Photoshop vs. fingerprint comparator programs

[Bill Schade]

I'm watching the discussion on Photoshop CC licenses and the cost involved to keep using photoshop. Not being a photoshop user myself I can't add to that discussion in any meaningful way.

But it raises the question in my mind "doesn't this make fingerprint comparison software like iDs software and CSIpix software a more appealing alternative to Photoshop?"

A couple of posters on the other thread have mentioned that they don't need all the features and upgrades of photoshop, so why not switch to a product to provides the tools we need for fingerprint comparison with none of the things we don't use or need?

[josher89]

Bill, I'll offer my thoughts.

Growing up in this field, we were taught that PS was the one and only option for enhancements (or clarifications, not alterations ). Why? I don't know. It was software that has been around for a long time (since the late 80s) so maybe its longevity was the only reason. It kept track of metadata so that's a good thing if we were asked to repeat the steps we took. It offered darkroom techniques in a digital environment so that's another good thing. It wasn't hard to get (meaning, it was easier to get a license than say, an AFIS UI) and it just worked well.

I would venture to guess that of all of the upgrades that PS implements in their new versions, the majority are UI changes (and new equipment support) and much less on the side of new features. So, I mentioned previously that PS 7.0 can still do whatever I need it to do. The unfamiliarity with the software you mention CSIPix, iDs (RS&A product) and how they store that metadata make it a scary transition. How different is the brightness and contrast filter between them all? How different is the levels adjustment between them all? If one could have access to all three, apply a series of enhancement techniques and compare the final results, that might be the impetus to give those others a second look.

And, you'll have to write a book about it, right George?!

[NRivera]

/2cents: I think it's important to consider image capture, enhancement and subsequent comparisons as separate and distinct parts of the workflow. PS has been the gold standard in image enhancement since forever, but I find that what we need it to do doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of its capabilities. Some have even described it as overkill. Personally, I like it but I have also found that there are other options out there that work just as well. My shop uses ImagePro software on DCS-4's and 5's and it works very well also. On the other hand, comparison software is meant for documentation of the ACE-V comparison methodology. Enhancement capabilities in these types of programs are nowhere near as robust as PS, but the end result should be an image that speaks for itself in terms of the data that was considered to reach a conclusion. I have tried the demos for IDs and CSIPix. Currently we have FCS and it works just fine. The built-in CAFIS module is surprising and the UI is bare-bones basic and super-easy to learn. It's strictly a matter of what works best for you and your agency's workflow. /2cents [Feel free to keep the change]

[Shane Turnidge]

FWIW I've used Photoshop for quite a while, recently though, I've been using Paintshop Pro X9 from Corel. IMO For fingerprint annotation purposes it does everything that Photoshop does. The image history can be exported to a text file and, for those of you GYRO fans, layers and opacity are pretty similar.
The only difference is the familiarity with the software and the price. Here in the Great White North it retails for around $79. It is a one time expense and you are off and running.

For that price, any agency thinking of using it could probably grab a copy and see if it meets your imaging SOPs.
Shane

[George Reis]

Which software to use is kind of like comparing computer operating systems or different brands of electric tools. We may like one over another for a variety of reasons - but it could be that any of them will get the same thing done. The difficulty that any user has is that we get conflicting information. One person may say that program X does something that program Y doesn't do - but they may just not be familiar with program Y. Or, Program X is too complex - but that may just be because they haven't learned a simple way to use that program.

All of that said - I have used Photoshop since 1992 or 1993. As such, I've figured out how to make it work very efficiently for me. I also have found that it does almost everything I need to do for image corrections, clarifications, comparisons, documentation, and output. The key exception is that it doesn't have an FFT filter for pattern noise removal (so I use the ClearID plug-in from Ocean Systems for that, and ImageJ can do it for free).

I know that some Photoshop users in non-forensic fields have been looking at Affinity Photo as an alternative to Photoshop. I haven't tried it for any forensic work yet.

As to Photoshop's cost - $10 per month per user seems reasonable to me, although I still would prefer to own software over renting it. I'm pretty sure that Adobe will not return to selling their software, as the subscription-based approach has proven to have helped their stock prices.

[csi539]

I'm curious if anyone has tried using AFFINITY Photo software for LP work?