Anthropometric proportions in the upper

lip-lower lip-chin area of the lower face in Dr. Farkas

young white adults

Leslie G. Farkas, M.D.,* M. J. Katie, B.A.,* Tania A. Hreczko, Ph.D.,*
Curtis Deutsch, Ph.D.,** and Ian R. Munro, M.B. B.Ch.*
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

The relationships between measurements of the lower lip, chin, upper lip, and lower half and lower third of the
face were studied. Fifteen new indices were formed with the help of eleven vertical linear, one horizontal linear,
and two surface-arc measurements in the area. Neoclassic canons related to the lower face were not conformed.
On the average, the lower lip was 83% to 85% as large as the upper lip. The upper lip occupied one third of the
lower face, while the lower lip occupied more than one third of the lower third of the face and the chin occupied
the remainder. Skin covered 73.5% of the upper lip in males and 88% in females; it covered 83% of the lower lip
in males and 81.1% in females, The remainder was covered by vermilion, more on the lower than on the upper
lip and more protruding in females than in males. Proportion standards are a valuable contribution to the surface
anatomy of the lower face of young white adults.

Key words: Anthropometric proportion standards, lower face proportions, upper-lower lip-chin proportions,
cross-sectional

T he importance of the lips and chin in MATERIAL

influencing the quality of the facial profile was already
recognized in the Renaissance’ and emphasized again
by orthodontists at the start of this century.” ‘s Many
papers have been devoted to the determination of the
soft-tissue profile of the lower face, measuring the in-
clinations and the angles on cephalograms and/or lat-
eral photographs .4-‘1
The purpose of the current study was to report the
linear vertical measurements of the upper and lower
lips and the chin, to report the length of the upper and
lower vermilion arcs and demonstrate their relation-
ships to each other and to the width of the mouth, to
assess chin contour quality, to show the interrelation-
ships between the vertical measurements of the lips and
chin and the linear measurements of the lower face and
the lower third of the face, and to compare these
findings with the neoclassic proportions. All mea-
surements were taken from young white adults.
Supported by Grant 9725 of the Conn Smythe Foundation
dren, Toronto, Canada.
*Research Institute at The Hospital for Sick Children,
Canada.
**Department of Behavioral Neurology, Eunice Kennedy
Mental Retardation, Waltham, Mass.
The study group was composed of two subgroups
consisting of healthy young North American white
adults. In Group I, which consisted of 89 randomly
selected healthy subjects (39 females and 50 males)
ranging between 18 and 25 years of age, employed at
The Hospital for Sick Children, eleven profile mea-
surements and the chin quality were registered. In
Group II, which consisted of 100 young adults (50
males and 50 females) similarly selected from among
students at the University of Toronto, the vermilion
arcs and the width of the mouth were measured.
METHODS
Vertical profile measurements (Group I)
Eleven vertical profile measurements were taken in
the area of the lower face, as shown in Fig. 1. Mea-
surements previously describedi include (1) height of
the lower face (subnasale-gnathion, sn-gn); (2) height
of the lower third of the face (stomion-gnathion, sto-gn)
for Crippled Chil- (Fig. 1, A), medial vertical heights of the upper lip; (3)
height of the cutaneous lip (subnasale-labiale superius,
Toronto, Ontario,
sn-1s); (4) height of the upper vermilion (labiale superi-
Shriver Center for us-stomion, Is-sto); (5) height of the upper lip (subna-
sale-stomion, sn-sto) (Fig. 1, B); and (6) height of

52
Volume 86 Anthropometric proportions in lip and chin area of lower face 53
Number 1

--I-2
1
s mm sto

II”:.,
2

- - --v-w.

A
Fig. 2. Relationship between the vestibulum oris and lips. A, On
the median sagittal section of the head.j3 The arrows point to
the upper and lower portions of the vestibule. B, On the external
surface of the chin and the anterior surface of the mandible.j4
The arrows point to the indentations.

