If non finito as an artistic technique can be traced back to Donatello (Altar of Saint Anthony of Padua"), 1446-1453),[11]​ who sought the spiritual and dramatic intensity of the figures or scenes represented, and has a notable example in Leonardo da Vinci; Michelangelo is undeniably the one who promotes an aesthetic of the unfinished. However, in the classical Renaissance (late century and beginning of the century) only a fortuitous circumstance could explain leaving a work of art unfinished. Already in Mannerism, Vasari invokes the sketch, more than the finished work, as the bearer of creative "fury." Paradoxically, Michelangelo, the genius of the non finito, said of Donatello that "he lacked the patience to give his pieces a clear finish, so that they appear wonderful from a distance, but do not live up to their reputation when seen up close" while for Vasari that characteristic in Donatello deserved to be called; sprezzatura (understandable as "intentional negligence").[12]​.

Even if a notable number of material circumstances can explain the non finito of many of Michelangelo's works, the truth is that many of them were left unfinished (due to defects that appeared in the marble block during carving, due to difficulties with the client, etc.); as can be seen in some Pietà, in pieces from the tomb of Julius II, in the Sagrestia Nuova of the Medicean Chapel of San Lorenzo, etc. Due to his taste, he does not stop at completing a job unless he considers the possibility of achieving perfection, and he is fascinated by the effect obtained in the incomplete statues (the Slaves that emerge from a block still largely intact, with heads and limbs barely roughed out) "leaving the rest to sleep in the marble."

If non finito as an artistic technique can be traced back to Donatello (Altar of Saint Anthony of Padua"), 1446-1453),[11]​ who sought the spiritual and dramatic intensity of the figures or scenes represented, and has a notable example in Leonardo da Vinci; Michelangelo is undeniably the one who promotes an aesthetic of the unfinished. However, in the classical Renaissance (late century and beginning of the century) only a fortuitous circumstance could explain leaving a work of art unfinished. Already in Mannerism, Vasari invokes the sketch, more than the finished work, as the bearer of creative "fury." Paradoxically, Michelangelo, the genius of the non finito, said of Donatello that "he lacked the patience to give his pieces a clear finish, so that they appear wonderful from a distance, but do not live up to their reputation when seen up close" while for Vasari that characteristic in Donatello deserved to be called; sprezzatura (understandable as "intentional negligence").[12]​.

Even if a notable number of material circumstances can explain the non finito of many of Michelangelo's works, the truth is that many of them were left unfinished (due to defects that appeared in the marble block during carving, due to difficulties with the client, etc.); as can be seen in some Pietà, in pieces from the tomb of Julius II, in the Sagrestia Nuova of the Medicean Chapel of San Lorenzo, etc. Due to his taste, he does not stop at completing a job unless he considers the possibility of achieving perfection, and he is fascinated by the effect obtained in the incomplete statues (the Slaves that emerge from a block still largely intact, with heads and limbs barely roughed out) "leaving the rest to sleep in the marble."