On the integral use of foundational concepts in verifying validity during skull-photo superimposition

Transitions from the concepts recommended as foundational for video superimposition method have been noted in the methods described by authors using computer assisted superimposition processes (Table 3 in Jayaprakash [1]) including Gordon and Steyn [2] and the impact of such differences on the method reliability is a matter of current debate [3]. Gordon and Steyn [2] cite the traditional video superimposition method described by Austin-Smith and Maples [4] as the basis for their methodology. Austin-Smith and Maples [4] used face-images, although at lesser than ‘life-size’, but filled the monitor screen and then overlaid 3D skull-images from real skulls to fit the face-images guided by tissue thickness markers, included the tragus-auditory meatus relationship in addition to ectocanthion-Whitnall’s tubercle relationship when orientating the skull-images in relation to the posture seen in the face-images and evaluated the match among the superimposing skull- and face- images relying on wipe images in addition to images seen in mix mode.

from #AlexandrosSfakianakis via Alexandros G.Sfakianakis on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2qtE5nG
via IFTTT