• Zozano@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      3 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
            ·
            2 days 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
              ·
              13 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
        ·
        2 days 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.