PMI know what you mean. The knee to feet part is the part we never bother reaching anyway.
But if you have really long tibias, your knees will be really high when you sit.

Have you even seen a 5'7 or less dude with long tibias?

Edit Post

Quote from: Penguinn on February 17, 2016, 02:17:41 PMWhen compared to their femurs? Yeah.

There is a video on youtube of Dr.M patient that did 8 cm LATN on tibia. Doesnt look disproportionate at all

Edit Post

Also I got the impression that alot of people, after frames removal and returning to normal life, lose their chicken leg and get pretty bulky calves which also help to make your calves look shorter. Remember that during a mock-up (either of tibia or femur) when you lengthen one part you also make it look "slimmer" thus making it look longer than what it actually is. This is why many times the thigs look shorter than calves.. Because they have more muscle mass