Just to clarify, the original image was taken on a Fuji S5 and saved as a .tif image. However, in order to not exceed the posting limits, I had to convert it to a .jpg. Not ideal for comparison, but it had to be done. And again, to those who feel this is a trap or a joke, it truly is not. Thanks to everyone for their help.Neville wrote:I also can see that this image is of very low quality, an image of 142kb is hardly a great starting point. Perhaps we are falling in to the same trap that the FBI fell into.
Opinions Needed
-
Forensic Scientist
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 6:34 am
Re: Opinions Needed
-
mbeeton
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:41 am
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Re: Opinions Needed
Hello everyone,
I agree with Pat, we need Alice's help! I have seen livescan distortion similar to what is happening in this latent print. (I confirmed it was distortion because the corresponding flat impression did not have the extra ridge.) Since this latent was deposited on a glass surface, would it be fair to attempt an explanation for the appearance of an 'extra' ridge in it to similar distortion in livescan impressions? Is the known print an inked print or livescan? I believe the distortion in the known print is also relevant.
Also, something else to think about...If the latent only included the area directly above the delta and stopped before the area of 'weird' distortion, how many would say that enough agreement exists such you may come to the conclusion that it is "reliably predictable" (thanks Pat) to find additional agreement of ridge characteristics, in sequence... ? (Because the latent is mostly delta area, I would prefer to observe more 3rd level detail in higher resolution images before giving an opinion,but....and that's a big but, if this is not an identification I may need to reassess my 'reliable predictablity' threshold.)
There is a very interesting article on livescan anomalies that I think was written by Jennifer Hannaford and published in the Detail. I found it in my files so if you can't find it in the archives I can email it to anyone who's interested. I definitely will start saving more livescan distortion examples - maybe Alice or Jennifer have already collected a bunch???
Mary
I agree with Pat, we need Alice's help! I have seen livescan distortion similar to what is happening in this latent print. (I confirmed it was distortion because the corresponding flat impression did not have the extra ridge.) Since this latent was deposited on a glass surface, would it be fair to attempt an explanation for the appearance of an 'extra' ridge in it to similar distortion in livescan impressions? Is the known print an inked print or livescan? I believe the distortion in the known print is also relevant.
Also, something else to think about...If the latent only included the area directly above the delta and stopped before the area of 'weird' distortion, how many would say that enough agreement exists such you may come to the conclusion that it is "reliably predictable" (thanks Pat) to find additional agreement of ridge characteristics, in sequence... ? (Because the latent is mostly delta area, I would prefer to observe more 3rd level detail in higher resolution images before giving an opinion,but....and that's a big but, if this is not an identification I may need to reassess my 'reliable predictablity' threshold.)
There is a very interesting article on livescan anomalies that I think was written by Jennifer Hannaford and published in the Detail. I found it in my files so if you can't find it in the archives I can email it to anyone who's interested. I definitely will start saving more livescan distortion examples - maybe Alice or Jennifer have already collected a bunch???
Mary