Fig. 1. Vertical linear measurements of the lower face. A, Lower \

face height (7) and lower third of the face height (2). B, Upper lip
heights: cutaneous portion (3), vermilion (41, and medial mea-
surement (5). C, Lower lip heights: vermilion (S), cutaneous
portion (7), and medial measurement (8). D, Chin heights:
upper chin (9)) lower chin (70), medial measurement (7 7).

the lower vermilion (stomion-labiale inferius, sto-li)

(Fig. 1, C).
New vertical measurements of the lower lip and
chin were taken: (7) height of the cutaneous lower lip
(labiale inferius-sublabiale, Ii-sl); (8) medial vertical
height of the lower lip (stomion-sublabiale, sto-sl) (Fig.
1, C); (9) medial vertical height of the upper chin
(sublabiale-pogonion, sl-pg); (10) medial vertical
height of the lower chin (pogonion-gnathion, pg-gn);
and (11) medial vertical height of the entire chin
(sublabiale-gnathion, sl-gn) (Fig. 1,D).
To measure the lower lip heights, three landmarks
were used: stomion (sto) or midpoint of the labial
fissure, labiale inferius (Ii) or midpoint of the lower
vermilion line, and sublabiale point (sl) or midpoint of
the horizontal labiomental skin ridge (approximately at
the bottom of a curved chin).
The lower lip extends distally from the labial
fissure, reaching the mentolabial sulcus externally and
the bottom of the vestibule of the mouth intraorally
Fig. 3. Vermilion surface arcs and the mouth lengths: mouth (7),
upper vermilion arc (2), and lower vermilion arc (3).
(Fig. 2, A). On the lower third of a face with indented
relief, the division between the lower lip and the chin
is evident. If the chin contour is flattened, the sublabi-
ale can be identified by inserting a spatula to the bot-
tom of the vestibule and gently elevating the skin
surface.
The chin is located between the horizontal lines
crossing the sublabiale point and the chin point (gna-
thion). The area is divided into an upper part between
sublabiale and pogonion and a lower part between
pogonion and gnathion. The concave surface relief may
54 Farkas et al. Am. J. Orthod.
July 1984

Fig. 4. Chin contour variations traced from life-sized standard profile photographs. A, Healthy, young
adult males. B, Healthy, young adult females. C, Patients with various facial anomalies, Arabic numbers
indicate the types of the chin contour quality. 7 = Deep and indented; 2 = deep and curved; 3 = shallow
and curved; and 4 = flattened.

FRANCESCA FARKAS ET Al oiRER

Fig. 5. The proportion qualities of the lower half of the face, according to Francesca and Pacioli, Diirer,
and Farkas and others. The proportion of the upper lip height in the lower half of the face proposed by
Francesca and Pacioli is similar to that in our findings. The proportion of the lower lip height in the lower
half of the face proposed by Diirer is similar to that in our findings.

correspond to a similar deepening on the underlying
bone (Fig. 2, B).
All vertical measurements were taken in millime-
ters with sliding calipers when the subject’s head was in
rest position. The points were marked on the skin be-
fore measurement.
Labial fissure and vermilion arc measurements
(Group II)
Since our primary interest was in the normal rela-
tionship of the occlusion to the vermilions in Group II,
subjects with Class II or Class III malocclusion were
excluded from the sample. In the remaining subjects
only the length of the labial fissure (cheilion-cheilion,
ch-ch) (Fig. 3, 1) and the upper and lower vermilion
arcs (Fig. 3,2 and 3) were measured. The vermilion arc
lengths were measured with a soft measuring tape along
the vermilion lines (ch-ls-ch, ch-li-ch).
Chin contour quality
The relief of the lower third of the face, which can
be deep and indented, deep and curved, shallow and
curved, or flattened, was assessed (Fig. 4).
Establishment of lower face proportions
The relationship between two measurements was
indicated as a ratio (index, I), in which the smaller
measurement was expressed as a percentage of the
larger. To demonstrate the degree of dependence of the
measurements composing the index, the correlation
coefficient (r) was calculated. The coefficient was pos-
itive if both measurements increased and negative if the
 Anthropometric proportions in lip and chin area qf lower face 55

