All famous scansAll famous scansAll famous scansAll famous scansAmerican actor - Wikipedia Page
Cam Gigandet is an American actor best known for his versatile roles in both film and television. He gained widespread recognition for his portrayal of James Cullen in the 2008 teen drama Twilight and its sequel, establishing him as a familiar face in Hollywood’s major franchises. His career is defined by a range of leading and supporting roles in projects such as Jumper, Never Back Down, and the series The Following, showcasing a steady presence in genre cinema and television drama.
The scan reflects a lean, athletic build consistent with his active lifestyle and the physical demands of his acting roles. At 180 cm and 78 kg, his frame exhibits a balanced distribution of muscle and fat, typical of a functional, endurance-oriented physique rather than a bulky power build. This "parsnip" shape indicates a tapered waist with developed upper body musculature, suggesting a body optimized for agility and movement on screen. The composition aligns with the physical requirements often seen in action and drama roles, presenting a fit and proportionate aesthetic without extreme definition.
A visual estimation of the areas of your body with a higher likelihood of containing more fat than others -- not a measurement. This feature is experimental; treat the heatmap as an indication, not a clinical finding. Accuracy is best at the extremes of body-fat percentage, weaker in the middle, and atypical body shapes (athletic builds, pregnancy, etc.) may not be modelled well.
| Metric | Value vs reference | Reference | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lateral lean?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | +1.4° | 0° = vertical (frontal knees-to-head axis) | natural — upright |
| Head forward offset?Accurate to about ±1-2 cm in a single scan -- camera tilt and head rotation (looking up / down / sideways) are the main confounders. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, look straight ahead and keep the camera level while scanning. | Upload a side picture to get this metric | 0 = ear in line with the spine axis (no forward head) | — |
| Forward/back lean?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | Upload a side picture to get this metric | 0° = vertical (side knees-to-head axis) | — |
| Shoulder tilt?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | +2.8° | 0° = level (frontal) | natural — right shoulder low |
| Hip tilt?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | 0.0° | 0° = level (frontal) | natural — balanced |
| Segment | Left width | Right width | Δ vs symmetric | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Upper arm Biceps / triceps | 8.7 cm | 8.6 cm | +0.9% | natural — balanced |
| Forearm Forearm flexors | 5.8 cm | 7.9 cm | -30.9% | significant — right side largerlow confidenceA single front-facing photo can't tell a genuinely larger limb from one simply rotated toward the camera, and small limbs like the forearm swing a lot — so a large difference here is more likely a measurement artifact than a real asymmetry. A full-body scan (front + back) averages this out and is far more reliable. |
| Thigh Quadriceps | 15.4 cm | 14.9 cm | +3.1% | natural — balanced |
BodyWHAT uses its own proprietary, neural-network-based technology to estimate your body-fat percentage and other body-composition metrics directly from your photos. These in-house models are combined with established anthropometric methods; the published methods and reference ranges below inform and calibrate those estimates.
BodyWHAT's figures are estimates for general fitness and education — not medical advice or a diagnosis. They draw on established methods and published reference ranges:
Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making decisions about your health.
Processed in 16.3 seconds
Sign in to join the conversation. Sign in
Loading…
