Scanning the pressure-induced distortion of fingerprints

Production of artificial fingermarks. Part II - The use of a modified inkjet printer for the deposition of synthetic secretions

This study is the second part of a larger body of research dedicated to the production of synthetic secretions and the use of an inkjet printer to deposit realistic artificial fingermarks. An artificial emulsion combining eccrine and sebaceous compounds, which was described and tested in the first part of this research, was used as it showed a promising compatibility with common detection techniques. An inkjet printer was modified to print the emulsion on two different substrates: paper (porous) and acetate (non-porous). After optimisation of the printing parameters, multiple fingermarks were printed and processed with a range of standalone detection techniques: 1,2-indanedione-zinc, ninhydrin, Oil Red O, and physical developer on paper, and cyanoacrylate fuming, rhodamine 6G, gold/zinc vacuum metal deposition, and silver black powder on acetate. The detection techniques were also applied in sequence, which is considered one of the biggest advantages of the emulsion over simpler amino acid mixtures that are usable with amino acid reagents only. Natural fingermarks deposited by a single donor were processed with the same techniques for comparison. The effect of water immersion was also investigated, where fingermarks printed on paper were immersed in water for 15 min, before being processed with 1,2-indanedione-zinc and Oil Red O. The results showed that realistic-looking fingermarks could be printed on paper and that printing on acetate was also possible albeit of lower quality due to the nature of the substrate. The artificial fingermarks were successfully enhanced by all the detection techniques tested, at the notable exception of physical developer. The results obtained were very similar to what is generally observed with real fingermarks, and it was observed that the impact of water immersion on the artificial fingermarks was comparable as well. These findings open new perspectives for the development of multi-target quality control test strips or for the standardisation of proficiency testing and interlaboratory collaborative exercises where ground truth is crucial to guarantee comparable results and objective assessment.

The permanence of friction ridge skin and persistence of friction ridge skin and impressions: A comprehensive review and new results

This study addresses the permanence and persistence of friction ridges and the persistence of impressions made from these friction ridges over months and years. Permanence is the unchanging presence and appearance of friction ridge arrangements and their attributes between recurring observations of the skin. Permanence was evaluated from direct photographs of fingers collected over a period of 30-45 days (covering one or more skin regeneration cycles) as well as after 8 or more years had elapsed. Persistence embodies the operational concept of whether or not a pair of images displays sufficient similarity upon which to base an informed decision that they were made by the same finger, while acknowledging certain dissimilarities or distortions due to friction ridge physiology, image capture, matrix, substrate, and applied pressure. Persistence applies to both friction ridge skin and impressions made from these friction ridges. Permanence and persistence of skin were assessed from direct photographs of fingers taken two months apart and from finger photographs separated by an interval of at least 8 years. Permanence and persistence were also assessed from impressions taken over 4 months, as well as those separated by 8-53 years. Variability due to capture method was assessed by using four image capture methods over a four month period: direct photography of fingers, impressions captured by ink, holographic imaging, and live scan. Qualified latent fingerprint examiners assessed all changes observed over time, as well as any limitations imposed by capture method. The practice of comparison and identification of fingerprint impressions was upheld, as was the prevailing use of the word persistence to describe stability of friction ridges. All photographs and impressions of the same finger were identifiable as originating from the same source. Within all the periods of observation, level 1 detail was permanent and persistent. Persistence, but not permanence, was supported for level 2 detail. Notably, the small changes observed were only in appearance; there were no changes in the presence of new, or absence of existing, minutiae. Level 3 details of ridge edge shape and pore presence were neither permanent nor persistent. Ridge width was permanent and persistent. Incipient ridges were neither permanent nor persistent.