Attractive facial esthetics is undoubtedly a major treatment goal of orthodontics. Patients desire esthetic improvement even when their primary goal is to improve function. Aim of the study: the purpose of this study was to evaluate orthodontists’ and laypersons’ perception of varying degrees of lip retraction in a three dimensional model of bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion cases. Materials and Methods: The sample consisted of six randomly selected adult female patients having bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. For each patient a group of standardized digital photographs were captured; frontal photograph at rest, profile photographs at rest (right) and (left), 45 degrees photographs at rest (right) and (left). These photographs were captured using the aid of a specially fabricated patient positioning assembly, standardization of the camera was assured and directmeasurements on the patients’ faces were taken to help construct the 3D model for each patient. For each patient, five models were constructed with different amounts of lip retraction ranging from (0) to (5.5mm) for the upper lip and (6.5mm) for the lower lip. Seven groups of frames were then constructed, the first three groups were for the “Comparative Photos” (Front, Quarter, and Profile views), the fourth was for the “3D Video”, and the last three were for the “Merging photos” (Front, Quarter, and Profile views). A panel of 136 judges (31 orthodontists, and 105 laypersons) was asked to rank the photographs from best to worst, in addition choosing from the different views of “Comparative Photos”, and “Merging Photos” the easiest and most informative one. Finally, the judges were asked to select from the three methods, the best method that helped them take their decisions. Results: There was an agreement between laypersons and orthodontists as far as judging the facial attractiveness. The "Profile" view was chosen as the best from the different views of the "Comparative photos” for judging the facial attractiveness. The "Quarter" and "Profile" views were chosen as the best from the different views of “Merging photos” for judging the facial attractiveness, both had equal acceptance between laypersons and orthodontists. Conclusions: The “3D Video” method was neither as easy nor as indicative as the “Merging Photos”. "Merging photos" was the best method preferred by orthodontists and laypersons to evaluate the soft tissue changes. Upper lip retraction ranging between 2.75mm and 3.5mm, and lower lip retraction ranging between 3.25mm and 4.5mm were most accepted.