The “shear” method of Humphries et al. (1981) is based on a path model intended to explain differences in form by multiple factors: one for size and one or more for shape differences. Its adaptation for “removing” the effects of a within-population size-factor from between-group morphometric analyses is presented in compact matrix form, simplified, and compared to the method of orthogonal projection proposed by Burnaby (1966). While the sizecorrection methods give similar results for most real data sets, Burnaby's procedure with k = 1 (i.e., using a single composite size variable) is recommended for this purpose owing to its geometrical and computational simplicity. An example based on artificial data demonstrates that sheared principal components are not necessarily uncorrelated with size. Path modeling of size and shape together is a different purpose than size-correction, and is better served by a different procedure.