The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: 

Document Title: Blood on Black- Enhanced Visualization of 

Bloodstains on Dark Surfaces 

Author: Peter R. De Forest, Rebecca Bucht, Frani 

Kammerman, Brooke Weinger, Lauren 

Gunderson 

Document No.: 227840 

Date Received: August 2009 

Award Number: 2006-DN-BX-K026 

This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. 

To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federallyfunded grant final report available electronically in addition to 

traditional paper copies. 

 

Opinions or points of view expressed are those 

of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect 

the official position or policies of the U.S. 

Department of Justice. 
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Report Title: 

Blood on Black- Enhanced Visualization of Bloodstains on Dark Surfaces 

Award Number: 

2006-DN-BX-K026 

Authors: 

Peter R De Forest, Rebecca Bucht, Frani Kammerman, Brooke Weinger, Lauren Gunderson 

Abstract 

Accurately visualizing and documenting bloodstains and patterns is an integral part of crime scene 

investigation and can provide crucial information for both the analysis of evidence in the laboratory and 

crime scene reconstruction efforts. 

Visualization of bloodstains is trivial on white or lightly colored surfaces. However, on darkly 

colored or black surfaces, this visualization can be extremely difficult. The failure to visualize and thereby 

recognize blood and bloodstain patterns on darkly colored surfaces has had seriously adverse consequences 

for important criminal investigations. 

There are two aspects to the problem. First, the presence of blood may not be recognized at critical 

stages in the investigation. Second, where the presence of blood is recognized, the pattern of blood-staining 

may not be appreciated. Sampling of bloodstains for DNA typing and other analyses must take place with 

knowledge of the bloodstain patterns. Otherwise important information may be destroyed. In a significant 

number of cases knowing how the bloodstains were formed is more important than knowing the biological 

source of the stains. In most cases the two types of information are complementary. 

Photography represents a nondestructive method of documenting stains. Traditionally, black and 

white photography uses color filters to either lighten or darken a stain against the surrounding background to 

elucidate the forensic information contained on a difficult substrate. This technique, however, provides little 

benefit with bloodstains on very dark and reflective surfaces. Observing and documenting bloodstains on 

these surfaces is problematic due to the glare reflected off of the surface as well as the lack of contrast 

between the stain and substrate. 

Page 1 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Previous studies have shown the usefulness of chemical enhancement techniques on bloodstain 

patterns, with the drawback of potentially compromising DNA analysis and altering the stains. IR 

photography, performing background corrections on digital images and the combination of digital 

photographs taken at several wavelengths have also been shown to enhance visualization of blood on some 

strong colored substrates. 

During the course of examining evidence in cases, we observed stunningly dramatic improvement in 

the contrast between the otherwise subtle bloodstains and the dark or black background by using polarizing 

filters over the light source and the camera lens. This project has resulted in the determination of the 

optimum parameters and limitations for the enhancement, a better understanding of the mechanism behind 

the phenomenon and increased awareness of the technique within the field. 

Page 2 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Table of Contents: 

Executive Summary

Final Technical Report 

I. Introduction 

Statement of the problem 

Review of relevant literature 

Rationale for the research 

II. Methods & Results 

 Samples and equipment 

 Optimum parameters

 Mechanism 

 Features and limitations

III. Conclusions 

Discussion of findings 

Implications for policy and practice 

Implications for further research 

Dissemination of research findings 

IV. Bibliography 

V. Appendices 

 Table of stains made 

 Table of substrates tested 

 Image processing data & calculations 

List of figuresin final technical report 

 PDF Guide

 pg. 3 

 pg. 17 

 pg. 19 

 pg. 21 

 pg. 21 

 pg. 26 

 pg. 38 

 pg. 41 

 pg. 54 

 pg. 56 

 pg. 58 

 pg. 59 

 pg. 60 

 Appendix 1

 Appendix 2

 Appendix 3 

 Appendix 4

 Appendix 5 

Page 3 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Executive Summary 

Introduction 

Accurately visualizing and documenting bloodstains and patterns is an integral part of crime scene 

investigation and provides crucial information for both the analysis of evidence in the laboratory and crime 

scene reconstruction efforts. 

Visualization of bloodstains is trivial on white or lightly colored surfaces. However, on darkly 

colored or black surfaces, it can be extremely difficult. The failure to visualize and thereby recognize blood 

and bloodstain patterns on darkly colored surfaces has had seriously adverse consequences for important 

criminal investigations. 

