Abstract
As early as the nineteenth century, measurements of the face and body were used for forensic identification. It was believed that no two individuals had the exact same measurements. However, this was overtaken by fingerprint analysis because it was considered more reliable in court proceedings as the probabilities of finding matching individuals could be calculated. With the standardisation of photographs, identification primarily occurs from the face. With the ability to take measurements from photographs, why not use the body? The Army Anthropometry Survey (ANSUR) database contains anthropometric measurements of 3982 individuals. Eight facial and eight body measurements were compared to investigate whether or not there is enough information on the body to use for identification. Measurements were compared by adding one measurement to the other(s) in a stepwise approach until there were no duplicate cases where two or more individuals share the same combination of measurements. Results consistently show that less body measurements are needed to find no duplicates when compared to the face. The larger the range of each of the measurements, the less chance there is of finding a duplicate. With the combination of eight body measurements, it is possible to achieve a probability of finding a duplicate to the order of 10−20 or 1 in a quintillion. These results are comparable with fingerprint analysis. The body is more variable than the face and should be used in identification. An advantage to using the body is that larger dimensions are easier to locate on images and not affected by facial expression.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barrett HC (2008) Evolved cognitive mechanisms of human behaviour. In: Crawford C, Krebs D (eds) Foundations of evolutionary psychology: ideas, issues, applications and findings, 2nd edn. Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, pp 173–190
Henneberg M (2007) Facial mapping, body mapping and the duties of an expert witness. http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/pdo/ll_pdo.nsf/pages/PDO_facialmapping
Bertillon A (1886) Identification anthropometriques. Methode nouvelle de determination de L’iidentiteindividuelle. Masson, Paris
Bertillon A (1890) La photographiejudiciaire, avec unappendicesur la classification et l’identificationanthropometrique. Gauthier-Villars, Paris
Jain AK, Prabhakar S, Pankanti S (2002) On the similarity of identical twin fingerprints. Pattern Recogn 35:2653–2663
Pankanti S, Prabhakar S, Jain AK (2002) On the individuality of fingerprints. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 24:1010–1025
Bagchi P, Bhattacharjee D, Nasipuri M, Basu DK (2014) Registration of three dimensional human face images across pose and their applications in digital forensic. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland
Best-Rowden L, Han H, Otto C, Klare B, Jain AK (2014) Unconstrained face recognition: identifying a person of interest from a media collection. MSU Technical report. p 14-1
Mukane D, Hundiwale SM, Dere P (2014) Emerging forensic face matching technology to apprehend criminals: a survey. IJAET 7:255–262
Jain AK, Klare B, Park U (2012) Face matching and retrieval in forensic applications. Multimed IEEE 19:20–28
Chen S, Mau S, Harandi M, Sanderson C, Bigdeli A, Lovell B (2010) Face recognition from still images to video sequences: a local-feature-based framework. J Image Video Process 2011:1–14
Knussmann R (1988) Anthropologie. Bd I/1. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart
Knussmann R (1983) Die vergleichendemorphologischeAnalysealsIdentitatsnachweis. Strafverteidiger 3:127–129
Rösing F (2006) Identification von Personen auf Bildern. Verlag C.H Beck, München
Rösing F (2013) Morphologische Identifikation von Personen. Grundlagen, Merkmale, Häufigkeiten. In: Buck J, Hrg KB (eds) Sachverständigenbeweis im Verkehrs- und Strafrecht, 2nd edn. Nomos-Verlag, Baden-Baden, pp 287–440
Edmond G (2008) Specialised knowledge, the exclusionary discretions and reliability: Reassessing incriminating expert opinion evidence. UNSW Law J 31:1–55
Edmond G, Biber K, Kemp R, Porter G (2009) Law’s looking glass: expert identification evidence derived from photographic and video images. CurrIss Crim Just 20:337–376
Edmond G (2010) Impartiality, efficiency or reliability? A critical response to expert evidence law and procedure in Australia. Aust J Forensic Sci 42:83–99
Biber K (2009) Visual jurisprudence: the dangers of photographic identification evidence. CJM 78:35–37
