Hello kylems,
The Greek Polykleitos (born in 480 BCE and active 450-420 BCE) was the
most famous sculptor of his day. Pliny refers to his famous work
"Canon" (Doryphoros) in which he set the ideal proportions of the
human body. Some Roman copies of his sculptures are still in existence
and are shown at http://www.sikyon.com/Sicyon/Polykleitos/polycl_egpg0.html
(from “Ancient Greek Cities” by Ellen Papakyriakou/Anagnostou)
The ideas of Leonardo da Vinci were influenced by those of Vitruvius,
a Roman architect and engineer from the 1st century BCE. Leonardo’s
famous drawing of the human body is called “The Vitruvian Man”. The
proportions, as defined by Vitruvius were:
“4 fingers make 1 palm, and 4 palms make 1 foot, 6 palms make 1 cubit;
4 cubits make a man's height. And 4 cubits make one pace and 24 palms
make a man.
The length of a man's outspread arms is equal to his height.
From the roots of his hair to the bottom of his chin is the tenth of a
man's height; from the bottom of the chin to the top of the head is
one eighth of his height; from the top of the breast to the roots of
the hair will be the seventh part of the whole man. From the nipples
to the top of the head will be the fourth part of man. The greatest
width of the shoulders contains in itself the fourth part of man. From
the elbow to the tip of the hand will be the fifth part of a man; and
from the elbow to the angle of the armpit will be the eighth part of
man. The whole hand will be the tenth part of the man. The distance
from the bottom of the chin to the nose and from the roots of the hair
to the eyebrows is, in each case the same, andlike the ear, a third of
the face.”
From the Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci
http://www2.evansville.edu/drawinglab/vitruvian.html (The Figure
Drawing Lab, University of Evansville)
The Evansville web site has some further information about
proportionalities of the human body, based on the size of the head:
The human figure is an average of 7 heads high.
The width from shoulder to shoulder is 3 heads width.
The distance from the hip to the toes is 4 heads.
The distance from the top of the head to the bottom of the chest is 2
heads.
The distance from the wrist to the end of the outstretched fingers of
the hand is 1 head.
The length from top to bottom of the buttocks is 1 head.
The distance from the elbow to the end of outstretched fingers is 2
heads.
http://www2.evansville.edu/drawinglab/body.html
However, it has been argued that Leonardo was incorrect in where he
placed the center of the body. Here you can see the suggested
correction, and how it relates to Michelangelo’s sculpture of David:
http://www.tiki.net/~donjusko/human.htm (“Painting on Location” by Don
Jusko”).
Nevertheless, Michelangelo is also said to have distorted the ideal
proportions “distortions of proportion are used by the artist to
depict both the youthfulness of the boy David, together with the power
of the hero about to conquer the giant Goliath.”
http://char.txa.cornell.edu/language/principl/principl.htm
(“Principles of Design” from “Art, Design and Visual Thinking”, an
interactive textbook by Charlotte Jirousek, Cornell. The start of the
textbook is at http://char.txa.cornell.edu/ )
Albrecht Durer produced a 4-volume treatise on the proportions of the
human body, which was published in 1528 after his death. “this work
is notable for its extraordinary series of anthropometrical woodcuts.
The first two books deal with the proper proportions of the human
form; the third changes the proportions according to mathematical
rules, giving examples of extremely fat and thin figures, while the
last book depicts the human figure in motion and treats of
foreshortenings. Durer's work is the first attempt to apply
anthropometry to aesthetics.”
http://clendening.kumc.edu/dc/rti/human_body_1528_durer.html
(University of Kansas Medical Center)
His idea of the male and female ideal is shown in his engraving of
Adam and Eve http://www.kfki.hu/~arthp/html/d/durer/2/13/2/042.html
(Web Gallery of Art)
Here you can see the proportions of the ideal female figure as defined
by Gerard de Leiresse in his “The Art of Painting” (1778)
http://www.adh.brighton.ac.uk/schoolofdesign/MA.COURSE/09/LArtMan041.html
(School of Design, University of Brighton)
The Buddhists also defined ideal proportions for the body, which had
to be applied to images of Buddha. “The span is the basic measure,
i.e. the distance from the tip of the middle finger to the tip of the
thumb of the outspread hand. This distance corresponds to the space
between the dimple in the chin and the hair-line. Each span has twelve
finger-breadths. The whole figure measures 108 finger-breadths or 9
spans corresponding to the macro-micro-cosmic harmony measurements.”
From “The Buddha Image. Ideal Physical Proportions”
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/buddhist-art/image.htm
(Buddha Dharma Education Association and BuddhaNet)
The ideal dimensions of the ancients, used in their architecture, and
used also to define the ideal human body, are based on so-called
“golden ratios”. “The 13th-century scholar Leonardo Fibonacci
discovered that if you start a number series with 0 and 1, then add
any two adjacent numbers to obtain the next integer, the series that
results (0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89. . .) has the
property such that the ratio of any two successive numbers converges
on the golden number phi.”