Table I. Vertical profile measurements in the area of the lower face in healthy young North American
white adults
Mean SD
No. Area Measurement Sex N (mm)

1 Face Height of the lower face (sn-gn) M 50 70.4 6.6

(Fig. 1,A) F 40 63.0 4.3
2 Height of the lower third of the face M 50 48.8 4.0
(sto-gn) F 50 44.8 3.4
3 Upper lip Medial height of the cutaneous upper lip M 50 16.7 2.2
(Fig. I, B) (sn-1s) F 39 13.3 2. I
4 Medial vermilion height of the upper lip M 50 7.4 1.7
(Is-sto) F 39 7.7 1.1
5 Medial vertical upper lip length (sn-sto) M 50 22.7 2.3
F 40 19.6 2.1
6 Lower lip Medial vermilion height of the lower lip M 50 8.8 2.0
(Fig. 1, C) (sto-Ii) F 50 9.0 1.5
7 Medial height of the cutaneous lower lip M 50 11.9 2.2
(Ii-sl) F 50 9.9 2.4
8 Medial vertical lower lip length (sto-sl) M 50 18.8 2.5
F 39 16.7 2.0
9 Chin Medial height of the upper chin (sl-pg) M 50 16.9 3.6
(Fig. 1 ,D) F 50 17.3 2.3
10 Medial height of the lower chin (pg-gn) M 50 20.4 3.7
F 50 17.6 2.2
1I Medial vertical chin length (sl-gn) M 50 30.1 3.3
F 50 28.2 2.6

increase in one measurement was accompanied by a Table II. Vermilion arc measurements in healthy young
decrease in the other: North American white adults with normal occlusion

Comparison with neoclassic canons Mean SD

No. Measurement Sex N (mm)
We tested the validity of two neoclassic canons.
1 Width of mouth M 50 54.1 3.8
Francesca (1420- 1492)‘” and Pacioli ( 1509)16 divided
(ch-ch) F 50 50.6 3.1
the lower face into three equal segments: upper lip, 2 Upper vermilion arc M 50 75.0 5.5
lower lip, and chin. According to Diirer” (1591), the (ch-ls-ch) F 50 68.1 5.6
upper and lower lip each occupy one quarter of the 3 Lower vermilion arc M 50 68.6 4.8
lower face and the chin takes up the remaining two (ch-Ii-ch) F 50 62.9 6.3
quarters. Thus, Francesca and Pacioli put the labial
fissure two thirds of the way from chin point to sub-
nasale, while Diirer placed it a little higher, three quar- (1) height of the lower face and (2) height of the lower
ters of the way up the lower face. When comparing our third of the face. All lower lip measurements were simi-
data with the canons, we regarded measurements lar in both sexes (6-8). Measurements of the lower face
within the lower face differing by + 1 mm as equal. (l), lower third of the face (2), most of the upper lip
(3,5), and lower chin (10) were moderately longer in
Statistical analysis males than in females.
A posterior test of normality (goodness of fit)
Vermilion arc measurements
showed that the study groups had normally distributed
measurements. Consequent statistical analysis used the The upper vermilion arc was significantly longer
Student’s t test and the Pearson correlation. than the lower arc in both sexes (p < 0.001). The mea-
surements were significantly longer in males than in
RESULTS females (p < 0.001) (Table II).
Vertical measurements of the lower face, lips, and
chin Chin contour quality
Table I reports the eleven vertical profile mea- In males, the deep and indented chin was found
surements in both sexes (Fig. 1). Most variable were most frequently (21 of 50), followed by shallow and
56 Farkas et al. Am. 3. Onhod.
July 1984

