Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 77, Issue 7, pp 8729–8758 | Cite as

Digital forensics of microscopic images for printed source identification

  • Min-Jen Tsai
  • Imam Yuadi


When trying to identify a printed forged document, examining digital evidence can prove to be a challenge. In this study, microscopic images are used for printed source identification due to their high magnification properties resulting in detailed texture and structure information. Prior research implemented a scanner as a digitizing technique to resolve very fine printed identification, but this technique provided limited information on the resolution and magnification of the sample. In contrast, the performance of microscopy techniques can retrieve the shape and surface texture of a printed document with differing micro structures among printer sources. To explore the relationship between source printers and images obtained by the microscope, the proposed approach utilizes image processing techniques and data exploration methods to calculate many important statistical features, including: Local Binary Pattern (LBP), Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM), Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT), Spatial filters, the Wiener filter, the Gabor filter, Haralick, and SFTA features. Among the different set of features, the LBP approach achieves the highest identification rate and is significantly superior to other methods. As a result, the proposed technique using microscopic images achieves a high classification accuracy rate, which shows promising applications for real world digital forensics research.


Microscopic images Digital image forensics Feature filters Support vector machines (SVM) Local binary pattern (LBP) 



This work was partially supported by the National Science Council in Taiwan, Republic of China, under NSC104-2410-H-009-020-MY2.


