Table 6 Fingerprints development scores using CA technique on glass, metal and plastic surfaces submerged in fresh water at 1, 2 and 10days’ intervals according to fingerprints quality assessment scale
From: Development of latent fingerprints on non-porous surfaces recovered from fresh and sea water
CA | Time (day) | Number of deposited marks | Scores | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Â | Â | 5 (very good) | 4 (good) | 3 (poor) | 2 (bad) | 1 (blur/no) | |||||
N | % | N | % | n | % | n | % | N | % | |||
Glass | 1 | 10 | 8 | 80% | 2 | 20% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% |
2 | 10 | 4 | 40% | 5 | 50% | 1 | 10% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | |
10 | 10 | 0 | 0% | 3 | 30% | 5 | 50% | 2 | 20% | 0 | 0% | |
Metal | 1 | 10 | 6 | 60% | 4 | 40% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% |
2 | 10 | 4 | 40% | 6 | 60% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | |
10 | 10 | 0 | 0% | 6 | 60% | 3 | 30% | 1 | 10% | 0 | 0% | |
Plastic | 1 | 10 | 0 | 0% | 6 | 60% | 4 | 40% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% |
2 | 10 | 0 | 0% | 2 | 20% | 3 | 30% | 5 | 50% | 0 | 0% | |
10 | 10 | 0 | 0% | 2 | 20% | 5 | 50% | 3 | 30% | 0 | 0% | |