cannot be
determined with _reasonable accuracy_, but the ridges allow
reasonably accurate subclassifications by ridge tracings or
counting, the impression should be given the primary value
of the pattern of the corresponding finger and the
subclassification value as indicated by the ridges of
partially scarred impressions.

- When an impression is partially scarred and the general
type of pattern can be determined with reasonable accuracy,
but the ridges cannot be traced or counted so as to fall
within the proper subsecondary classification, the
impression should be given the ridge count or tracing value
of the corresponding finger of the other hand, if the
corresponding finger is of the same general type. If the
corresponding finger is not of the same general type, the
scarred impression should be given the probable value and
referenced to all other possibilities.

- When an impression is so scarred that neither the general
type of pattern nor the ridge tracing or count can be
determined with reasonable accuracy, and it so happens that
the corresponding finger of the other hand is similarly
scarred, both patterns are given the arbitrary value of
whorls with meeting tracings.

In figure 355, the pattern is entirely obliterated. It could have been
a small whorl, a small ulnar or radial loop, an arch, or a tented
arch. If the opposite finger were an arch or tented arch or whorl,
this impression would be classified as arch, tented arch, or whorl
(with the same tracing). If the opposite finger were a small-count
loop, this would be classified as a loop of the same count. If the
opposite finger were a large-count loop, this impression would be
given the count of the opposite finger even though it could never have
had that count. If the opposite finger were scarred in the same
fashion or were amputated or missing, both impressions would be
classified as whorls with meeting tracings.

In figure 356, the general type of the pattern could have been loop
(ulnar if in the right hand) or whorl. If the opposite finger were a
whorl this would be classified as a whorl, and with the same tracing.
If a radial loop were opposite, this would be classified as an ulnar
loop (if in the right hand). The ridge count can be obtained with a
fair degree of accuracy. If an arch or tented arch were opposite, this
impression would be