>>13675767sorry, im not about to pull out the tablet for this but i'll try to explain clearly
white pixels are the fur
furthest to the right, you see a black point. This is the debated third toe on that foot.
It is the same shape as the two toes before it.
you notice just above this third toe that the fur(white pixels) rounds up and away from this toe. Therefore, that triangle cannot be part of the fur, shaded or not.
you may say that this happens on the other leg. If you look at the positioning of the fur trailing the ground, you'll notice that it trails BACKWARDS.
Since it trails back instead of forward, you would not see that segment on the other foot from this angle.
Looking at the toe on the opposite foot will reveal that it MIRRORS the debatable toe.
The same can be applied to he leg closest to us. You notice the shading on the furthest toe of the closest foot changes to a darker gray while leaving the fur(white) on that side intact and curving over the toe like its counterpart.
The back foot is facing the viewer. From this angle/at this quality, it's harder to tell what's going on there but the color DOES change twice. Two separations=three toes
