^ There's definitely a thumb there, though? You can see a minor incline heading up from the base of the wrist. It's just that her thumb is obscured behind her palm, and you can only see the rounding of the joint. Considering that the artist has dainty, delicate hands, it's not too strange for the bones to not be pronounced enough to prominently jut.
Edit: Yep, I tried replicating the position with my own hands, and it's a perfect match with the art. I'm honestly impressed at the author's attention to intricate positioning and detail here, because the placement isn't something you can easily visualize- you'd need to have someone model it for you or actually do the pose yourself. Conversely, all you'd need to do to confirm the accuracy of the art is pull the same position. But I like how the person who first pointed it out just went with the most condescending possible interpretation to dunk on someone who literally portrays anatomy for a living.
It is not rocket science. And I am speaking as someone who had to know anatomy as part of my profession. However, instead of countering your condescendence with my own, I will just ask you a simple question. This rounding of the joint, on which side do you see it?
Edit: On second thought, I have no desire to engage with this person. The only noticeable rounding that can be seen is on the inner side of the hand, facing the sitting person, indicating that the thumb is on that side. Which is anatomically impossible, the thumb should be on the opposite side, facing away from the person.
Secondly, the only way the thumb is not visible in this pose is if the back of the hand is positioned perfectly flatly towards us. If the hand is at an angle, like it is here (which we know because we can clearly see the sides of the fingers and not just their backs), the thumb must be visible (we are, of course, automatically assuming the thumb is in flexion here). You can not physically flex it to the point it would not be seen at such an angle. The moment even a sliver of the sides of the fingers is seen, the thumb becomes visible.
Thirdly, the cuffs are on the side of the little finger, which is, like the rounding mentioned before, on the wrong side of the hand. The little finger and the cuffs should be on the side towards the person.
Point is, the artist messed up, this is a right hand. And even if they think it is a left one and the thumb is simply not visible because it is flexed against the palm (in which case we need to ignore the rounding seen on the wrong side), they still messed up. With the hand at an angle towards us, we must see a part of the thumb.
I do like the block of text accompanied with the usual smugness, though. I especially like it when it comes after a failure to use something as simple as a mirror.
last edited at Dec 10, 2020 10:13PM