MJK2/MJK3 Hand comparison

[Stewart P Evans]

Light

...
It seems to me, and I must emphasise that it is merely my opinion, that what Ripper research has become is a stagnated pool of the same discussions going round and round and the only fun, it seems to me, are for those that enjoy belittling others.
...

Ah, you are beginning to see the light.

[Amanda Sumner]

I have to say, I don't think I have ever come across a forum where there are so many rude people in one place.

Whatever my stance on the photograph, and nothing has changed my mind on that, I have appreciated Richardh taking the time to compare the digits on the two photographs because, clearly, many people see a thumb or a little finger. I accept that the left hand does seem to fit better but there is no denying that there is still justification too, why people see a thumb.
He is extremely talented at what he does and his work is fascinating.

It seems to me, and I must emphasise that it is merely my opinion, that what Ripper research has become is a stagnated pool of the same discussions going round and round and the only fun, it seems to me, are for those that enjoy belittling others.

I think Brenda's post said it all....

[Rob Clack]

Hello Brenda... don't worry.. it will be photoshopped out soon enough. :-)

PS... go into this casebook site... go look at the photos section... go click on MJK... and then the MJK3 photo... then enlarge it....you'll need a laugh when you see that!

Phil

What are you insinuating?

[Stewart P Evans]

Extended Debates

These extended debates about little finger v. thumb exemplify just how ridiculous Ripper research has become. We have two photographs of Kelly's body taken from either side of the body, depicting what is clearly the same left hand resting on the left edge of the abdominal cavity. Time, methinks, to retreat back into sublime obscurity.

[The Good Michael]

Seriously. One cannot just look at the hand in isolation, let alone the finger. People have seen Baphomets and initials on the wall and wine glasses and all sorts of nonsense from "careful" analysis of a given area of one photo or another. There is some common sense to be applied here by looking at the entirety of the situation. If one cannot answer all the whos and whys when one imagines something different from what is the most sensible possibility, then one should just stay with what is reasonable and predominantly accepted.


Cheers,

Mike

[richardh]

Yes, I'd agree with that. But that's because a) my rendered hand is not resting on bedclothes/other material which would partially obscure the anterior of the 'thumb knuckle'. And b) the original images is of a left little finger and what we're seeing at the 'thumb-knuckle' area is in fact the MCP joint of the fifth phalanx (finger). So a little finger it is!

Hi Richard, that is somewhat close to what I see. To my eyes, the "thumb knuckle" area isn't as bulbous-looking.

[Brenda]

.

Brenda,
Do you see this perhaps?

Hi Richard, that is somewhat close to what I see. To my eyes, the "thumb knuckle" area isn't as bulbous-looking.

[richardh]

And a final render of the left hand using the remodelled left hand on MJK3

I've adjusted the shadowing to a close match and cropped to fit.

IMO it's a more accurate fit.

[Debra A]

Thanks for all the hard work. I suspected it was too short to be a thumb and the bloodstain (or Celtic cross tattoo ) adds to the illusion of a thumb web.

[richardh]

Right then, I've remodelled the hand proportions based on an actual hand. This this the template:

The hand of a female - 5'5" (didn't have a 5'7" female available!)



and after lots of adjustments this is the best match I could get:



I'm afraid (in actual fact I'm pleased! as it strengthens my point) to say that the area you mentioned (the bloodstain) which would be the joint of the 'thumb' to the index finger is too long. Note in the image of the hands (above) that I put two red dots - one at the joint-base of the little finger and one at the joint-base of the thumb. You can see that the thumb base-joint is much further up the hand toward the wrist. In MJK3 you can see that the shadow (or base-joint) is shorter than in my 'thumb' render. It's shorter because it's a little finger!

The first images I posted on this thread were of the left hand in both MJK2 & MJK3 position. I setup the MJK2 render first and everything (all the landmarks, the hand, the bent little finger, the shadowing, the base-joint) fitted instantly when I rendered the exact same MJK2 position onto MJK3.

Personally, although I can see where people are coming from with the right thumb theory, I am more convinced than ever that MJK3 is showing a left hand and a little finger.

That thumb - if it is a thumb in MJK3 is very, very short.

This roughly demonstrates what I mean.
I've softened the scratch or bloodstain that I believe is causing the illusion of a thumb web .I also lightened some of the shadow between the two fingers.

On the second picture I drew in a purple line as I think this the top of an object (sheeting?) that is between the hand and camera, obscuring the bottom of the curled under left finger a little.

[richardh]

Phil, I'm scared to say in a public forum what I think I see, what is it I'm SUPPOSED to be seeing?

Brenda,
Do you see this perhaps?

[Simon Wood]

Hi Brenda,

You're supposed to see what isn't there.

I would follow Amanda's sage advice.

Regards,

Simon

[Amanda Sumner]

Phil, I'm scared to say in a public forum what I think I see, what is it I'm SUPPOSED to be seeing?

I think the easiest answer to that, Brenda, is just agree with everyone else. :-)

[Brenda]

.

Hello Brenda... don't worry.. it will be photoshopped out soon enough. :-)

PS... go into this casebook site... go look at the photos section... go click on MJK... and then the MJK3 photo... then enlarge it....you'll need a laugh when you see that!

Phil

Phil, I'm scared to say in a public forum what I think I see, what is it I'm SUPPOSED to be seeing?

[Debra A]

I'm on to it Debra, with a new improved hand model.

Thanks Richard.