the answer is 43, lol, dude I’m not going to sum up variations. It’s stupid. Otherwise you’d need a supercomputer the size of a country to simulate all the particle collisions. probably even sillier.
Well, just one then. I’ve seen a human with pointy ears like an elf.
John Keates,
This article might be of interest to you, and you may find links to similar research from there. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4314209.stm
There was a related television program a few weeks ago, and I’m really sorry that I don’t remember what it was called. But one part of it showed that the performance of an athlete could be predicted, very accurately by measuring the length of the ring finger against the length of the index finger.
It’s true that we all have the same bits, anatomically speaking, but the variation between people is truly fascinating.
in that case, after deliberating from all the information. I don’t see how looking for differences could make someone a better artist, it goes against naturalistic conditioning. However there is always a reason for those looking, mr.abstract, which would make for a viable reason. would make a good realistic piece labeled for abstraction. You know, thinking of it more and more, that is a good idea, i have more respect for you now as an artist johnny, creative thinking like this is what raises the bar for the artistic profession…
However, I personally think each species is pure. I don’t see how there would be such a difference. If there was such a difference than wouldn’t that organism be classified a different specie.
p.s.: Watch the X-files, they have a lot of that type of stuff. e.g. evolved homo-supersapians. yadda yadda.
in salute,
D
First off, thanks for the contributions. I will try to include them in the first post and give credit where it is due.
There are some things I guess I should clear up (I’m not a scientist but I read this stuff all the time and I’m not making it up).
I should mention about the 99.9% varience of gene thing. It is true that we are very uniform as a species but most of the variations are in cosmetic things rather than functional things. For this reason, the variations that exist tend to be relevent to us artists. It is possible for very small variations in genes to have large effects. A fairly large number of embrios are aborted by the womb because there is a mutation in an important gene so a gene can have a very marked effect - but marked effects tend to be lethal unless they are cosmetic.
Whilst there are some convincing case studies where twins separated at birth lead very similar lives, even prefering the same colour and playing the same sport etc, this doesn’t apply to all twins. Also, identical twins are rarely completely identical as there are around ten mutations (copying errors) each time the genes are spliced.
There can be very large variations in a species and species are rarely “pure”. Take dogs for example. Obviously this is an extreem case as they have been bred by people. Another example is cichlid fish which can change during thier life to look like completely different species. Many fish can also change from male to female depending on circumstances.
So, in other words, it is naive to place any restrictions on the kinds of variations that can uccur within a species. The germ line is the only important thing as far as the genes are concerned.
This is a complex subject so I will stop myself before I bore everyone.
i’ve yet to see such a drastic change or difference in homo-sapien, although hoping can help you could try but it won’t do you no good. Hope you do find this anomoly in your equation, would probably be front page.
also,
I’m not saying that their wasn’t such a change in the entire time of our species. And if their was than the change of such in individual variation would be limitless in attribute, and most likely minor in change. However, i’ve yet to see such a thing in my life-time. Maybe science or more specifically scientists could offer a more determinent answer with pictorial reference.
The website for a touring wax exhibit, Panoptikon
And it’s for sale. If you got the dough, I bet the Panoptikon has enough of aberrations to last you a lifetime. 
Okay, you were talking about maths defining or measuring the differences… well, there’s really a average face which I saw in the discovery channel, hehe, after averaging some hundreds of faces it doesn’t matters how different are the new faces that U are adding the average face stills being the same, and sorprisingly close to typical beauty patterns…
But this scientifics also studied the diferences and variations, made books etc. so, I’ll post some links and the biography in there:
THE ARTICLE:
http://www.open2.net/everwondered1/image/topic1.htm
the biography:
Books:
Two-And Three-Dimensional Patterns of the Face, A K Peters, Ltd; ISBN: 1568810873
Intelligent Biometric Techniques in Fingerprint and Face Recognition (CRC Press International Series on Computational Intelligence.) L. C. Jain, CRC Press; ISBN: 0849320550
The Art of Genes, Enrico Coen, Oxford Paperbacks; ISBN: 0192862081
Human Facial Expression : An Evolutionary View, Alan J. Fridlund, Academic Press Inc; ISBN: 0122676300
Links:
[http://www.gene.ucl.ac.uk/](http://www.gene.ucl.ac.uk/)
For more information on David Hopkinson and the Galton Lab
[http://www.personology.com/](http://www.personology.com/)
Looking at the characteristics of the face
[http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/discover/open2000.htm](http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/discover/open2000.htm)
NIDCR article about whats in a face [http://depts.washington.edu/hsd/INFO/genlang.htm](http://depts.washington.edu/hsd/INFO/genlang.htm)
Research into genetics
edit: more Links
Forensic face reconstruction link: users.rsise.anu.edu.au/~hartley/Papers/forensics/Overview.pdf
one of a thousand face recognision projects links: http://www.cim.mcgill.ca/~wsun/sa/project/node12.html
(I haven’t finished yet 
)
Durty,
Of course I’m not suggesting that there are variations in humans quite as extreem as those if cichlid fish - I was just using them as a clear example. I really don’t see what the big fuss is over looking at variations that exist.