  1. 1.
    Ali GN, Chiang PJ, Mikkilineni AK, Chiu GT, Delp EJ, Allebach JP (2004) Application of principal components analysis and Gaussian mixture models to printer identification. In: Intl. Conference on digital printing technologies. Salt Lake City, pp. 301–305Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bekhti MA, Kobayashi Y (2016) Prediction of vibrations as a measure of terrain traversability in outdoor structured and natural environments, in: image and video technology, Vol. 9431 of the series lecture notes in computer Science. Springer International Publishing, Auckland, pp 282–294. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-29451-3_23 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buchanan JDR et al (2005) Fingerprinting’ documents and packaging. Nature 436:475. doi: 10.1038/436475a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bulan O, Mao J, Sharma G (2009) Geometric distortion signatures for printer identification International conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP). Taipei pp 1401-1404. doi:  10.1109/ICASSP.2009.4959855
  5. 5.
    Chiang PJ, Khanna N, Mikkilineni AK, Segovia MVO, Suh S, Allebach JP, Chiu GTC, Delp EJ (2009) Printer and scanner forensics: examining the security mechanisms for a unique interface. IEEE signal processing magazine. March, pp.72-83. doi:  10.1109/MSP.2008.931082
  6. 6.
    Choi JH, Lee HY, Lee HK (2013) Color laser printer forensic based on noisy feature and support vector machine classifier. Multimedia Tools Applications 67:363–382. doi: 10.1007/s11042-011-0835-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chu PC, Cai BY, Tsoi YK, Yuen R, Leung KSY, Cheung NH (2013) Forensic analysis of laser printed ink by X-ray fluorescence and laser-excited plume fluorescence. Anal Chem 85(9):4311–4315. doi: 10.1021/ac400378q CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chun-Lin L, (2010) A tutorial of the wavelet transforms. National Taiwan University Accessed 13 July 2016
  9. 9.
    Costa AF, Humpire-Mamani G, Traina AJM (2012) An efficient algorithm for fractal analysis of textures. SIBGRAPI Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images, August, Ouro Preto. pp. 39–46. doi: 10.1109/SIBGRAPI.2012.15
  10. 10.
    Cox IJ, Miller ML, Bloom JA, Fridrich J, Kalker T (2008) Digital watermarking and steganography, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abramowitz M, Davidson MW, The concept of magnification. Olympus America, Inc. Accessed 2 Feb 2017
  12. 12.
    Ferreira A, Navarro LC, Pinheiro G, Santos JAD, Rocha A (2015) Laser printer attribution: exploring new features and beyond. Forensic Sci Int 247:105–125. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.11.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gonzales RC, Woods RE (2008) Digital Image Processing, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Haghighat M, Zonous S, Abdel-Mottaleb M (2015) CloudID: trustworthy cloud-based and cross-enterprise biometric identification. Expert Syst Appl 42(21):7905–7916. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2015.06.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haralick RM, Shanmugam K, Dinstein I (1973) Textural features for image classification. IEEE Trans Syst, Man Cybern SMC-3(6):610–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herman B, Lemasters JJ (1993) Optical microscopy: emerging methods and applications. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hewlett-Packard Company (2002) HP LaserJet 4200 and 4300 series printers Accessed 21 June 2016
  18. 18.
    Hsu CW, Chang CC, Lin CJ (2003) A practical guide to support vector classification, Taipei: National Taiwan University. Accessed 18 July 2016
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Jurič I, Ranđelović D, Karlović I, Tomić I (2014) Influence of the surface roughness of coated and uncoated papers on the digital print mottle. Journal of Graphic Engineering and Design 5(1):17–23Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Juuti M, Prykäri T, Alarousu E, Koivula H, Myllys M, Lähteelä A, Toivakka M, Timonen J, Myllylä R, Peiponen KE (2007) Detection of local specular gloss and surface roughness from black prints, in: colloids and surfaces a: physicochemical and engineering aspects. Elsevier 299(1-3):101–108. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2006.11.039 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kawasaki M, Ishisaki M ( 2009) Investigation into the cause of print mottle in halftone dots of coated paper: effect of optical dot gain non-uniformity, vol.63. No.11, pp.1362–1373. Accessed 27 June 2016
  23. 23.
    Kim DG, Lee HK (2014) Color laser printer identification using photographed halftone images, Proc. of EUSIPCO. September, IEEE, Lisbon, pp. 795–799Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kim KI, Jung K, Park SH, Kim HJ (2002) Support vector machines for texture classification. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 24(11):1542–1550. doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2002.1046177 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kundur D, Lin CY, Macq B, H. Yu (2004) Scanning the issue: special issue on enabling security technologies for digital rights management, in Proceedings of the IEEE, pp. 879–882Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li Q, Zhang Z, Lu W, Yang J, Ma Y, Yao W (2016) From pixels to patches: a cloud classification method based on a bag of micro-structures. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques 9:753–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mäenpää T, Pietikäinen M (2004) Texture analysis with local binary patterns. In: Chen CH, Wang PSP (eds) Handbook of Pattern Recognition & Computer Vision, 3rd edn. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 115–118Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Marcella AJ Jr, Guillossou F (2012) Cyber forensics: from data to digital evidence. John Willy & Sons, New JerseyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mihlbachler MC, Beatty BL, Caldera-Siu A, Chan D (2012) Error rates in dental microwear analysis using light microscopy. Palaeontol Electron 15(12A):22Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mikkilineni AK, Chiang PJ, Ali GN, Chiu GTC, Allebach JP, Delp EJ (2005) Printer identification based on graylevel co-occurrence features for security and forensic applications. In Proceedings of the SPIE International Conference on Security, vol. 5681, pp. 430–440Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mikkilineni AK, Arslan O, Chiang PJ, Kumontoy RM, Allebach JP, Chiu GTC, Delp EJ (2005) Printer forensics using svm techniques in Proceedings of the IS&T’s NIP21: International conference on digital printing technologies, vol. 21, Baltimore, October, pp. 223–226Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ojala T, Pietikäinen M, Mäenpää T (2002) Multiresolution gray-scale and rotation invariant texture classification with LBP, IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis & Machine Intelligence 24(7):971–987. doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2002.1017623 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Oravec M, Gál L, Čeppan M (2015) Pre-processing of inkjet prints NIR spectral data for principal component analysis. Acta Chim Slov 8(2):191–196. doi: 10.1515/acs-2015-0031 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Osadchy M, Jacobs DW, Lindenbaum M (2007) Surface dependent representations for illumination insensitive image comparison. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 29(1):98–111. doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2007.19 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pollard SB, Simske SJ, Adams GB (2010) Model based print signature profile extraction for forensic analysis of individual text glyphs. IEEE workshop on information forensics and security - WIFS'10, Seattle, December 12-15. Accessed 6 Aug 2016
  36. 36.
    Pollard S, Simske S, Adams G (2013) Print Biometrics: Recovering forensic signatures from halftone images, Hewlett-Packard Development Company Accessed 30 Jul 2016
  37. 37.
    Ryu SJ, Lee HY, Im DH, Choi JH, Lee HK (2010) Electrophotographic printer identification by halftone texture analysis. In: IEEE Intl. Conference on acoustics speech and signal processing (ICASSP). pp. 1846–1849. doi: 10.1109/ICASSP.2010.5495377
  38. 38.
    Say OT, Sauli Z, Retnasamy V (2013) High density printing paper quality investigation, IEEE Regional Symposium on Micro and Nano electronics (RSM). Langkawi, pp. 273-277. doi: 10.1109/RSM.2013.6706528
  39. 39.
    Schalkoff RJ (1989) Digital image processing and computer vision. John Wiley & Sons, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sharma G (2016) Image-based data interfaces revisited: barcodes and watermarks for the mobile and digital worlds. 8th International conference on communication systems and networks (COMSNETS). 5-10 January, 6 p. doi: 10.1109/COMSNETS.2016.7440021
  41. 41.
    Sharma A, Subramanin L, Brewer E (2011) PaperSpeckle: microscopic fingerprinting of paper. Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, Chicago, Illinois, USA — October 17–21, pp. 99–110 doi:  10.1145/2046707.2046721
  42. 42.
    Simske SJ, Adams G (2010) High-resolution glyph-inspection based security system, IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 14–19 March, pp. 1794–1797. doi:  10.1109/ICASSP.2010.5495416
  43. 43.
    Su R, Pekarovicova A, Fleming PD, Bliznyuk V (2005) Physical Properties of LWC Papers and Gravure Ink Mileage Accessed 23 June 2016
  44. 44.
    Szynkowska MI, Czerski K, Paryjczak T, Parczewski A (2010) Ablative analysis of black and colored toners using LA-ICP-TOF-MS for the forensic discrimination of photocopy and printer toners. Survey and Interface Analysis 42:429–437. doi: 10.1002/sia.3194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tsai MJ, Liu J (2013) Digital forensics for printed source identification. In IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS). May, pp. 2347–2350. doi:  10.1109/ISCAS.2013.6572349
  46. 46.
    Tsai MJ, Yin JS, Yuadi I, Liu J (2014) Digital forensics of printed source identification for Chinese characters. Multimedia Tools and Applications 73:2129–2155. doi: 10.1007/s11042-013-1642-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tsai MJ, Hsu CL, Yin JS, Yuadi I (2015) Japanese character based printed source identification, IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS). May, Lisbon. pp. 2800-2803. doi:  10.1109/ISCAS.2015.7169268
  48. 48.
    Vega LR, Rey H (2013) A rapid introduction to adaptive filtering. Springer-Verlag, Berlin HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Voloshynovskiy S, Holotyak T, Bas P (2016) Physical object authentication: detection-theoretic comparison of natural and artificial randomness. IEEE International conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing, 20-25 March, pp. 2029-2033. doi:  10.1109/ICASSP.2016.7472033
  50. 50.
    Zhu B, Wu J, Kankanhalli MS (2003) Print signatures for document authentication. Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on Computer and communications security. Washington D.C., USA October 27–30, 2003, pp. 145–154. doi:  10.1145/948109.948131

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Information ManagementNational Chiao Tung UniversityHsin-ChuRepublic of China
  2. 2.Department of Information and Library ScienceAirlangga UniversitySurabayaIndonesia

Personalised recommendations