Boob geometry

Reading the “Boobs exist to make men happy” thread reminded me of a subject near and dear to my heart… boob geometry.

There are a lot of factors that affect the appearance of breasts, and I’ve been way too much time staring at female chests, trying to figure it out.

Bust size is really a misleading measurement. After all, it is the measurement of the total circumference of a woman’s rib cage + her breasts. Having a bust size of 38 is not so impressive if the woman is 6’ tall.

Likewise, cup size alone is a misleading indicator. A D cup in a 6’ woman is probably proportional for her frame, whereas a D cup on 4’9" woman is probably an eye-popper. But not necessarily - that short woman could have a large rib cage. So it’s a combination of bust & cup size - a 30C may be more of an eye-popper than a 48DD.

But the study of breast geometry doesn’t end there. Breasts seem to vary in how close they sit together (thereby creating cleavage). They also seem to vary in “perkiness”, which is really a measure of how high they sit on the chest. The Miracle Bra works by pushing breast up and close together. On the other end of the scale, a lot of technically well-endowed women are not attractive because they hang low and far apart.

So my question is: Is there a way one can measure all these factors in a single measurement?

See the threads on “dimensions” …

I’m sorry, the only thread I saw was “Extra Dimension in Space”, which seemed to have nothing to do with breasts. Can you steer me in the right direction?

I’m sorry, the only thread I saw was “Extra Dimension in Space”, which seemed to have nothing to do with breasts. Can you steer me in the right direction?

To measure eye-popability…

1)Have her breathe deep.

2)Ask her to stand sideways.

3)Look at profile.

4)A glass-eyed stare combined with drool scientifically proves she is an “eye-popper”.

Actually, your post about looking at a woman standing sideways reminds me of another potential breast measurement - overhang. In other words, how far away is the tip of the breast from the rib cage. The bullet bras of the 50’s were trying to emphasize this dimension, although most men prefer breasts that are more rounded than conical.

Just a clarification - the number in the bra size indicates the measurement around the rib cage under the breasts – then you add 5 to that (go figure). Then the letter represents how many inches more the breasts stick out. After D, some manufacturers go DD, DDD, … ; others do E, F, G…

It always tickles me to see the strip/porno ads advertising “I’m a 48 DD”. I don’t think they realize that they are describing Roseanne, not Dolly Parton.

Its so beautiful to see science at work… :slight_smile:


It only hurts when I laugh.

I’ve always felt that there should be a measurement that indicates how much a woman’s boobs stick out past her stomach. I’ve seen some women who look great form the top of their head to the bottom of their boobs, but from there down it’s a disaster. My proposed measurement system would result in a negative number for such women.

Women may appreciate a similar system for measuring men. It would be based on how far a man’s penis stuck out beyond his stomach. Obviously, negative values would be possibe for the men also.

You do know those ads aren’t referring to someone’s bra size, don’t you?


“Age is mind over matter; if you don’t mind, it don’t matter.” -Leroy “Satchel” Paige

Joe Bob, that’s easy – can the man stand buck naked and still not violate male frontal nudity laws?

Jeff - if they aren’t referring to bra (i.e. breast) size, what are they referring to?

Getting away from the empirical side of the subject, I recall, in undergraduate college, arriving at a formula for the analytical curve of the profile of a human female breast. It did have one discontinuity at the nipple, however. Sorry, I think the formula has been lost to posterity. Would’ve been great for establishing standardized esthetic parameters for such organs and for designing falsies, inflatable dolls, mannequins, etc. Wouldn’t explain why Spanish explorers decided mountains in profile met the criteria.

Ray (curiosity easily piqued)

Good lord, I never thought that a womens boobs, breasts, mammalia, whatever you wish to call them (me I am old fashioned and like the word boobs) would become such a boring topic as you people have made it - personally the only test I like is the pencil test - if she can hold the pencil under her breast, its okay with me - also that old axiom about more than a mouthful is a waste, that came from some guy with a flat chested friend - I personally don’t care abou size, shape, or nipple color - I LOVE THEM ALL :wink:


The worst thing that can possibly happen is not be used for something by someone - Kurt Vonnegut

When zyada said:

 Just a clarification - the number in the bra size indicates the measurement around the rib cage under the breasts
 -- then you add 5 to that (go figure). Then the letter represents how many inches more the breasts stick out.
 After D, some manufacturers go DD, DDD, .. ; others do E, F, G...
 It always tickles me to see the strip/porno ads advertising "I'm a 48 DD". I don't think they realize that they
 are describing Roseanne, not Dolly Parton.

It reminded me of more obsessive thoughts about boob geometry. Perhaps it’s really a matter of cup/bust ratio. Perhaps
you can express the bustiness factor in the form of:

 Bustiness Factor (BF) = (Bust+Cup)/Bust

 Examples:
 34B = 36/34 BF = 1.06 BF      36B = 38/36 BF = 1.05 BF
 34D = 38/34 BF = 1.12 BF      36D = 40/36 BF = 1.11 BF
 34DD = 39/34 BF = 1.15 BF     36DD = 41/36 BF = 1.14 BF

 Or zyada's example, 48DD = 1.10 BF.

As far as CptHowdy65’s comment about making boobs boring, hey, this is how analytical geeks drool and obsess. Same obsession, different means of appreciation…

Cpt. Howdy said:

[quote]

  • personally the only test I like is the pencil test - if she can hold the pencil under her breast, its okay with me -[unquote]

Didn’t you rather want to say if she can’t hold the pencil under her breast or perhaps I never understood the real purpose of the test to start with.

More geometrical thoughts: Another important dimension is the position of the fullest part of the breasts on the rib cage. Probably the most optimal position is roughly even with the breastbone (good name, huh?). If it’s dramatically higher or lower, it doesn’t look good.

To quantify, let’s call it Droop Factor, and measure it in relation to the breastbone. Let’s say that every 1.5" droop = 1 DF. If she hangs high, then DF is a negative number.

Then let’s renormalize the BF measurement (see above) so that:
NBF 0 <= 1.05 BF
1.05 BF < NBF 1 <= 1.10 BF
1.10 BF < NBF 2 <= 1.15 BF
1.15 BF < NBF 3 <= 1.20 BF

You can then come up with the Stare Factor measure, expressed in the form:
SF = NBF - DF

Thus, a woman who measures 34DD, but droops 1.5" below her breastbone earns a SF of 1 (NBF = 2, DF = 1)

Whaddya think?

[[Reading the “Boobs exist to make men happy” thread reminded me of a subject near and dear to my heart… boob geometry.]]

Wish I could have gotten credit for THAT elective …

(.)(.) <----------------hee hee.
boobies.
Don’tcha think Cecil might find this discussion a little immature? Besides, we still haven’t agreed on the purpose of the hymen.

I recall a thread on the old AOL board concerning big breasts; I was probably as confused abou those numbers as you are. Near as I can figure, the measurement is taken straight across the nipples.


“Age is mind over matter; if you don’t mind, it don’t matter.” -Leroy “Satchel” Paige

Omni - if the pencil falls, IT’S A BOY!!!

I am reminded of an Irish friend of mine who said, upon observing of well endowed woman obviously braless, “looks like two kids playing under a blanket”…

Droop factor ?? Stare factor ?? whether they droop or not, I stare !!!


The worst thing that can possibly happen is not be used for something by someone - Kurt Vonnegut