Kargokultti, thanks for that, I will add it to the list.
Stahlberg, thanks for some fine examples of facial variations 
It is interesting how the nasojugle fold can sometimes merge with the eye bag (I don’t know the technical term for ‘eye bag’). See how this has happened only under the left eye of John Cheese? (his original name). This seems to have happened to a greater extent to the black gentelman and the guy on the bottom left. My face is the same. When I give a big grin there is some evidence of the nasojugle fold but only as part of the mass of crows toes that go round my head.
The two on the right have little eye bag creases just under the eyes which lends them a freindly - chirpy look.
It appears that, no matter how big the eye bag, it never extends beyond the nasojucle fold (is this a rule?)
These faces are good examples of variations and unusual creases etc. Look for instance at the crease on the forehead of the guy on the top left. I never saw something quite like that before. I don’t think it is a scar. It could be to do with stress (he sure looks pissed off) . There are muscles that run over our scalp which are there purely to give us a head ache (our brain has no pain receptors). Maybe these muscles have been very active over the years of hang-overs and have caused the crease?
Arn’t there a lot of differences there? I think I am going to have to start drawing pictures and getting into some more heavy research.
mosconariz, thanks for the links. A lot of them don’t work for me but maybe those books will be interesting. The web page itself didn’t go into enough detail for me to really get a handle on what they were saying.
Actually, I have read “the art of genes” (which you mention) and recommend it highly. It is very clearly written and quite revealing. It doesn’t say much about this subject though.
yeah, the links doesn’t worked for me but I thought the problem was mine, hehe, sorry
and yeah, the article is very superficial, sorry for that…
I have found a lot of math researches using fractals to analyise and identify specific faces. The most interesting (for me) was: http://hct.ece.ubc.ca/research/facenav/fnsig.pdf
maybe, with enough images uploaded and linked we can make a fine and useful “catalog of some anatomic differences rarely portrayed in realistic art”, gegege
And Stahlberg, sorry, I maybe misunderstood your aproach to genetics… But forgive me, I’m buying your ballistic character modeling book
I have re-created this thread in the anatomy forum here:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=265753
This way, the philosophy can go here (if you feel the need) and more constructive stuff can go in the other thread.
Thanks
A good site to get great faceshots of hundreds of people who looks far from photomodells is the swedish parlament.
I hope that this link will work, while there, press a letter and start looking. The link under the pictures contains a high resolution picture.
http://www.riksdagen.se/webbnav/index.aspx?nid=1003
Thanks for that Alice,
It is interesting how much variation there is amongst these Swedes, even though Swedish people are fairly uniform genetically speaking (they are mostly from some small populations that moved up there fairly recently).
Nopes, the scandinavian geenes are pretty mixed nowdays, and have been so from nomads during the last 1500 years.
If you want isolated and cool geenes, have a look at Iceland. 
Hello John Keates,
I don’t know whether this will help your in-depth research on this topic, but I found this book to be very good to have for studying variety of faces within a single book.
1000 On 42nd Street (Paperback)
ekah
Thanks Ekah, Actually I have been recommended this book before. I thought it looked a little deer but I may still have to go for it. I will put it on the list. Thanks
Hi,
Just note that this book has no text to speak of. Each page is a photo of a person. As far as analysis on distinctions or variations, you’ll have to make do with your own observation from these photos.
ekah
I havent read all of ther posts in this thread, but I personally think that artists should simply go to the subjects that the find facinating (unless you are working for a client etc.). I think what will eventually attract veiwers to an artists work in the long haul, is the artists commitment to his/her vision. This is something that unfolds, for the most part over the course of a career, not a few paintings.
The most celebrated artists across time have pursued ideal beauty and the grotesque (as well as everything in between). I like Bosch, but I also like Renior, (IMHO) in each of these respective instances, the artists pursued thier unique visions, and incidentally, made history in the process.
Gord
The nature of normal human variation
Here is a link to an essay with replies on one of my favorite internet sites. Hefty reading but enlightening.
“There are thousands upon thousands of mutants out thereno, more, millionsno, actually billions. This is because we are all mutants. That’s one thing you don’t expect but which happens to be statistically true.”
I SUGGEST THAT PEOPLE WHO READ THE ARTICLE READ THE WHOLE OF IT so that there arn’t mis-understandings - particularly read the bit written by NICHOLAS HUMPHREY at the end.