Fax Comparisons Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Latent Print Examination » Questions from FP Experts for FP Experts... Processing, Testimony, and Technical Matters » Fax Comparisons « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kasey Wertheim
Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2003 - 11:42 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Terry,

I am interested in your thoughts being distributed for discussion in the Weekly Detail, but I can't find your contact information anywhere. Please e-mail me at your earliest convenience. Thanks!

-Kasey
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

mary ellen holmberg
Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2003 - 09:28 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Terry, I very much like your answer to me and am going to copy it and use it! I believe that not using them at all, while an easier choice, does not contribute to our individualization process. Thanks for responding. meh
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Terry A. Smith
Posted on Wednesday, July 16, 2003 - 01:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Mary Ellen;
I knew if I just allowed myself a few more gray (grey) hairs, someone would respond. Thank-you indeed !
I've always looked at the fax transmitted fingerprint as simply a fingerprint with distortion. In this case the distortion is applied through the electronic processes of the machine(s) itself. If we stick to our methodology, I believe we can use the FAX, within limitations, of course.

As you know, some fingerprints reproduce reasonably well on the FAX. That is to say, features at Level 2 on the original, appear in the correct relative location on the FAX. Because our CLARITY has been compromised to some degree, our TOLERANCE for discrepancy of some features is broadened accordingly. If I can then satisfy myself that sufficient agreement exists between the questioned impression(s) and the FAX'd knowns - within tolerance - why not make the ident and seek verification?
It all boils down to reliability in the image and a sufficient volume of available information.

I always prefer to have the comparison prints enlarged to 150 or 200 %, before FAXing, which deals with the pixellation (?) problem quite well.

These comparisons are not the ideal, but are sometimes necessary in the interest of expediency. Due caution should be utilized in any case, followed by a hard-copy mailing. TS
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Mholmberg
Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2003 - 10:09 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Having just read T. A. Smith's question about fax comparisons (Sept. 2002) under the problem idents section, I was curious about what standards are used for fax comparisons. I know of agencies which will not do them at all and others (like ours) which judge on a case by case basis. What is the consensus of opinion (or is there one?) on fax transmittals?

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Password:
E-mail:
Action: