Cargando…

The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether different camera lenses and dental specialties can affect the perception of smile esthetics. METHODS: In the first phase of this study, 40 female smile photographs (taken from dental students) were evaluated by six orthodontist...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sajjadi, Seyed Hadi, Khosravanifard, Behnam, Esmaeilpour, Mozhgan, Rakhshan, Vahid, Moazzami, Fatemeh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4759977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26952147
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.173426
_version_ 1782416822348283904
author Sajjadi, Seyed Hadi
Khosravanifard, Behnam
Esmaeilpour, Mozhgan
Rakhshan, Vahid
Moazzami, Fatemeh
author_facet Sajjadi, Seyed Hadi
Khosravanifard, Behnam
Esmaeilpour, Mozhgan
Rakhshan, Vahid
Moazzami, Fatemeh
author_sort Sajjadi, Seyed Hadi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether different camera lenses and dental specialties can affect the perception of smile esthetics. METHODS: In the first phase of this study, 40 female smile photographs (taken from dental students) were evaluated by six orthodontists, three specialists in restorative dentistry, and three prosthodontists to select the most beautiful smiles. The 20 students with the best smile ranks were again photographed in standard conditions, but this time with two different lenses: Regular and then macro lenses. Each referee evaluated the beauty of the smiles on a visual analog scale. The referees were blinded of the type of lenses, and the images were all coded. The data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U-tests (alpha = 0.05, alpha = 0.0167). RESULTS: The lenses led to similar scores of beauty perception (Mann–Whitney P = 0.8). There was no difference between subjective beauty perception of specialties (Kruskal–Wallis P = 0.6). Two-way ANOVA indicated no significant role for lenses (P = 0.1750), specialties (P = 0.7677), or their interaction (P = 0.7852). CONCLUSION: The photographs taken by a regular lens and then digitally magnified can be as appealing as close-up photographs taken by a macro lens. Experts in different specialties (orthodontics, prosthodontics, and restorative dentistry) showed similar subjective judgments of smile beauty.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4759977
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47599772016-03-07 The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics Sajjadi, Seyed Hadi Khosravanifard, Behnam Esmaeilpour, Mozhgan Rakhshan, Vahid Moazzami, Fatemeh J Orthod Sci Original Article BACKGROUND AND AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether different camera lenses and dental specialties can affect the perception of smile esthetics. METHODS: In the first phase of this study, 40 female smile photographs (taken from dental students) were evaluated by six orthodontists, three specialists in restorative dentistry, and three prosthodontists to select the most beautiful smiles. The 20 students with the best smile ranks were again photographed in standard conditions, but this time with two different lenses: Regular and then macro lenses. Each referee evaluated the beauty of the smiles on a visual analog scale. The referees were blinded of the type of lenses, and the images were all coded. The data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U-tests (alpha = 0.05, alpha = 0.0167). RESULTS: The lenses led to similar scores of beauty perception (Mann–Whitney P = 0.8). There was no difference between subjective beauty perception of specialties (Kruskal–Wallis P = 0.6). Two-way ANOVA indicated no significant role for lenses (P = 0.1750), specialties (P = 0.7677), or their interaction (P = 0.7852). CONCLUSION: The photographs taken by a regular lens and then digitally magnified can be as appealing as close-up photographs taken by a macro lens. Experts in different specialties (orthodontics, prosthodontics, and restorative dentistry) showed similar subjective judgments of smile beauty. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4759977/ /pubmed/26952147 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.173426 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Journal of Orthodontic Science http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Sajjadi, Seyed Hadi
Khosravanifard, Behnam
Esmaeilpour, Mozhgan
Rakhshan, Vahid
Moazzami, Fatemeh
The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics
title The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics
title_full The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics
title_fullStr The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics
title_full_unstemmed The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics
title_short The effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics
title_sort effects of camera lenses and dental specialties on the perception of smile esthetics
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4759977/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26952147
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.173426
work_keys_str_mv AT sajjadiseyedhadi theeffectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT khosravanifardbehnam theeffectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT esmaeilpourmozhgan theeffectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT rakhshanvahid theeffectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT moazzamifatemeh theeffectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT sajjadiseyedhadi effectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT khosravanifardbehnam effectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT esmaeilpourmozhgan effectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT rakhshanvahid effectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics
AT moazzamifatemeh effectsofcameralensesanddentalspecialtiesontheperceptionofsmileesthetics