deleted deleted

Patti wrote:



I think your left index is a small ulnar loop.

Martijn (admin) wrote:
... Regarding your left index finger, yes there are some irregular ridge lines inside but these do not make any well defined pattern, nor a triradius, etc. - though I do see 5 ending ridge lines in a row in the upper center of the loop.

So, therefore we can simply continue to speak about an ULNAR LOOP.

kiwihands wrote:Hi dermatoglyphics experts,

this print of mine has been pronounced a loop by Martijn a while ago, but it's still rattling around in my head as not quite sure. So I finally sat back down with the FBI handbook and took a good print to get to the bottom of this, but I'm STILL not sure. Argh. Patti, if you could chip in your opinion, that would be awesome!

Did I find the type lines (green), delta (red), and looping ridges (blue) correctly?
And what do you think about the light blue line? It looks like an appendage on the main (dark blue) loop to me, in which case the recurve would be spoilt. Or would you keep going from the light blue to the dark blue ridge and see that as the main recurve, rather than an appendage?

kiwihands wrote:Hi dermatoglyphics experts,

this print of mine has been pronounced a loop by Martijn a while ago, but it's still rattling around in my head as not quite sure. So I finally sat back down with the FBI handbook and took a good print to get to the bottom of this, but I'm STILL not sure. Argh. Patti, if you could chip in your opinion, that would be awesome!

Did I find the type lines (green), delta (red), and looping ridges (blue) correctly?
And what do you think about the light blue line? It looks like an appendage on the main (dark blue) loop to me, in which case the recurve would be spoilt. Or would you keep going from the light blue to the dark blue ridge and see that as the main recurve, rather than an appendage?

Patti wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:
... Regarding your left index finger, yes there are some irregular ridge lines inside but these do not make any well defined pattern, nor a triradius, etc. - though I do see 5 ending ridge lines in a row in the upper center of the loop.

So, therefore we can simply continue to speak about an ULNAR LOOP.

kiwihands wrote:Hi Patti, Lynn, and Martijn,

Thanks heaps for your patience clearing up my questions! I think second time around I'm finally getting it ... What confused me most was the way that the only proper looping ridge was spoilt by the appendage: without the presence of an unspoilt loop, I didn't even think of counting the short ridge in front of the delta. That's where I went wrong!

And yep, I did get a bit carried away with the type lines, thanks for the reminder that there should be just two of them.

Patti wrote:

Patti wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:
... Regarding your left index finger, yes there are some irregular ridge lines inside but these do not make any well defined pattern, nor a triradius, etc. - though I do see 5 ending ridge lines in a row in the upper center of the loop.

So, therefore we can simply continue to speak about an ULNAR LOOP.

Although the newer print does clearly show that there is a triradius, I noticed in your description here, Martijn, that you have suggested a lack of a triradius results in a loop, but if there were not triradius, in this case, it would have been a tented arch.

(p.s.: I think Kiwi was aware of the innermost parallel lines creating the type lines in her drawing.)

kiwihands wrote:...

And yep, I did get a bit carried away with the type lines, thanks for the reminder that there should be just two of them.

Okay, great to know that you are aware of how the FBI has described the 'type lines'.

Martijn (admin) wrote:

Patti wrote:

Patti wrote:

Martijn (admin) wrote:
... Regarding your left index finger, yes there are some irregular ridge lines inside but these do not make any well defined pattern, nor a triradius, etc. - though I do see 5 ending ridge lines in a row in the upper center of the loop.

So, therefore we can simply continue to speak about an ULNAR LOOP.

Although the newer print does clearly show that there is a triradius, I noticed in your description here, Martijn, that you have suggested a lack of a triradius results in a loop, but if there were not triradius, in this case, it would have been a tented arch.

(p.s.: I think Kiwi was aware of the innermost parallel lines creating the type lines in her drawing.)

Hi Patti,

No, in that passage I considered the possibility of the presence of a second triradius at the center of the pattern area. And because there is no such second triradius... the fingerprint can not be a whorl, and therefore resulting in a loop.

(The context outside the quoted-passage in the other topic should have made you understand this - sorrry, I don't recall in which topic I made that comment)

kiwihands wrote:Awesome, you got it Patti!
Example 180 was what I overlooked. Makes sense now, thank you!