In the Principal Investigator’s experience there are two aspects to the problem. First, the presence of 

blood may not be recognized at critical stages in the investigation. Second, where the presence of blood is 

recognized, the pattern of blood-staining may not be appreciated. Sampling of articles bearing bloodstains for 

DNA typing and other analyses must take place with knowledge of the bloodstain patterns. Otherwise 

important information may be destroyed. In a significant number of cases knowing how the bloodstains were 

formed is more important than knowing the biological source of the stains. In most cases the two types of 

information are complementary. 

Photography represents a nondestructive method of documenting stains. Traditionally, black and 

white photography uses color filters to either lighten or darken a stain against the surrounding background to 

elucidate the forensic information contained on a difficult substrate. This technique, however, provides little 

benefit with bloodstains on very dark and reflective surfaces. Observing and documenting bloodstains on 

these surfaces is problematic due to the glare reflected off of the surface as well as the lack of contrast 

between the stain and substrate. 

Previous studies have shown the usefulness of chemical enhancement techniques on bloodstain 

patterns, including luminol, amido black, and leucocrystal violet, with the drawback of potentially 

Page 4 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

compromising DNA analysis and altering the morphology of the stains. Documenting the result of some 

chemical enhancements also requires specialized photographic techniques. 

Performing background corrections on digital images and the combination of digital photographs 

taken at two or three wavelengths have also been shown to lead to enhanced visualization of blood on some 

strong colored substrates. With this method there is a significant time lag between capturing the image and 

being able to visualize the stain. 

IR photography has also been used to enhance the contrast between bloodstains and certain substrates, 

especially those that are multicolored with dyes that do not absorb IR. 

During the course of examining evidence, we have done some exploratory work using polarizing 

filters over the light source and the camera lens. We have observed stunningly dramatic improvement in the 

contrast between the otherwise subtle or even unrecognized bloodstains and the dark or black background. 

Samples and equipment 

All stains used were prepared by the project staff using fresh blood. The blood was obtained, in 

accordance with IRB approved methods, by piercing the tip of a finger with a lancet designed for that 

purpose. Four different types of stains were produced. ‘Smear’ stains were produced by smearing a thin layer 

of blood across the surface of the substrate using the pierced finger. ‘Contact’ stains were produced by 

blotting the surface of the substrate with the pierced finger. ‘μL’ stains were produced by pipetting a given 

μL amount of freshly bled blood onto the surface of the substrate. ‘Small spatter’ stains were produced by 

dipping the bristles of a toothbrush into freshly shed blood and creating small spatter by flicking a finger 

across the bristles while holding the toothbrush over the substrate. All stain making methods were tested on 

white paper in order to ascertain that the stain making methods resulted in the type of stains we were 

intending to make. These four stains cover the sizes and thicknesses or blood stains one could expect to find 

in case scenarios. 

Page 5 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

The polarized method requires three main components, a white collimated light source with a linear 

polarizing filter, the surface to be sampled on a dark matte background, and a camera with a linear polarizing 

filter. 

Camera 

Linear polarizing 

filter 

Intense 

white light 

source 

Polarized Light Method Setup & Components 

Linear polarizing 

filter 

Sample on a black 

background 

Fig. 1 

Optimum parameters 

The lack of a suitable light source was the main problem in early experimentation using this 

enhancement method. The best results were obtained with a fiber optic light, which also caused the most 

damage to the polarizing filter in front of it. Less intense lighting options also caused considerable damage to 

the polarizing filter, even if a heat absorbing glass and air flow was present between the light source and the 

filter. Since experiments with narrow wavelength sources and polarizing filters did not yield particularly 

good results, we assumed that the entire white light spectrum would be needed. LEDs produce ‘white’ light 

without extraneous IR or UV radiation, so we started our search by experimenting with LEDs. 

Page 6 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

LEDs use one of two technologies to produce white light. The more common method, known as 

‘white LED’, is a blue diode covered with phosphor to convert a portion of the blue light to yellow light. This 

combined spectrum is perceived as white light. The output spectrums of these LEDs have a specific shape 

but do vary somewhat depending on the wavelength of blue LED and phosphorescent compound used. 

The less common method is known as RGB LED and uses a combination of red, green and blue 

LEDs to mimic the CIE colorspace of white light. The main variables in these LEDs are the wavelengths of 

the red, green and blue LEDs as well as the output intensities of those three LEDs. 

The RGB LED, the Zylight Z90, turned out to be by far the best option. The enhancement produced is 

comparable to that obtained with traditional white light sources and there has been no noticeable damage to 

the polarizing filter, even after over one year’s heavy use. It is the only commercially available RBG LED 

portable and maneuverable enough to be used comfortably and efficiently in a lab or crime scene setting. 