On this web site, you can change the shape of a body and see if what
you conceive to be an ideal shape matches that obtained using the
golden ratio: http://www.discover.com/neuroquest/beautybrain.html
(“Beauty and the Brain. What makes one body better proportioned than
another?” By Andrew Epstein and Eric Haseltine)
As for bust-waist-hip ratios:
The waist-hip ratio (WHR) “for healthy, pre-menopausal women is
generally between 0.67 and 0.80, but for men it is usually between
0.85 and 0.95 (National Academy of Sciences, 1991). WHR has been shown
to be a reliable morphological indicator of the levels of sex
hormones, and also the risk of major diseases, reproductive potential,
and premature mortality. (Sex Roles: A Journal of Research - August,
1998; The role of body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, and breast size in
judgments of female attractiveness, Adrian Furnham) Generally a WHR
of 7.0 is considered very attractive while anything more than an 8.0
WHR is considered as possibly unhealthy if it is indeed fat and not
muscle… As far as the (breast to hip ratio, BHR) - it usually is about
the same ratio as the hips to waist. Although we know a lot of people
don't abide by this and for some -- bigger is better. It is a matter
of preference really but generally an hour glass shape is sought
after. And there are no known harmful diseases or disorders
symptomatic of having large breasts other than some back aches and
headaches.” http://www.yestheyrefake.net/ideal_beauty2.htm (“Ideal
Beauty?” from the "Yes They're Fake" web site on plastic surgery and
cosmetic enhancement)
If you want to know the full set of measurements for an ideal male
body, according to bone structure, the 1is2fat web site provides a
male body calculator. Input the wrist size in inches, and the program
will calculate ideal measurements for chest, waist, hips, biceps,
forearms, thighs, calves and neck:
http://www.1is2fat.com/male_body_calculator.htm
However, real people’s tastes will deviate from ideals of perfection,
and also differ between men and women:
“Styles change in bodies as they do in clothing. Prior to the 16th
century, for example, the female body ideally had large hips and
belly. Only later was a small waistline stressed. In the 17th century
and many other periods, the ideal body was much heavier than we would
accept today. Of course, in the last 25 years the ideal personified
by the fashion model has fostered a standard which idealizes
exceptionally slender body proportions for women. In this century,
sports have provided models for ideal male body proportions. Beginning
with the rise of televised football in the 1960's, and the subsequent
fitness boom, an increasingly muscular silhouette has been presented
as the ultimate male form. This ideal is quite different from that
presented in earlier periods.”
http://char.txa.cornell.edu/language/principl/principl.htm
(“Principles of Design” from “Art, Design and Visual Thinking”, an
interactive textbook by Charlotte Jirousek, Cornell. The start of the
textbook is at http://char.txa.cornell.edu/ )
“Men’s ideals for their own physique tends to be "bigger equals
better." This preference is consistent with the Freudian construct
that men are obsessed with large objects or parts of their anatomy.
According to Adam Drewnowski (1995), more men wanted to gain weight
rather than lose weight. The use of steroids and excessive weight
lifting can accomplish this goal of a larger body. Women however tend
to find men of average size to be most attractive. Michael Cunningham
(1990) found that women prefer men with moderately broad shoulders who
are of medium height and have a chest slightly larger than average,
but not as large and powerful as a traditional body builder’s chest.
Devendra Singh (1995) examined the role of male body shape, as defined
by their waist-to-hip ratio, in women’s mate choices. Again men found
in the typical size range were judged as more attractive, healthy, and
possessing many positive personal qualities.”
References
Drewnowski, A. (1995). Effects of body image on dieting, exercise, and
anabolic steroid use in adolescent males. International Journal of
Eating Disorders, 17, 381-386.
Cunningham, M. R. (1990). What do women want. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 59, 61-72.
Singh, D. (1995). Female judgment of male attractiveness and
desirability for relationships: Role of waist-to-hip-ratio and
financial status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69,
1089-1101.
From “Gender Differences in Physical Attraction” by Chris Hendricks,
Dawn Olson, Seth Hall & Jonathan Batt, Miami University
http://www.units.muohio.edu/psybersite/Attraction/gender.shtml
Finally, a study was carried out on the way in which the perception of
what is the ideal for body proportions can become distorted, in this
case specifically due to the dimensions presented by Barbie and Ken
dolls: “Measurements on young adult subjects, men and women, aged 22
to 32 years, who were of normal weight and average height, were taken.
Hips, waist, chest, neck length, and neck circumference were recorded.
The same measurements were made on Barbie and Ken dolls, and a
ratio of the measurements of the real subjects to doll figures
was calculated. The ratio was then applied to estimate changes needed
for the subjects to have the same proportional measurements as the
dolls. The researchers found that for the female subject to attain
Barbie’s proportions, there would have to be an increase in 24 inches
in height, 5 inches in the chest, and 2 to 3 inches in neck length and
a decrease of 6 inches in the waist and 0.2 inches in the neck
circumference. For the male subject to attain Ken’s proportions, he
would require increases in height by 20 inches, waist by
10 inches, chest by 11 inches, and neck length by 0.85 inches. The
neck circumference for the male would need to increase 7.9 inches.”
Brownell, K., & Napolitano, M. A. (1995). Distorting reality for
children: Body size proportions for Barbie and Ken dolls.
International Journal of Eating Disorders, 18, 295–298.
http://www.lww.com/promos1/boyd/images/research_box.pdf (Sample page
from “Psychiatric Nursing, Contemporary Practice” by Mary Ann Boyd
http://www.lww.com/promos1/boyd/ )
I hope that I have covered this topic to your satisfaction, otherwise
please request further clarification. |
