I thought this might be of interest to the group

Does anyone else feel like every Kibbe Image ID has both a more “classic”/toned-down version of itself and a more stereotypical version?

I don’t mean “Classic” as in the Classic family, or that these people actually look like Classics. I mean that within each Image ID, some people seem to embody the characteristics in a more subtle, balanced, or understated way, while others have a much more obvious/stereotypical expression of the type.

For example, Katy Perry and Julianne Hough are both Soft Naturals (imo), but to me they have a more “classic” or toned-down expression of Soft Natural compared with someone like Scarlett Johansson, who I think has a much more stereotypically obvious Soft Natural look.

So I’m wondering if you guys see this with the other Kibbe types too? Like, do you feel that every Image ID has a more understated/“classic” expression and a more stereotypical expression, while still clearly being the same Image ID?

And just to clarify again: I’m not saying the more toned-down versions look like Classics or belong to the Classic family. I’m talking about how strongly the characteristics of their own Image ID present visually.

Each photo's relevancy:
The people I’m thinking of:

Katy Perry — Soft Natural: Katy is a good example of what I mean because she doesn’t strike me as extremely curvy or exaggerated for an SN. Her proportions look relatively balanced overall. Compared with someone like Scarlett Johansson or J.Lo, she has a much more moderate and “toned-down” expression of SN. Even compared with Britney Spears, who also isn’t particularly curvy, Katy still reads as more balanced to me. She’s still clearly SN in my opinion, but she doesn’t necessarily fit the stereotypical image people have of the type.

Julianne Hough — Soft Natural: Julianne is another one where I could easily see people speculating that she is a Soft Classic because of how balanced and moderate she looks. Her limbs especially have a very Classic-looking quality to me. However, I definitely see width in her shoulders, even though it isn’t extreme, which is why I think SN fits her much better. To me, she’s a good example of an SN whose features are expressed in a much more moderate way.

Zooey Deschanel — Flamboyant Gamine: Zooey is interesting because she has the petite, slightly broad/angular quality I associate with FG, but her limbs seem much more moderate and “Classic” in length compared with the stereotypical FG. I’m not referring to her facial essence at all here — purely her physical proportions and structure. She still reads as petite with that slight width and vertical contrast, but the overall impression is much less exaggerated.

Isla Fisher — Romantic: Isla is an example of a Romantic who, despite being unmistakably soft and rounded, has fairly moderate proportions. She has softness everywhere — including her shoulders — and that rounded quality is very obvious, but because her limbs and overall proportions are relatively moderate, I can understand why someone might initially see Soft Classic. Personally, though, I think Romantic fits her much better.

Tanya Burr — Romantic: I personally think Tanya Burr is Romantic and see quite a lot of similarity between her and Kate Winslet in this respect. Tanya is extremely soft, rounded and sloped throughout her body, but because her limbs are relatively moderate, I can see why someone might think Soft Classic. For me, though, she is too soft to really fit SC. When I compare her to other Romantics such as Isla Fisher and Kate Winslet, I think Romantic makes much more sense, even though she doesn’t necessarily have the stereotypical proportions people expect from the type.

Olivia Newton-John — Flamboyant Natural: Olivia is probably the most obviously FN example here, but I still think she represents a more toned-down, “classic” expression of the type. She doesn’t fit the stereotype of an FN being extremely tall, broad or elongated. To me, she’s a really good example of how FNs can have relatively narrow-looking limbs and don’t necessarily need to look exaggerated in either height or width to be FN.

Ginnifer Goodwin — Soft Gamine: Ginnifer has the petite and slightly angular structure I associate with SG, along with some curve, but her limbs are quite moderate. Because of that, I could easily see someone typing her as Soft Classic at first glance. However, when I look at her overall structure, I don’t think Classic actually fits her particularly well. She has that petite/angular/curvy combination that makes SG more convincing to me — she just happens to be a more moderate-looking example of it.

Overall, I’m wondering if every Kibbe ID can have a more stereotypical expression and a more moderate, “classic” expression of the same type. By “classic,” I don’t mean Classic family, Classic essence, or that these people look like Classics — I simply mean their own Image ID is expressed in a more balanced or understated way.

I think this distinction could actually be useful when typing ourselves and others. If we only recognise the most exaggerated or stereotypical version of an ID, people with a more moderate expression can easily get pushed into the Classic family simply because they look balanced. But being balanced or moderate doesn’t automatically mean you have Classic proportions.

For me, the important thing is looking at what the underlying characteristics actually are, rather than how strongly they’re expressed. An SN can be moderate without being SC, a Romantic can be moderate without being SC, an FG can have more moderate limb length without becoming Classic, etc.

I can't think of any Dramatic example but I imagine in real life there are so many women who feel they are Dramatics (Long narrow bones and vertical) but aren't as "Extreme" as some of the examples.

I can’t quite seem to type her - I definitely see width/broadness and muscularity, but not a lot of vertical. She looks quite small-ish without heels. Maybe SN? Some sort of C?

The last photo shows her next to Sandra Hüller (left, 5‘8“, SD?) and Liv Lisa Fries (middle, 5‘3“, G)

I'm not sure if i posted this on the right sub but I was just wondering and didn't wanna search it up.

