Image manipulation: Fraudulence in digital dental records: Study and review

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Apr 1, 2014
https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.127767
Download
PDF
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Volume 6, Issue 1, January-April 2014

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Aman Chowdhry
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi
Keya Sircar
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi
Deepika Popli
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi
Ankita Tandon
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi

Abstract

Introduction: In present-day times, freely available software allows dentists to tweak their digital records as never before. But, there is a fine line between acceptable enhancements and scientific delinquency. Aims and Objective: To manipulate digital images (used in forensic dentistry) of casts, lip prints, and bite marks in order to highlight tampering techniques and methods of detecting and preventing manipulation of digital images. Materials and Methods: Digital image records of forensic data (casts, lip prints, and bite marks photographed using Samsung Techwin L77 digital camera) were manipulated using freely available software. Results: Fake digital images can be created either by merging two or more digital images, or by altering an existing image. Discussion and Conclusion: Retouched digital images can be used for fraudulent purposes in forensic investigations. However, tools are available to detect such digital frauds, which are extremely difficult to assess visually. Thus, all digital content should mandatorily have attached metadata and preferably watermarking in order to avert their malicious re-use. Also, computer alertness, especially about imaging software′s, should be promoted among forensic odontologists/dental professionals.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Aman Chowdhry, Keya Sircar, Deepika Popli, & Ankita Tandon. (2014). Image manipulation: Fraudulence in digital dental records: Study and review. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 6(1), 31–35. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.127767
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Keiser‑Neilsen S. Person Identification by Means of Teeth. Bristol: John Wright and Sons; 1980.
  2. Güneri P, Akdeniz BG. Fraudulent management of digital endodontic images. Int Endod J 2004;37:214‑20.
  3. Rossner M, Yamada KM. What’s in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation. J Cell Biol 2004;166:11‑5.
  4. Fiete R. “Photo Fakery” oemagazine [Internet]. 2005 January. Available from: http://spie.org/x16032.xml?highlight=x2410andA rticleID=x16032. [Last cited on 2012 Dec 12].
  5. Singbal KP, Chhabra N, Madan B. Digital Imagery: Reality or Fakery. Int J Contemp Dent 2010;1:93‑8.
  6. Tsuchihashi Y. Studies on personal identification by means of lip prints. Forensic Sci 1974;3:233‑48.
  7. Establishing the reliability of palatal rugae pattern in individual identification (following orthodontic treatment). J Forensic Odontostomatol. 2011;29:20‑9.
  8. Beautification and fraud. Nat Cell Biol 2006;8:101‑2.
  9. Abbott A. Forged images lead to German inquiry. Nature 1997;387:442.
  10. Aldhous P, Reich ES. Further doubts over stem‑cell images. New Sci 2008; 203:2.
  11. Weissmann G. Science fraud: From patchwork mouse to patchwork data. FASEB J 2006;20:587‑90.
  12. Xin H. Scientific misconduct. Online sleuths challenge cell paper. Science 2006;314:1669.
  13. Young JR. Journals find fakery in many images submitted to support research. The Chronicle of Higher Education (May 29, 2008). Available from: http://chronicle.com/article/ Journals‑Find‑Fakery‑in‑Man/846/. [Last accessed on 2009 Apr 12].
  14. Cromey DW. Avoiding twisted pixels: ethical guidelines for the appropriate use and manipulation of scientific digital images. Sci Eng Ethics 2010;16:639‑67.
  15. O’Brien JF, Farid H. Exposing Photo Manipulation with Inconsistent Reflections. ACM Trans Graph 2012;31:1‑11.
  16. Farid H. Digital image forensics. Sci Am 2008;298:66‑71.
  17. Parrish D, Noonan B. Image manipulation as research misconduct. Sci Eng Ethics 2009;15:161‑7.
  18. Pearson H. Forensic software traces tweaks to images. Nature 2006;439:520‑1.
  19. Benos DJ, Vollmer SH. Generalizing on best practices in image processing: A model for promoting research integrity: Commentary on: Avoiding twisted pixels: Ethical guidelines for the appropriate use and manipulation of scientific digital images. Sci Eng Ethics 2010;16:669‑73.
  20. Kutter M, Petitcolas FAP Fair evaluation methods for image watermarking systems. J Electron Imaging 2000;9:445‑55.