Table III. Relationships between vertical profile measurements in the lower face in healthy young
North American white adults
Signijcant sex
Pearson correlation difference
No. Related measurements Index Sex N coefficient (r)* Mean SD (p value)
Medial height of the cutaneous upper lip- sn-1s X 100 M 50 r = 0.77* 73.5 6.1 Yes
Upper lip height sn-sto F 39 r = 0.75* 68.0 6.9 0.001
Upper lip vermilion height - Is-sto x 100 M 50 r = 0.27* 32.1 1.2 Yes
Upper lip height sn-sto F 39 rE0.19 39.9 6.7 0.001
Medial height of the cutaneous lower lip- li-sl X 100 M 50 r = 0.64* 63.0 9.1 No
Medial vertical lower lip height sto-sl F 39 r = 0.35* 61.1 16.7 0.48
Lower lip vermilion height - sto-li X 100 M 50 r = OSO* 47.0 9.9 Yes
Lower lip height sto-sl F 39 r = 0.32* 52.1 9.3 0.007
Medial upper chin height - sl-pg X 100 M 50 r = -0.20 85.9 24.4 Yes
Medial lower chin height pg-gn F 50 r = -0.29* 100.0 19.7 0.002
Medial upper lip vermilion height - Is-sto x 100 M 50 r = 0.72* 85.7 20.1 No
Medial lower lip vermilion height sto-Ii F 39 r = 0.56* 90.4 14.8 0.22
Medial height of the cutaneous lower lip - li-sl X 100 M 50 r = 0.26* 71.7 14.2 No
Medial height of the cutaneous upper lip sn-Is F 39 r = 0.25 77.0 20.2 0.15
Medial vertical height of the lower lip- sto-sl X 100 M 50 r = 0.33* 83.4 11.5 No
Medial vertical height of the upper lip sn-sto F 39 r = 0.44* 85.7 10.6 0.33
Medial vertical upper lip height - sn-sto X 100 M 50 r = 0.43* 32.4 3.1 Yes
Height of the lower face sn-gn F 40 r = 0.64* 31.1 2.6 0.030
Medial vertical lower lip height- sto-sl x 100 M 50 r = 0.58* 38.7 4.1 No
Height of the lower third of the face sto-gn F 39 r = 0.68* 37.4 3.4 0.14
11 Medial vertical lower lip height- sto-sl x 100 M 50 r=0.14 63.7 13.9 No
Medial vertical chin height sl-gn F 39 r = 0.39* 59.9 7.2 0.11
12 Medial vertical chin height - sl-gn X 100 M 50 r = 0.45* 61.9 6.5 No
Height of the lower third of the face sto-gn F 50 r = 0.17* 62.9 3.6 0.33

*p < 0.05.

curved chins (15) and almost as many deep and curved
chins (14). In females, the deep and curved chin was
the most common (26 of 50), followed by shallow and
curved chins (13) and deep and indented chin contours
(11). Chins with flattened contours (Fig. 5) were not
seen in either sex.
Lower face proportions
Relationships between the vertical measurements of
the lower face, the upper and lower lips, and the chin
are shown in Table III.
Upper lip proportions (indices I and 2). The cuta-
neous part occupied a significantly (p = 0.001) greater
portion of the entire upper lip height in males (73.5%)
than in females (68%). The height of the upper vermil-
ion in relationship to the upper lip was significantly
(p = 0.001) larger in females (39.9%) than in males
(32.7%).
Lower lip proportions (indices 3 and 4). The cuta-
neous part of the lower lip, on the average, took up less
than two thirds (63%) or the lower lip height in males
and slightly less (61.1%) in females. On the average,
the lower vermilion height was significantly greater in
females (p = 0.007), occupying more than half of the
lower lip (52.7%) than in males (47%).
Chin proportions (index 5). There was a significant
difference between the sexes in chin proportions
(p = 0.002): in females the average heights of the
upper and lower chin were equal (I = lOO.O>, and in
males the upper chin was smaller (I = 85.9).
Upper and lower lip relationships (indices 6, 7, and
8). The upper vermilion, on the average, was thinner in
both sexes than the lower vermilion; it was 85.7% of
the lower vermilion in males and nonsignificantly more
(90.4%) in females. The cutaneous portion of the lower
lip in relation to the same area of the upper lip was
nonsignificantly smaller in males (71.7%) than in fe-
males (77%). The relationship between the heights of
the entire upper and lower lips was similar in both
sexes; the lower lip was shorter, taking up 83.4% of the
upper lip height in males and 85.7% in females.
Upper lip/lower face proportion (index 9). The
upper lip height occupied about one third (32.4%) of
the lower half of the face in males and less than that
(31.1%) in females.
Lower lipllower third of the face height proportion
(index 10). The lower lip height, on the average, oc-
cupied a similar proportion of the lower third of the
face in both sexes (males, 38.7%; females, 37.4%).
Lower lip/chin proportions (index 11). On the av-
Volume 86 Anthropometric proportions in lip and chin area of lower,faccT 57
Number 1

Table IV. The vermilion arc-mouth width relationship in healthy young North American white adults
Pearson correlation
No. Related measurement It&X Sex N coeficient (r) Mean SD

I Lower vermilion arc over upper vermilion arc ch-li-ch X 100 M 50 r = 0.7891 91.6 4.3
ch-Is-ch F 50 r = 0.8219 92.4 5.1
2 Mouth width over lower vermilion arc ch-ch x 100 M 50 r = 0.6116 79.0 5.0
ch-Ii-ch F 50 r = 0.7949 80.8 4.7
3 Mouth width over upper vermilion arc ch-ch x 100 M 50 r = 0.6456 72.3 4.3
ch-ls-ch F 50 r = 0.6124 74.5 4.9

Table V. Neoclassic proportions of the lower face and our findings

Neoclassic canons Study group

Francesca’”
Pacioli’” Diirer17

Canon Related measurements Formula Proportion* Proporrion Sex N Mean (%) SE SD

Three equal seg- Upper lip height - sn-sto X 100 l/3 l/4 M 50 32.4 0.44 3.1
ments of lower Lower face height sn-gn F 50 31.1 0.41 2.6
face Lower lip height - sto-sl x 100 l/3 l/4 M 50 26.8 0.40 3.0
Lower face height sn-gn F 50 26.5 0.35 2.2
Chin height - sl-gn x 100 l/3 2/4 M 50 42.9 0.70 4.7
Lower face height sn-gn F 50 44.4 0.51 3.2
Labial fissure Labial fissure level in relation to ch-ch level 2/3 3/4 M 50 69.5 0.56 3.9
level the height of the lower face in relation to F 50 70.8 0.62 3.9
sn-gn

*Also accepted by Broadbent and Mathews,‘* Burian,” Patterson,‘” and Belinfante.”

erage, in the males the lower lip height reached 63.7%
of the entire chin height and in females it was nonsig-
nificantly less (59.9%).
Chinllower third of the face proportion (index 12).
In both sexes the chin occupied almost two thirds
(males, 61.9%; females, 62.9%) of the facial area
below the labial fissure.
Vermilion arcslmouth width proportions. The in-
dex indicating the relationship between the lower and
upper vermilion arcs (Table IV, index 1) was slightly
smaller in males than in females. Similarly, the index
expressing the relationship between the width of the
mouth and the lower vermilion arc was nonsignificantly
smaller in males (index 2, p = 0.08). The relationship
between mouth width and the upper vermilion arc pro-
duced a significantly smaller index (No. 3) in males
than in females (p = 0.02). The mouth width/vermilion
arc indices showed that both lips protruded more in
females than in males but significantly so only for the
upper lip.
Correlations between the measurements
lower face
Among the vertical measurements, the highest cor-
relations (r) were found between upper lip height and
cutaneous height (index l), between lower lip height
and height of the lower third of the face (index lo), and
between the upper and lower vermilion heights (index
6). No correlation was observed between the mea-
surements in four of the twelve indices: in females,
between upper lip and upper vermilion heights (index
2) and between heights of the cutaneous parts of both
lips (index 7); in males, between upper and lower chin
heights (index 5) and between heights of the lower lip
and chin (index 11). All significant correlations were
positive (Table III).
In the horizontally oriented measurements of the
mouth and vermilion, high correlation coefficients (r)
demonstrated significantly high dependence (p =
0.001) among the individual measurements (Table IV).
Proportions of the lower face versus canons
Analysis of our sample did not reveal any one sub-
ject with the three or four equal segments proposed by
Francesca,‘” Pacioli (Fig. 5),16 and Diirer (Fig. 5) .I7
The only two segments of the lower face in the study
within the group that were equal were the upper and lower lips; in
two males (out of 100) upper and lower lip heights were
each one third of the lower face, as in the canons of
Francesca’j or Pacioli,16 but in only one male (out of
58 Farkas et al.
100) were the upper and lower lips each one quarter the
height, as in the canon of Diirer.17
In both sexes the largest portion of the lower face
was occupied by the chin (Table V) and the smallest by
the lower lip height (Fig. 5). FrancescaY upper lip
height estimate (33%) approaches the average mea-
surement in males in our sample. Diirer ‘s17figures for
lips are the smallest: his lower lip height (25%) ap-
proaches the average value of the lower lip in both
sexes of the study group. Diirer’s17 formula for chin
height (50%) is closer to our findings (42.9% to 44.4%)
than the estimates of Francescal” or Pacioli16 (33%).
The average values for the level of the labial
fissures in the study group were similar in both sexes
and closer to the proportion given by Francescar” or
Pacioli16 (66%) than that given by Diirerr7 (75%). The
very small values of the standard error (SE) indicated
stable average findings in both sexes.
Of 100 young adults, 22% (12 males and 10 fe-
males) had the labial fissure at 66% of the distance from
chin point to subnasale (Francesca’j and Pacioli16). A
labial fissure three quarters the distance up the lower
face (Diirer17) was found in only 8% (5 males and 3
females).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
In our previous extensive population study of the
head and face based on 1,3 12 North American white
persons in thirteen age groups (6 to 19 years old),
ninety-three norms were established for the head, face,
orbits, nose, lips, mouth, and ears.l’ This data base
provided information regarding the various relation-
ships between measurements, asymmetries, and pro-
portions in these age groups.
For example, a pilot study in 100 6-year-olds and
100 18-year-olds (equally divided as to sex) showed a
significant correlation between the head and face indi-
ces but not for all head and face types. When the three
facial types (wide-short, average, and narrow-elon-
gated) were compared, no differences were found in the
major lower face proportions in girls. In two of the
male subgroup comparisons, on the other hand, some
significant differences involving only the upper lip in-
dices were seen, but the pattern was not clear. The head
and face indices were significantly correlated, and a
strong correlation was found between the facial index
and all lower face measurements, as expected. Surpris-
ingly , the head index and lower face measurements did
not correlate.
The tenuous relationship between the head, face,
and lower face proportions indicated that the standard
cephalic and facial measurements were unnecessary in
our present population sample. Consequently, this
Am. J. Ortlwd.
July 1984
study concentrated only on the lower half and lower
third of the face, especially on the lips and chin. Since
the main objective was to evaluate the normal relation-
ships between the upper and lower lips and the chin,
malocclusions were omitted from both study groups.
Linear measurements and proportions of the upper
and lower lips and the chin provide valuable informa-
tion in addition to the angles of the area”. 22-24 for
planning or evaluating surgery. The objectivity of the
data is ensured by the use of measurements directly
from the subjects instead of from photographs, which
are less reliable .25The reliability of biostereometry , an
expensive but versatile method offering a great amount
of data about the morphology of the face ,26must first be
clearly demonstrated by using control data obtained by
direct anthropometry .
The sublabiale landmark determining the lower
border of the lower lip corresponds with the mentola-
bial ridge of anatomists,” a point in the midline of the
mentolabial suclus (Si) ,‘I or the points marked as in-
ferior labial point ,s supramentale ,28 or submental
point .26A point in a similar location can be seen on the
drawings of Renaissance artists.15zl7 The identification
of this landmark on the lower face with deep and in-
dented or deep and curved chin contours was easy. On
the shallow and curved chins of the study group (30%
of males and 26% of females), the bottom of the lower
lip was determined by intraoral examination. Our study
confirmed the finding of Legan and Burstone” that the
upper lip occupies one third of the space between the
columella base (subnasale) and the chin point (gnath-
ion), which they called the lower third of the face as in
neoclassic proportion concepts and which we named
the lower half of the face according to the an-
thropometric nomenclature.
Since the external surface of the area does not di-
rectly relate to the underlying skeleton,7a 2s-R’ evalua-
tion independent of dentoskeletal analysis is essen-
tial.6, ‘I Knowledge of the proportions between the
upper and lower lips helps in surgical correction of the
region.
The division of the chin into upper and lower por-
tions proved useful: a chin with well-balanced pro-
portions and a proper inclination of the upper part is an
additional and important factor in the formation of a
pleasing facial profile. There is a wide range of chin
sizes and inclinations .32
The division of chin sizes into normal, large, and
smalP3 is very general. Usually, a chin with a deep
impression in the upper third of the area or in a protrud-
ing lower third of the face looks larger than a chin in a
receding mandible.
Significant interrelationships (r) were found among
Volume 86 Anthropometric proportions in lip and chin urea of lower face 59
Number 1