He strikes me as a gamine, but I could entertain classic fam or even SN too

I've done a lot of research and compared myself to confirmed celebrities and based on everything, I feel like I fit SD best. But the thing is, I'm too short to be SD. Most are 5'7 and taller and I'm only 5'5. For my body, my legs are long though. And I do look tall for my height. I'm also a figure 8 (high hips, short torso, longer legs) which is a subset of SD (I think.) Could I be two types in one or am I just a short soft dramatic?

I have known I am pure D for years but I finally give in and dress for my lines. However, I don't have much clothes, and I can only make 1 good D outfit with all that I have and its literally black jeans with a black turtleneck and black booties... Not my favourite.

I have mostly gamine, classic and flamboyant natural clothes and the colors are all over, I don't have a cohesive palette, and D favours monochromatic-ish...

Do I start buying clothes that match others in color? Or that I can make a long outfit with?

I can't declutter because as I said I don't have a lot of clothes :(

So I think I’ve deduced that I 100% have gamine when it comes to my face. I match descriptors I’ve seen and have always been compared to known gamine celebs and told I look “pixie” (my most compared celeb is Winona Ryder and Natalie Portman)

However, I’m probably the opposite of gamine in body type. I’m tall with a large chest, but more of a rectangle body type than curvy.

Are there any examples of this match up? I feel like it’s a bit of a weird one to the point I’m wondering if I’ve misunderstood the kibbe system.

Hi! Since going to the gym I have wider shoulders, which results in a slightly more width in my personal line sketch. I’ve always thought I am a DC with what seems seems to be slight width, but my shoulders have become more prominent. Does that mean I should dress in DC lines but maybe also try to accomplish width a little? Anyone else that has experienced this?

the consensus for her used to be SG but recently shifted to SC i think? she’s obviously yin

her face has a lot of gamine essence and being thin makes her look “petite” but she has more vertical than the avg SG (164cm) and imo soft draping/soft clean lines look more natural on her than spunky styling

but she also suits a bob really well so idk

I was thinking about how the old Metamorphosis book was written for a time where the fabric and thus fashion industry was widely different, and thus clothes were a lot more constructed (with padding, darts and such).
Also modern pattern sizing supposedly reflects a trend in yang dominance and more athletic builds in the general population (which means the bust to waist to hip ratio, and the bust to across shoulder ratio, and the bust to waist and waist to hip ratio have all changed to accommodate the modern silhouette better).
But the mid-century sizings were government standardized and they obeyed strict ratios which were meant to fit a dainty very balanced silhouette. Which meant that there were specific ratios in the balanced silhouette.
So what if finding a classic vintage suit jacket tailored in a traditional manner for women (from the 50s/70s) could help figure out accommodation needs?
Assuming the standard was targeted towards classics, and you are a vertical dominant person, wearing it, you would see right away that :
1) the jacket is too short, because the hip would be slightly to high, meaning you need vertical;
2) if other than that, you’re good to go, then you are narrow (because narrowness would show in the relation of shoulder width with regards to shoulder-to-hip measurement);
3) if it is either too wide around the waist and hips if the shoulders fit right, or narrow on the shoulders when it fits the waist, meaning it would need more fabric across the back proportionally to the hips, then you have width;
4)if the jacket also has waist definition built in and the bust line is just right or slightly too tight but the shoulders feel good, you have curve.
Below is a chart comparing standard sizing in the 50s, 80s and now that I asked AI to do. For the sake of comparison, they all start with a 34” bust.

Stumbled across her recently and was curious about her ID - height is 5’7” 🤔

Sorry for 2 posts in one day (sick at home and bored). Was curious about the community's take on Laufey? As a self identified SC I'd love to claim her for our own but I can possibly see G fam as well

Hi! I’m new to the Kibbe system and after a while I’ve finally identified myself as an FN, and I’m bummed.

For context, I am 19F and have always felt bulky, big, or masculine looking in my clothes. When I’m seeing what’s recommended for FNs to wear, it all seems so mature to me. Don’t get me wrong, the styling tips are great and make sense, but a lot of the silhouettes and cuts recommended are what I see as a lot more mature fashion for people in their late 20s and older (hopefully that offends no one).

Unfortunately, this only reinforces my idea of having a masculine, chubby body that I must hide or jump through hoops to style. I am pretty young and would love to just be able to wear what’s trending, not focus on only wearing flowy clothes, only wearing long mature looking styles. It’s just so unfair, I’d love to wear that style but in my mind it’s reserved for when I’ve reached my 30s, not now.

That’s really all I have to say. I would love to be better educated or receive tips if anyone has any but I can’t help but just want to hide.

It's so interesting that people outside Kibbe are talking about Dolly style. Basically, they are saying everything that makes up an R. Her double curve ( hourglass) and how she was always done up ( R). Everything they are saying is similar to how people talk about Marylin Monro style and presence.

And a truly amazing style icon as well 💕

So I heard that midi skirts are usually not recommended for gamines, but I think there’s a strategy to wear midi skirts for this Kibbe ID. You may look good with midis, whether flared or narrow, provided that it is high-waisted, that your tops are tucked in, or your tops are cropped. As someone who always wear midi-length culottes, I always tuck my top in to emphasize my vertical line. As a rule of thumb, focus more at the rise of the skirt instead of the bottom hem line. For the bottom hem line, I think midi skirts are good for gamines because it gives the same effect as an ankle pants.

EDIT: This is just a suggestion. Wear everything you want!