When considering ideas and perceptions of social and cultural 'norms', be they standards of beauty or moral conceptions/ideals, one must remember that the rapid homogenization of these perceptions across large regions only begins to occur with the expansion of the media and communication systems that can deliver those ideals. Fortunately, you have limited us to "Victorian", which is a cultural denomination limited to the industrialized urban British aristocracy and middle class of June 20th 1837 up until January 22nd 1901 - the reign of Queen Victoria.

A problem arises in that "a real life beauty" is often very different from what the ideal is - and seeing as "real life beauty" is far more subjective than the perceived ideal, i'll stick with that.

For woman the Victorian Era was hyperfocused on characteristics representative of exaggerated feminine and delicate features, heavy ornamentation and demure presentation, and frail/delicate demeanor. There is a fascinating book called Tuberculosis and the Victorian Literary Imagination that shows how many of the standards of Victorian beauty are symptoms of sickness and decay - especially Tuberculosis. Indeed, some such features included: unhealthily pale/tender skin, physical weakness and extreme thinness, signs of physical frailty (sweating, fainting, dizziness), and a lack of energy and expressiveness.

As such, there was an appreciation for subtler, muted, color tones. Makeup was often reserved in color - generally softer and less colorful than it is now or was before. Generally speaking the only make up that showed was eyeliner and blush - which could again be tied to an obsession with sickness-as-a-sign-of-frailty. Clothing on the other hand - in order to make the body-tones seem softer - was generally colorful to the point of garish by modern standards... and in one of those cases where popular conception is accurate, clothing for woman could weight more than 15 pounds. That, combined with the popularization of the corset, did even more to make breathing and moving quite difficult for women, reinforcing their presentation as physically ill or frail.

Ideas of eye and hair color... that's a bit tougher to pin. But the best answer I think would lie in "Victorianism", the elevation and idealization of Queen Victoria. Many depictions of attractive woman at the time shared the physical characteristics of Queen Victoria - meaning short, tightly worn, black hair and heavily lidded blue eyes. I don't think it needs to be stated that the exaggerated breasts and bottom were also a major part of Victorian beauty standards (once again we can look to the corset for evidence of this).

As for men? Well, this seems to have been even more homogeneous: extremely prominent and jutting chest and broad shoulders, small hips, thin long legs, stronger arms, long neck and feet. The vast majority of depictions of Victorian men display all of these physical features - all of which were exaggerated by the high-cut frock coat, tight vests, and even tighter pants. While not as heavy as woman's clothing, men's clothing was just as tight and physically restrictive. One was to present oneself in a very reserved and controlled fashion, and clothing, as if often does with social rules, supported this.

Facial hair was attractive, though no more than being clean shaven. What mattered was appearing controlled and well kept - hair had to be carefully and obviously groomed and controlled, regardless of how much one chose to have. As for "hair and eye color"... hm. Without an equivocally idealized male physical representation as the Queen was for woman, it may be impossible to say. But if I had to take an educated guess i'd say black hair and blue eyes likely remained the ideal. If the ideas from Jane Morris: The Pre-Raphaelite Model of Beauty can be extrapolated to men.