Tag Archives: Facial Hair

Do you recognise this Aussie celeb?

https://au.news.yahoo.com/recognise-aussie-celeb-054349098.html

 

This bloke is the real thing

I’m amazed by two aspects of this interesting news story about an international competition run by the highly original author Douglas Coupland to find the world’s closest lookalike to the late great epileptic painter Vincent van Gogh. I’m amazed at how closely the British actor Daniel Baker in the photo shown visually resembles van Gogh in his face but also in so many other distinctive visible features. I can’t help wondering how closely the British man is like the legendary artist in his personality, talents and behaviour, if at all, and I’m also left wondering how far back the two might be related (all humans are related if you go back far enough), but all that is of course none of my business. This super-recognizer gives her seal of approval to the idea that Baker looks a heck of a lot like van Gogh. I am truly impressed, because I usually find celebrity lookalikes and lookalike competitions to be laughable due to the glaring differences between the faces of the “lookalike” and the real celebrity.

The other thing that I’m amazed about is the fact that all those other pictured men thought themselves as possible winners of the competition, when so many don’t really have faces or heads that look much like self-portraits of the artist (which we can assume were good likenesses). Being a van Gogh double requires more than having short ginger hair and beard and being a white man of similar age, with an intense look on your face. The face is the thing, and the shape of the head, the shape of the hairline and also the shape of the natural beardline, even the shape of the outline and the inner lines and the size of your ears (which may number one or two). I think it is interesting that it appears that the winner of the competition was not self-selected. It shows how little judgement some people apparently have into how visually close in resemblance one person is to another, which I guess is the result in a spectrum of person visual recognition ability.

I’m going to be really annoyed if in his acting career Baker never gets the chance to play van Gogh. It would be such a waste!

Van Gogh lookalike competition won by Dorset man. BBC News. November 25th 2016.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-dorset-38101522

 

When you wake up with the melody of a love song wafting through your mind like the scent of jasmine on a summer’s night…..

….you know you stayed up way too late watching a Bollywood movie the night before. I stayed up late the other night watching most of the 176 minutes of Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi, starring the incomparably gorgeous Shah Rukh Khan and beautiful Anushka Sharma. I should have been an Indian, with my love of music and bright colours.

Much as I adore Bollywood movies, especially ones with Shah Rukh Khan in them, I’ve taken a few viewings to warm to this film, probably because I don’t like the gender politics in it, as is the case with most Bollywood movies and I also don’t like the stereotypically negative depiction of introverts, as is often found in both Bollywood and Hollywood movies. One positive thing I can say about this film is that it proves the acting talent of the delightful male lead, because the plot of the film would be totally implausible if not for his ability to convince the audience that his wife in the movie could be fooled by her husband knowing her in close relationships both in his real persona and in a synthesized character who is his extreme opposite in terms of the introversion/extroversion spectrum of personality dimensions. Obviously both characters have the same face, so how could a wife not recognize her own husband’s face, playing a different character? I guess that premise is believable in light of the fact that face recognition ability is found in humans in a spectrum of ability, or a “bell curve” or a natural distribution. Most people are pretty good at it, a few excellent, and I guess the same number of a few really bad at recognizing faces. And there are other things that can confuse visual person recognition such as hairdos, facial hair, posture, habitual fashion styles, gait, voice and above all, personality, which is the spirit or mind that animates our bodies and faces. Shah Ruhk Khan and the make-up and fashion professionals who worked on this movie have expertly altered all of the above features of a persona (besides the basic face structure) in the two characters he plays, with such skill that the actor’s face no longer plays the usually dominant role in person recognition, even for a super-recognizer such as myself.

Upon some reflection, I’ve concluded that the degree of attention to the face of both personas of the male lead character are not reduced to the same degree. I think I paid much more attention to the sexy persona’s face than to the nerdy persona’s face, even though they are the same face. I guess that is just how that kind of attraction works; it demands and keeps attention. No surprises there, but if this is generally true it gives a nice clue to how to hide or disguise identity. I guess it is no accident that the stereotypical disguise consists of props that make a person less attractive, things such as spectacles or fake facial hair. Does a less attractive face draw less attention, and as a result is it less likely to be well-encoded in visual memory, and is it then less likely to be recognized later?

Can I really believe a plotline in which a wife repeatedly fails to recognize her own husband wearing a disguise that reveals his face rather than covers it? I’m not sure it matters that much when I just love watching the actors the dancing and the colours, but for sure Shah Rukh Khan’s ability to turn his industrial-strength charisma on an off like a tap is the only thing that makes this film believable in any shape or form.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1182937/

 

Department of Parliamentary Services security staff need to identify Parliament House visitors by face – but how?

I’m watching a lot of discussion about the Abbott Government’s embarrassing reversal of the controversial “burqa ban” regarding visitors to the Australian federal parliament in Canberra. Media reports state that all visitors will be required to reveal their faces temporarily to security staff, but there is no proper explanation of why. Why do people need to show their faces to staff, unless their faces are being photographed, recorded or memorized using some kind of technology or human ability, or are being screened in a systematic way by a human or technological system that is based on a suitably comprehensive library of stored or memorized facial images? I have my doubts that any of these things are actually happening. I’ve read nothing to indicate that human super-recognizers or a technological substitute for this kind of face recognition ability is being used by police or security services in Australia, even though there is a large collection of media and scientific reports of human and computerized facial recognition being used in the UK and USA. Another question that I’ve not seen addressed in recent media reports is the question of who is going to be targeted by the new requirement of facial inspection, and what are the criteria for adequate facial disclosure. I believe passport photos require no glasses to be worn and a neutral facial expression, and this certainly makes sense in terms of human facial recognition. Will the same rules apply at Parliament House, or will men be allowed to walk into Parliament without removing any element of the “bogan disguise” of sunglasses, goatee beard and baseball cap? I wonder, are visitors routinely asked to remove hats and hoodies in Parliament House? Why haven’t we had calls for a ban on dark sunglasses in Parliament House? Dark sunnies are clearly used very commonly by Australians of all ethnic backgrounds as a facial concealment. They are very popular among police and also dodgy people. It is pretty obvious to me that racism has played a large role in this hoo-haa over faces and identity and security, because the hypocrisy is obvious.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/controversial-parliament-house-burqa-ban-dumped-20141020-118j5h.html