RGB LED vs White LED 

Z90 Spectrum, RGB LED Blood on leather, Z90 

Foster Freeman S80 spectrum, ‘white’ LED Blood on leather, S80 

Fig.2 

Page 7 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

The effects of LED intensity, saturation and color temperature were tested. It appeared that the 

intensity did not significantly affect the enhancement, but a lower intensity requires a longer exposure time 

which can be more cumbersome in practical applications of the technique. The neutral or zero saturation 

provided the best results. Though the appearance of the image changed noticeably with the change in color 

temperature, there was little difference in the enhancement produced. With the higher color temperatures, the 

substrate background often took on a colder black color which can make distinguishing small or faint spatter 

easier, particularly on the ribbed cotton. 

The Fuji ISPro has a number of setting choices for dynamic range, color saturation, tone, film 

simulation, white balance, color temperature and exposure compensation. Changing the dynamic range did 

not appear to impact the enhancement. Color saturation, tone and sharpness did show a visible difference 

between the high and low extremes of the settings, but did not seem to significantly impact the enhancement 

or the ability to discern the stain from the substrate. 

The most dramatic changes were seen in varying the exposure compensation and film simulation. F2, 

the Fuji film simulation choice that mimics slide film and is geared towards landscape and nature 

photography by providing a ‘vibrant reproduction of natural colors’ produced a discernibly improved 

enhancement over the other film simulation options. Within the F2 film simulation, one can also vary the 

color, tone and saturation settings. Decreasing the sharpness to -2 and color to -1 produced the best results. 

The best images were produced by a shorter shutter speed than recommended by the built in light 

meter. This was accomplished by using the exposure compensation function. It was found that a 

compensation of -2 or -3 produced the best results. Longer exposure times tended to overexpose the image, 

making small spatter in particular hard to distinguish. 

A number of pairs of linear polarizing filters, both low end and high end, were purchased. The 

polarizing filters with the better extinction ratio, ie which transmitted the least light while crossed, produced 

the better enhancement. The span across which the filter showed near-zero transmission was a better 

indicator of its performance than the maximum transmission. Though the True Pol had a lower maximum 

transmission than the Hoya and Heliopan, the two latter ones showed near zero transmission across more of 

the 400-700nm range and produced better images. The filters that produced the better results also required 

the longer exposure time under the same settings. 

Page 8 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

The effect of changing the angle of incidence of the polarized light was explored. Having the incident 

light at 90 or 45 degrees produced the best overall enhancement, partially because the surface examined was 

more evenly darkened at those angles. This held true for close up photographs of stains as well. 

The effect of the orientation of the plane of incident polarized light was found to be substrate 

dependent. Some substrates like wool and leather did not react noticeably to the orientation of the plane of 

incident polarized light. Others such as polyester and silk were strongly influenced. 

In the case of one polyester sample, rotation of the incident polarized light changed the substrate 

appearance from red to black. Stains were, naturally, more visible when crossing the polarizers resulted in a 

dark background. It should be noted that this change from red to black background is not readily apparent 

through the viewfinder. 

Effect of Orientation of Incident Polarized Light on Polyester 

Uncrossed Crossed Crossed rotated ~20° 

Fig. 3 

Mechanism 

It is readily apparent from the photographs that turning the two polarizing filters to extinction reduces 

the glare from the surface of the substrate as well as the stain. 

Page 9 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

These stains were observed with an Olympus BX41 PLM, using the Z90 to produce reflected 

polarized lighting. Both the difference in color between the thick and thin portions of the stain and the 

reduction of glare from the stain and substrate are apparent. 

Micrographs 

Smear on leather x40 Uncrossed Smear on leather x40 Crossed 

Smear on polyester x40 Uncrossed Smear on polyester x40 Crossed 

Smear on wool x40 Uncrossed Smear on wool x40 Crossed 

Fig.4 

Page 10 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Features & Limitations 

Stain size impacted the enhancement through its effects on the absorption and thickness of the stain. 

Otherwise the limitations of visualization were those posed by zoom, resolution and focus of the 

photography. 

Stains that were absorbed into the substrate as opposed to drying on the surface of the substrate were 

harder to visualize. The contours of these stains were more prominent. Small spatter did not tend to be 

absorbed into the substrate which leads to it being particularly successfully enhanced on most dark 

substrates. Due to its small size, some zooming in on larger surface area images is necessary in order for the 

smaller spatter to be properly resolved. 

Different Stain Types 

Contact on wool, leather & cotton Smear on wool, leather & cotton 

10μL drop on wool, leather & cotton Small spatter on wool 

Fig.5 

Initial experimentation with the five different substrates confirmed that all substrates did not interact 

with the blood or the polarized light in a uniform manner. 