Scoleri T, Henneberg M (2012) View-independent prediction of body dimensions in crowded environments. International conference on Digital Image Computing Techniques and Applications (DICTA); 3–5 December 2012; Fremantle. 2 p
Scoleri T, Lucas T, Henneberg M (2014) Effect of garments on photoanthropometry of body parts: application of stature estimation. Forensic Sci Int 237:1–12
Zhao W, Chellappa R, Phillips PJ, Rosenfeld A (2003) Face recognition: a literature survey. ACM Comput Surv 35:399–458
Frith H, Gleeson K (2004) Clothing and embodiment: men managing body image and appearance. Psych Men Masc 5:40–48
Fan J, Yu W, Hunter L (2004) Clothing appearance and fit: science and technology. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge
Meekins F (2006) Optical illusion wear. US Patent. Patent no. US:7,107,621, B2
Lucas T, Kumaratilake J, Henneberg M (2014) The extent to which garments affect the body shapes of males from faceless CCTV images. J Biol Clin Anthrop 71:259–274
Larsen PK, Hansen L, Simonsen EB, Lynnerup N (2008) Variability of bodily measures of normally dressed people using photomodeler pro 5. J Forensic Sci 53:1393–1399
Hancock P, Bruce V, Burton M (2000) Recognition of unfamiliar faces. Trends Cogn Sci 4:330–337
Henderson Z, Bruce V, Burton M (2001) Matching the faces of robbers captured on video. Appl Cogn Psych 15:445–464
Bouchrika I, Goffredo M, Carter J, Nixon M (2011) On using gait in forensic biometrics. J Forensic Sci 56:882–889
Larsen PK, Simonsen EB, Lynnerup N (2008) Gait analysis in forensic medicine. J Forensic Sci 53:1149–1153
BenAbdelkader C, Davis LS (2006) Estimation of anthropomeasures from a single calibrated camera. International conference on automatic face and gesture recongnition; 2–6 April 2006; Southhampton. p 5
BenAbdelkader C, Yacoob Y (2008) Statistical body height estimation from a single image. International conference on automatic face and gesture recognition; 17–19 September 2008; Amsterdam. p 7
Jain AK, Dass SC, Nandakumar K (2004) Can soft biometric traits assist user recognition?. Proc SPIE; 12 April 2004; Bellingham. p 12
ANSUR database (1988) Clauser CE, Tebbetts IO, Bradtmiller B, McConville JT, Gordon CC Measurer’s Handbook: US ArmyAnthropometric Survey 1987–1988, Technical Report NATICK/TR-88/043. Gordon CC, Bradtmiller B, Churchill T, Clauser CE, McConville JT, Tebbetts IO, Walker RA 1988. Anthropometric Survey of US Army Personnel: Methods and Summary Statistics, Technical Report NATICK/TR-89/044, United States Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, Massachusetts
Henneberg M (1990) Brain size/body weight variability in Homo sapiens: consequences for interpreting hominid evolution. HOMO 39:121–130
Henneberg M (2010) The Illusive concept of human variation: thirty years of teaching biological anthropology on four continents. In: Štrkalj G (ed) Teaching human variation. Nova Science, New York, pp 33–43
Cavalli-Sforza LL, Bodmer WF (1971) The genetics of human population. WH Freeman and company, San Francisco
Gordon, Claire C, Blackwell CL, Bradtmiller B, Parham JL, Hotzman J, Paquette SP, Corner BD, Hodge BM (2010) Anthropometric Survey of US Marine Corps Personnel: Methods and Summary Statistics. No. NATICK/TR-13/018. Army Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center MA, 2013
Wang Y, Tan T, Jain AK (2003) Combining face and iris biometrics for identity verification. In Audio and video based biometric person authentication. Berlin: Springer, p 805–813
Jobling MA, Gill P (2004) Encoded evidence: DNA in forensic analysis. Nat Rev Genet 5:739–751
Farkas LG, Katic MJ, Forrest CR (2005) Internation anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofac Surg 16:615–646
Zhuang Z, Landsittel D, Benson S, Roberge R, Shaffer R (2010) Facial anthropometric differences among gender, ethnicity and age groups. Ann Occup Hyg 1:1–12
Henneberg M, Veitch D (2003) National size and shape survey of Australia. Kinanthreport 16:34–39
Henneberg M, Veitch D (2005) Is obesity as measured by body mass index, and waist circumference in adult Australian women 2002 just a result of the lifestyle? J Hum Ecol (Spec Issue) 13:85–89
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
(DOCX 25 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lucas, T., Henneberg, M. Comparing the face to the body, which is better for identification?. Int J Legal Med 130, 533–540 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-015-1158-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-015-1158-6