most lower face segments (Table III). Generally, one method of assessing facial change induced by orthodontic treat-
third of the upper lip was occupied by the vermilion and ment. AM J ORTHOD 41: 453-469, 1955.
5. Burstone CJ: The integumental profile. AM J ORTHOD 44: l-25,
two thirds by the cutaneous portion. In the lower lip, on
1958.
the average, about half of the total height was taken by 6. Neger M: A quantitative method for the evaluation of the soft-
the vermilion and the remainder by the skin area. The tissue facial profile. AM J ORTHOD 45:738-751, 1959.
chin had two equal portions in females, while in males 7. Bloom LA: Perioral profile changes in orthodontic treatment.
the upper portion was moderately smaller. Ahl J ORTHOD 47: 371-379, 1961.
8. Case CS: The question of extraction in orthodontia. AM J
The upper lip occupied about one third of the lower
ORTHOD 50: 659-691, 1964.
half of the face and the lower lip took more than one 9. Merrifield LL: The profile line as an aid in critically evaluating
third of the lower third of the face. The chin covered facial esthetics. AM J ORTHOD 52: 804-822, 1966.
almost two thirds of the lower third of the face. None of 10. Ricketts RM: Esthetics, environment, and the law of lip relation.
the study group revealed the neoclassic three or four AM J ORTHOD 54: 272-289, 1968.
11. Legan HL, Burstone CJ: Soft tissue cephalometric analysis for
equal parts.
orthognathic surgery. J Oral Surg 38: 744-75 1, 1980.
In one fifth of the study group (22% of loo), the 12. Farkas LG: Anthropometry of the head and face in medicine,
labial fissure level was positioned 66% of the way up New York, 1981, Elsevier-North Holland.
the lower face as indicated by Francescal” or Pacioli.16 13. Warwick R, Williams PL (editors): Gray’s anatomy, ed. 35,
The proportion of those with the labial fissure 75% of Edinburgh, 1973, Longmans, Green & Co.
14. Kiss F, Szentigothai J: Atlas anatomiae corporis humani (in
the way up the lower face, established by Diirer,17 was
Hungarian), vol. 3, Budapest, 1971, Medicina.
much smaller (8%). 15. Francesca P della (c. 1420-1492): Study of the proportions of the
In both sexes the upper vermilion was slightly head, Milano, Biblioteca Ambrosiana. Cited in Berry WA:
smaller than the lower vermilion and lower lip height Drawing the human form: methods, sources, concepts: a guide
was moderately smaller than upper lip height. to drawing from life, New York, 1977, Van Nostrand-Reinhold
The vermilion arc/mouth proportions indicated Company, p. 116.
16. Pacioli L: Divina proportione, Venetia, 1509, Paganius Paga-
more protruding lips in females. The examination was ninus
introduced in order to explore the relationship of index 17. Diirer A: Della simmetria dei corpi humani, Venetia, 1591,
values to various bite qualities.” However, our limited Press0 D. Nicolini.
experience with bite abnormalities in this study group 18. Broadbent TR, Mathews VL: Artistic relationships in surface
anatomy of the face: application to reconstructive surgery. Plast
does not allow any conclusion about the “sensitivity”
Reconstr Surg 20: 1-17, 1957.
of the indices. 19. Burian F: Atlas of plastic surgery, Prague, 1967, State Publish-
Variability of the individual measurements allows ing House of Medical Literature, vol. 2, p. 7.
great variation in proportions, which is one of the basic 20. Patterson CN: Surgery of the aging nose. In Sisson GA, Tardy
