posted on May, 28 2009 @ 11:34 PM
I actually had to quit doing the search for differences between them and I'll demonstrate it with two photos, that I can't embed right now, so I'll
give the links. The earlier Paul/Faul photos did look different for face shape, even if we ignored the nose, but photos change, people's faces, such
as baby fat, change, and bone structure actually changes often between early twenties and late. He was only 22? in 66. Pretty young.
This link shows that in 66 he was taller than the othersl
The link doesnt take you to it, but if you click on view the gallery, then its the third one from the bottom on the right hand side.
This picture, in 1968, while he was only roughly 24, (and I think he's quite beautiful in this one, shows his nose is still the same smaller shape,
and his face still has the wider look across the eye and cheekbone area, and the fuller cheeks, which is exactly what I was looking for because I can
capture a likeness in portraits and bone structure is important, but, lights, hair, angles, cameras even, expressions which changes the minute muscles
in the face, and age changes things.
Edit to add: his eyes are still very dark brown looking as well.
[edit on 28-5-2009 by mystiq]