Using the simple ball (knuckle) and rod (shank) forms we have studied earlier, note thai the three rods (shanks) of the index finger appear quite long in this three-quarter view. We see the other fingers more straight on, as we move progressively to the left. The rods or bone shanks arc seen as shortest, especially the rear shank, on the fourth finger. This is due to a foreshortening or compression of frontal space. One of the ways to test the accuracy of the drawings of foreshortened fingers is to check the fingernail lengths seen in depth against the curves in the different views from side to front as shown in the middle diagrams.
Beginning with the side view at right, the nail appears more iidcwisc than frontal. It seems long from front to back (note im>ws), and the curve is quite elliptical. In the schematic Mock in front of the nail, the circlc is seen as an ellipse because of the tangential view, and the top of the ellipse has the same kind of curve as the nail arch. The nail of the long middle finger is more circular because its tip is seen more to the front. It is also shorter from front to back, and the nail is less elliptical and more cursed, as shown by the schematic block. The fourth finger is seen from the deepest view of all. its tip seen at almost full circle with the nail fully arched. Conversely, the nail length is also the shortest of all because of the deepest foreshortening. Note the full circlc on the schematic block. The little finger is veering left of center, and the slight side view gives a somewhat elliptical nail arch at front.
The two sketches at bottom show the knuckle and shank forms in the terminals of the middle and fourth fingers. Compare the front view of the fourth finger with the tangential view of the middle finger. The fourth finger looks shon and circular, while the middle finger looks long and elliptical. Also note how the fingertips and nails reflect the views of the fingers.
Was this article helpful?