sible to accurate scaling. It was further estimated that errors inherent 
in determining circular sections from single central perspective images did 
not at worst exceed 0.3% of the diameter. 
Posing matters were not thoroughly investigated. Repeated measurements 
on six legs, however, photographed twice (estimated measuring error: + 0.7%) 
showed significance in only 152 of the 36 diameter differences thus measured. 
It was further found that s.v. results underestimated the directly mea- 
sured circumferences Cg, being at the same time larger than f.v. measurements, 
while s.v. and f.v. measurements gave practically identical results for C6 
For both circumferences, therefore, the diameters were obtained solely from 
S.v. measurements. In the case of the remaining circumferences, s.v. and 
f.v. measurements systematically overestimated and underestimated respective- 
iy the directly obtained values. Their mean value was consequently used. 
The final results regarding the direct anthropometry-moiré differences 
are shown in Table II, p being the correlation coefficient. 
Table II 
Direct Antropometry-Moiré Differences in Circumferences C: 
for left (L) and right (R) legs 
  
  
  
  
  
u (cm) o (cm) p up (7) 05 (4) "9 (%) 
C L 60.6 +4.1 .969 +0.2 +1.8 23.4 - 43.6 
1 R 60.7 +4.2 .978 -0.] +1.5 -3.0 = +242 
C L 52.4 +3.8 „972 0.0 +1.8 =35- +42 
2 R 52.5 +3.9 .971 -0.3 +1.7 -3.8.« 43,1 
C L 43.5 13.1 .980 +1.0* +1.5 -2.3- +45 
3 R 43.4 t3.2 .978 +0.6 +1.6 23.7 94:5 
C L 36.6 +2.8 925 -0.7 +2.9 27.7 - 46.5 
4 R 36.7 +2.9 .928 0.7 +2.9 7:0. 5.8 
C L 35.7 +3.0 .981 +2.4% +1.7 -0.9 = 46.2 
5 R 35.7 12.9 .961 42.8* 12.2 "1.9.9 42.7 
C L 36.1 12.9 .980 *0.9* +1.6 22.0 714.2 
6 R 35.8 +2.9 .978 +0.3 11.7 -4.9 - 44.6 
  
(*) significant at the 0.01 level 
  
Generally speaking, the results affirm a good agreement between direct 
anthropometry and moiré measurements. In a few cases significant differences 
266