ProfileProfileProfileProfileEnglish actress
Emma Watson is an English actress widely recognized for her breakout role as Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter film series, a performance that defined a generation of cinema. Beyond that iconic franchise, she has cultivated a diverse career spanning independent films like Little Women and The Perks of Being a Wallflower, alongside her prominent work in fashion and activism. Her public profile is inextricably linked to her transition from child star to respected adult performer, marked by a consistent presence in both blockbuster entertainment and high-profile cultural movements.
The scan reflects a slender, feminine build with an hourglass silhouette, characterized by a balanced distribution of mass that complements her height of 165 cm. At 54.849 kg with 27.0% body fat, the physique presents a soft yet toned aesthetic, typical of a female actor maintaining a lean frame suitable for on-screen versatility. This build supports the physical demands of long filming days and red-carpet appearances, offering a proportional and agile structure that aligns with the visual expectations of her profession.
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. | -0.5° | 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. | -1.4° | 0° = level (frontal) | natural — balanced |
| 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. | -1.0° | 0° = level (frontal) | natural — balanced |
| Segment | Left width | Right width | Δ vs symmetric | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Upper arm Biceps / triceps | 7.6 cm | 7.4 cm | +3.0% | natural — balanced |
| Forearm Forearm flexors | 5.6 cm | 7.1 cm | -22.5% | 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 | 13.7 cm | 13.7 cm | 0.0% | 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 18.5 seconds
Sign in to join the conversation. Sign in
Loading…
