Totally closed temples are certainly a way to look younger. But is that always necessarily better? I don’t think so.
I wouldn’t want a NW#1.0 even if perfect HM was offered free at the welfare offices. It’s a NW#2 for me, maybe #1.5 at the lowest. I’m saying this at 30 and I felt the same way about it back when I was 20.
And as for me being biased against a certain doc, well, this is an example of why I feel the way I do. I like the final result of this patient in question much better just because he still has grownup-looking temples. It often ages much better than the true NW#1.0, especially on a caucasian.
It’s the same principle as when a man dyes ALL the grey & white out of his hair even when he’s in his 70s or 80s. Jet black hair still works on a 40 or even a 50yo guy sometimes, but in the 60s-80s . . . it just looks weird by then. It just draws attention to how incongruiously old the rest of his face looks.
People might not be looking at him thinking, “Man, his hair looks too young!” But they might very well be looking and thinking, “Man, his face sure looks old!”
Think: Ronald Reagan. His face wasn’t as old as you think you remember, it was just incongruously paired with a head of low dark hair that looked too young for it.