• Zozano@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    2 days ago

    I can’t even tell if this has been edited lol.

    Hard to believe his face is that tiny.

    I guess that’s why the shooter aimed for the neck?

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          IMO 104% looks normal. 110% looks plausible, but makes his mouth look a bit big for his jaw. 100% looks completely implausible. The space between the eyes shouldn’t be smaller than the space from the eye to the side of the head.

          • Ghis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Yup 104% is the most human. Came to that conclusion when I found the site 2 days ago lmfao

            Dudes face looked way smaller than 96% of normal proportions though, but I don’t know how percentages work (if that 4% isn’t linear or something)

        • Zozano@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          2 days ago

          The fact that 110% looks wrong, despite knowing it’s normal facial proportions, deeply unsettles me

    • Kyrgizion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      He was wearing kevlar, and the shooter was likely aware of that, so head or neck were the only possible targets.

    • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      My theory as someone who isn’t a soldier or into killing people is that skulls can be pretty tough and a bullet at a slight angle could ricochet off. Ain’t nothing ricocheting off your neck. I think the shooter knew exactly what he was doing.