How John would look today

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3728030.stm

Scientists imagine Lennon at 64

An image of how John Lennon would have looked if he were still alive has been created by scientists.

The picture was put together using the latest technology by psychologists and computer scientists at The University of St Andrews.

It marks what would have been the ex-Beatle's 64th birthday on Saturday.

Lennon was killed at the age of 40 when Mark Chapman shot him outside his Manhattan home in New York on 8 December, 1980.

The scientists used the cover image from retrospective 1982 album The John Lennon Collection, in which the star was pictured just before he died, as a starting point.

Elisabeth Cornwell, of the university's perception lab, then used "ageing" software to reproduce the natural effects of growing old on skin texture, hairline and hair colour.

The software - which can be used to assist police inquiries into people who have been missing for many years - is able to manipulate facial images to change the age, sex, race or even perceived personality attributes of an individual.

The team has previously created images of how Hollywood stars Marilyn Monroe, James Dean and Elvis Presley might have looked in their old age.

Thats pretty good!

I agree, but I would think he would have less hair than that.

[ QUOTE ]
EnchantingLennon Posted:
I agree, but I would think he would have less hair than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, I was thinking the same thing...his hair was already balding/receding before he died...I think he'd have a lot less hair. (Ironic, really, when you think about how the Beatles were known for their hair!)

Is it just me, or does anyone think that John really aged a whole lot during that time period? Compared to just maybe, three years previously, his face just looked a :little: worn out. Sean must have really gotten to him...

[ QUOTE ]
HMVNipper Posted:
[ QUOTE ]
EnchantingLennon Posted:
I agree, but I would think he would have less hair than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, I was thinking the same thing...his hair was already balding/receding before he died...I think he'd have a lot less hair. (Ironic, really, when you think about how the Beatles were known for their hair!)

[/ QUOTE ] Maybe if John were alive today, he'd use rogain. Well, you never know.

[ QUOTE ]
HMVNipper Posted:
(Ironic, really, when you think about how the Beatles were known for their hair!)

[/ QUOTE ]
That goes for Peter Frampton too. He was known for his long golden locks and now, well....
As far as this picture goes, I would have pictures John to look more drawn, more gaunt. That is, if he would've quit that macro-biotic diet that was making him look that way, even at 40. And, yeah, it was obvious that John was indeed losing his hair. Let's just hope he wouldn't have grown it long on top and combed it forward. Ya know, to give himself less of a forehead. (That's kind of how it looks in this picture. )

[ QUOTE ]
Magill Posted:
[ QUOTE ]
HMVNipper Posted:
(Ironic, really, when you think about how the Beatles were known for their hair!)

[/ QUOTE ]
That goes for Peter Frampton too. He was known for his long golden locks and now, well....
And, yeah, it was obvious that John was indeed losing his hair. Let's just hope he wouldn't have grown it long on top and combed it forward. Ya know, to give himself less of a forehead. (That's kind of how it looks in this picture. )

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that pic looks like it is pretty much one from the cover of Double Fantasy that they aged. And on that album cover, he WAS combing his hair forward to fall over his forehead...but he cut his hair either the day before or the morning of the day he died...those Annie Leibovitz photos from that day show him with much shorter hair, and it's not combed forward...in fact, you can see that it's receding. I don't know if it mattered that much to him if he'd get a haircut that didn't hide it...

I was just thinking about this last weekend on John's birthday.
I also think that he would have lost some hair, but I sdort of see him in one of those headwrap thingies...maybe with a nice peace sign on it, with his hair falling over his ears and collar in back. I think he'd look pretty sexy like that.
I also don't believe for a second that he'd have become gaunt, though. I bet he'd have gone back to eating whatever he damn well pleased and would have ended up back at his Help era weight. He may have thought that was a little pudgy, but I thought he looked great at that weight.
I also don't think he would have dyed his hair. He wasn't vain enough (sorry, Paul).

I dunno - I kind of imagine he'd look a bit more careworn, perhaps starting to show that middle age droop and pudginess his body type leans to in the later years. Surely, a lively teenage boy would have given him more wrinkles. Given his personal habits and the sheer amount of roadwear in a mere 40 years, I've little doubt that he'd have kept in the public eye. That also tends to wear on a fella a bit...

I, too, see him with less hair, perhaps more in line with George Carlin's do. Either from several years back (scraped back into a no-nonsense, aging ponytail for convenience sake), or more recently (an even more sensible short cut that takes far less time to care for).

<font color="red">He would look like this but with less hair... </font>

<font color="green"> Aww! That is awesome how they did that! Kinda of funny, I was thinking the same thing when I posted something about Tim Piper. I said, well, here's an IDEA of how John MAY look today. John with less hair? Awww I looooove his hair! But it's possible. Would have John died it?... Would he have had used rogain?... Interesting.

Tiff Lennon </font>

Neat picture. It's interesting how they do that!

As for John's hair... I definately agree that his hairline would probably be receeding. Would he be completely bald in a few years?? Would he wear a wig? I'm honestly not sure what he would've done about that.

I imagine he might look a little older than 64, I'm sure his diet, the drugs, and alcohol throughout life wouldn't be the best for his physical appearence. I also hope he'd gain back a little more weight, he doesn't necessarily have to have a beer gut, but I'd hate to see him as a stick-thin guy with his bones sticking out and all that. Ouch!

[ QUOTE ]
HMVNipper Posted:
Well, that pic looks like it is pretty much one from the cover of Double Fantasy that they aged.

[/ QUOTE ]

The photo is from the mid 70's and was used on the front cover of 'The Lennon Collection' greatest-hits esque album

[ QUOTE ]
Harbidge Posted:
[ QUOTE ]
HMVNipper Posted:
Well, that pic looks like it is pretty much one from the cover of Double Fantasy that they aged.

[/ QUOTE ]

The photo is from the mid 70's and was used on the front cover of 'The Lennon Collection' greatest-hits esque album



[/ QUOTE ]]


Thank you, Harb...I knew it was SOME album cover, anyway...

I'll tell ya, though -- that original pic is what leads me to believe he'd have a lot less hair if he was here now!

I thought that photo (above) from the John Lennon Collection was from December 1980.
-Kristi

[ QUOTE ]
ImaginePeace78 Posted:
I thought that photo (above) from the John Lennon Collection was from December 1980.
-Kristi

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, December 8th, to be exact.

-lennon4

[ QUOTE ]
lennon4 Posted:
[ QUOTE ]
ImaginePeace78 Posted:
I thought that photo (above) from the John Lennon Collection was from December 1980.
-Kristi

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, December 8th, to be exact.

-lennon4

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, actually, can't believe I didn't catch that -- that was one of the photos Annie Leibovitz took the afternoon of the day John died...

Wow, I didn't know that photo was taken on the 8th October.
I always liked that photo although I don't know exactly why!

[ QUOTE ]
beatlemad Posted:
Wow, I didn't know that photo was taken on the 8th October.
I always liked that photo although I don't know exactly why!

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="green"> Me neither, I never knew that. I will never look at the picture the same again. *sigh*

Tiff Lennon </font>