requirements for individuality.” Tables with the nor- ME Jr (editors): Plastic and reconstructive surgery of the face
and neck: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium.
mal range data represent average values and, conse-
Vol. 1. Aesthetic surgery, New York, 1977, Grune & Stratton,
quently, average proportions-not the optimal ones p. 23.
making the face attractive. Reconstructive surgeons 21. Belinfante LS: Total treatment planning for esthetic problems of
today must become familiar with methods of objectively the face: a team approach. J Oral Surg 37: 178-186, 1979.
judging facial harmony and proportion .84 They need to 22. Frantz L: Balance and harmony. Angle Orthod 38: 328-336,
1968.
know how to arrange individual linear distances, angles,
23. McDonnell JP, McNeil1 RW, West RA: Advancement genio-
and inclinations in the area undergoing surgeryS5 while plasty: a retrospective cephalometric analysis of osseous and soft
allowing some asymmetries. Ready-to-use formulas tissue changes. J Oral Surg 35: 640-647, 1977.
may become possible with further research. 24. Hohl TH, Wolford LM, Epker BN, Fonseca RJ: Craniofacial
osteotomies: a photocephalometric technique for the prediction
We would like to thank Miss Carla Salvador, Assistant and evaluation of tissue changes. Angle Orthod 48: 114-125,
Editor, Medical Publications Department, and the editorial 1978.
staff for their assistance in editing this manuscript. 25. Farkas LG, Bryson W, Klotz J: Is photogrammetry of the face
reliable? Plast Reconstr Surg 66: 346.355, 1980.
26 Berkowitz S, Cuzzi J: Biostereometric analysis of surgically cor-
rected abnormal faces. AM J ORTHOD 72: 526.538, 1977.
REFERENCES 27. Zrzav); J: Anatomy for artists (in Czech). Prague, 1957, National
1. Kelen E: Leonardo da Vinci’s advice to artists, Nashville, 1974, Health Publishing House, p. 107.
Thomas Nelson, Inc. 28 Peck H, Peck S: A concept of facial esthetics. Angle Orthod 40:
2. Lischer BE: Variations and modifications of the facial features: 284-318, 1970.
an introductory study. INT J ORTHOD 5: 495-507, 1919. 29 Subtelny JD: A longitudinal study of soft-tissue facial structures
3. Wuerpel EH: On facial balance and harmony. Angle Orthod 7: and their profile characteristics, defined in relation to underlying
81-89, 1937. skeletal structures. AM J ORTHOD 45: 481-507, 1959.
4. Stoner MM: A photometric analysis of the facial profile: a 30 Farkas LG. Ross RB, James JS: Anthropometry of the face in
60 Farkas et al. Am. J. Orthod.
July 1984

lateral facial dysplasia: the bilateral form. Cleft Palate J 14: 35. Wylie WL: The assessment of anteroposterior dysplasia. Angle
41-51, 1977. Orthod 17: 97-109, 1947.
3 1. Farkas LG, James JS: Anthropometry of the face in lateral facial
dysplasia: the unilateral form. Cleft Palate J 14: 193-199, 1977.
Reprint requests to:
32. Lund BA, Sather AH: The chin. Mayo Clin Proc 48: 417-425,
Dr. L. G. Farkas
1973.
Research Institute
33. Izard G: Orthodontie: orthopedie dento-faciale (T. VII de la
The Hospital for Sick Children
pratique stomatologique), ed. 3, Paris, 1950, Masson & Cie.
555 University Ave.
34. Kipika^sa A: Reflections on aesthetic and functional reconstruc-
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1X8
tion in plastic surgery. Acta Chir Plast (Prague) 21: 201-207,
1979.