CLPEX Chat Board

My lab is currently attempting to validate the dry ninhydrin process for use on thermal paper. Our Quality Assurance manager is asking for additions to the validation doucmentation that don't make sense to me. She is asking for us to provide the reference material from the article we are using as our support documentation simply because it is peer reviewed. Is that normal? She is also making us perform a sample of our test to show that the dry ninhydrin process works on latents that are not "fresh" as she put it. I was hoping someone might be able to share with me their lab's validation process for latent prints so that I might get some perspective on what is being asked of me. If you could please send your response privately it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Please any feedback or example validations would be greatly appreciated!!!

Okay, I'll bite.

Back in 1986 I put together a series of training comparison exercises using latent prints from different development techniques. One exercise consisted of eight 3X5 note cards with fingerprints developed in Ninhydrin. I put a strip of tape around the edges for my students to handle the cards. I also put sheets of paper between the cards when they were stored in a manila envelope. Over a period of several years, latent prints developed on the sheets of paper that were stored between the 3X5 note cards. Of course, additional latents also developed on the 3X5s themselves.

My suggestion would be to devise a plan of experimentation using various papers and various carriers for Nin. Make a blank spreadsheet with your plan. Conduct a series of experiments. If necessary, refine the experiment and conduct a second series of experiments. Fill in the blanks on your spreadsheet. Publish it. Put the research and the published paper on your CV. Present it at an IAI conference and put that on your CV, too.

Go forth and do good things.

Cheers,
Pat