|
|
Post by McGarrett-Five-0 on Apr 15, 2005 1:02:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by McGarrett-Five-0 on Apr 15, 2005 1:12:16 GMT
 -From "A Hard Day's Night" 1964.  |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Apr 16, 2005 8:26:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Apr 16, 2005 22:11:34 GMT
Still, McGarrett, great pictures! He's still got that long flat head.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Apr 18, 2005 13:27:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cavendish on Apr 18, 2005 13:57:08 GMT
Faul has a different shaped forehead than Paul did, among other things ( such as a different shaped nose, & shallower eye depth ).
Good job, McGarrett & BP !
|
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on Apr 18, 2005 19:56:56 GMT
Also, Faul's ear hangs lower and more to the front, while Paul's ear hung higher and was more to the back.
|
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Apr 19, 2005 0:20:14 GMT
The problem is, i'm not sure we've ever seen JPM's forehead in profile, if there are any pics out there i'd love to see them, i think we've only ever seen faul side-on without hair covering his forehead, i agree with everything else but im not sure about the that, thats all!  |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on Apr 19, 2005 7:10:03 GMT
The problem is, i'm not sure we've ever seen JPM's forehead in profile, if there are any pics out there i'd love to see them, i think we've only ever seen faul side-on without hair covering his forehead, i agree with everything else but im not sure about the that, thats all! We were talking about the nose shape here. |
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Apr 19, 2005 14:32:42 GMT
BP you get so defensive, i said i agree with all thats being said, except cavendish mentioned the difference between their foreheads. Hence me saying that i cant remember ever seing the real JPM without hair covering his forehead.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Apr 20, 2005 14:52:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on May 23, 2005 17:20:58 GMT
Another Bill's profile... |
|
|
|
Post by TPIMaster on May 23, 2005 17:27:51 GMT
Check out around his ear, looks weird...
|
|
|
|
Post by LovelyJulia on May 24, 2005 3:11:46 GMT
    I still can hear from fakers: .... it's ALL about aging ..... it's ALL because MMT picture is too blurred ... bulls*h*i*t ... bulls*h*i*t ... bulls*h*i*t BeatlePaul darling, you know you flipped the older Faul picture by accident, right? That's not his left profile  . |
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on May 24, 2005 7:16:48 GMT
BeatlePaul darling, you know you flipped the older Faul picture by accident, right? That's not his left profile . LovelyJulia, tell me ... does the countour of a profile change changing side? |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on May 24, 2005 8:14:03 GMT
I thought nearly everybody had asymmetrical differences between the left and right profile? I do........
|
|
|
|
Post by BeatlePaul on May 24, 2005 8:17:24 GMT
 The boundaries of one man profile doesn't change changing side...the silhouette is just the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Michelle66 on May 24, 2005 20:23:45 GMT
Photos of Paul's forehead: I can keep this up ALL day  He is 9 here, but it's the only one I found  |
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on May 25, 2005 0:55:46 GMT
Mine does ;D Ok not majorly or noticably to anybody but if you look closely my profile isn't totally identical both sides, but certainly not to the degree that you have illustrated, they at least appear to be two different guys. Although i do think as people get older their noses do become slightly saggy and dare i say hooked  |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on May 25, 2005 4:41:09 GMT
He is 9 here, but it's the only one I found I know I will be the only person on this board, or probably in the world fo that matter with this opinion: That childhood picture is of..... William! But, I know that no one will be able to accept that, so I offer it as an opinion without support. Let's just say, its based on the eyes. Paul was just a little bit "wall-eyed." That child has very nicely central eyes, very british, very open and even. My current thought is that Paul's were atypically spread, somewhat elongated, and perhaps "squintier." And deeper set. The child in the photo has eyes set in an average depth; I think Paul's were further recessed. These are just my current opinions. The wind will blow and who knows what I'll come up with tomorrow.  |
|
|
|
Post by TotalInformation on May 25, 2005 4:51:33 GMT
Concur in re: Perplexed's observation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michelle66 on May 25, 2005 6:07:42 GMT
I know I will be the only person on this board, or probably in the world fo that matter with this opinion: That childhood picture is of..... William! That would show Bill's hair is brown, not red..... |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on May 25, 2005 7:01:39 GMT
Paul had more of a low top to his cranium, flatter seeming, and elongated from front to back. A round head in general. That child has a regular, well shaped head, one that, in my opinion, would grow into a taller type of head. I think, too, at 60IF, the "taller" quality of William's head has been exagerated quite a bit. I see nothing exceptional about it; I just, in my opinion, feel that maybe that perception has resulted from comparison to Paul's rounder head. I feel like an idiot with a capital "I" talking about craniums. Why don't I just quit music and go study anthropomorphism, and compare heads and knee caps and teeth all day long? Well, since we're on the subject, enjoy this website dealing with anthropomorphic art work depicting interesteing animals: www.anthroart.net/Better use of my dementia. |
|
.