Stains on substrates which contain one or more lighter colored elements show barely any 

enhancement. The reflection off the lighter colored elements is not diminished by crossing the polarizers, and 

Page 11 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

the excess reflected light dominates over the reflection from the stain. If the pattern of the substrate allows 

for it, this excess reflection from the lighter portions can be minimized by covering them with a dark swatch 

or choosing the field of view so that it contains only the dark portions of the sample. When the sample or 

object being examined is small, it should be photographed on a dark substrate to minimize the stray light 

interfering with the enhancement. 

Uniformity of the plane of the substrate can also be an issue. If the substrate is uneven, it can be 

difficult to illuminate sufficient portions of it so that the entire field of view is under crossed polar lighting. 

During our stain making process we observed that the stains would not retain their red color while 

drying. When first deposited on the substrate, the blood would appear very bright. During the process of the 

stain drying, the bright red would fade away and then reappear as the stain dried, if the stain was a thin stain. 

Thick stains remained dark. Once the stain was dry, there was no discernible change to the color or 

enhancement. The stains also maintained this contrast as they aged. Stains were also photographed up to one 

year after they were made and no visible change in the enhancement was observed. 

IR Photography is another bloodstain visualization and documentation method that does not involve 

any physical or chemical alteration of the surface being examined. Due to the development of digital SLRs 

with IR sensitivity, IR photography is gaining popularity. 

In terms of equipment, crossed polar illumination does not require a specially configured camera. 

Taking the photograph is also easier because one can observe the subject through the viewfinder. With IR, 

the lens needs to be focused prior to the addition of the IR filter because the IR filter is not transparent in the 

visible range. 

Six of the plain substrates with all four types of stains on them were photographed using both 

methods. With respects to stain thickness, IR is complementary to crossed polar illumination as thick stains 

are visualized better with IR. Certain substrates like silk and polyester that can be more difficult to visualize 

with crossed polarized light are also better visualized with IR. 

Page 12 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

In order to compare the visualization of small spatter, we focused in on a few swatches in particular. 

We took close up photographs of the silk and polyester swatches with the 60mm lens. Silk and polyester 

were chosen because bloodstains on them were enhanced the best with IR photography. Even though the 

smears, contact and drop stains are more enhanced with the IR, the small spatter is not discernable at all 

under IR. 

Discussion of findings 

This research further confirmed the utility of crossed polar illumination in visualizing and 

documenting bloodstains on dark surfaces. Though there are limitations to the technique, the instances in 

which it can be of great value are plentiful. 

Micrographs show that even seemingly matte surfaces like wool have a significant amount of white 

light reflected from them. They also show that the stain surface reflects white light as well. Crossed polar 

illumination eliminates this reflection from both surfaces, resulting in the two appearing more true to their 

intrinsic colors. This glare reduction appears to be the key element in the enhancement. 

The light source and polarizing filters are the most imperative components of this method. LEDs 

produce intense white light with the least heat damage to the filter in front of the source and RGB LED is the 

preferred LED technology. The poor performance and blue green tint of the bloodstain produced using the 

‘white’ LED technology may be partially due to its output in the 400-450nm area being stronger than that 

across the remainder of the visual spectrum and the crossed polarizing filters not being able to block the 400­

5000nm range as effectively as the 450-700nm wavelengths. 

The difference between the performances of most polarizing filters is less drastic than that of the 

different LED types. In terms of the transmission curve of two crossed polarizers across the visual range, the 

wavelengths across which there was virtually zero transmission was more indicative of better performance 

than the maximum intensity of transmitted light. For filters with similar ranges of near-total extinction, the 

ones with a lower maximum transmission were better. Given the dependence of the enhancement on the 

effective blockage of glare, this is to be expected. 

Page 13 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Though it may seem counterintuitive, seeing better enhancement with a negative exposure 

compensation, which produces a darker photograph, is in line with Weber’s law for light and sound 

perception and the theories behind visual adaptation. The less brightness there is from the background, the 

more contrast is produced by even a small luminance difference between the stain and the background. Other 

camera settings which improve the enhancement are hard tone settings and slide film simulation. 

Another essential tool for this method is a tripod, copy stand or other camera support structure. 

Despite the better enhancement with underexposed images, the exposure times were always well beyond the 

limits of handheld photography. Attempting to overcome this handicap by pushing the ISO setting of the 

camera requires an ISO number in the thousands. Such a high ISO setting or an unstable camera 

compromises the resolution when zooming in on the image, which affects the ability to detect small spatter. 

The stains that are enhanced the best with this technique are thinner stains and small spatter. Thick 

stains are harder to locate using this method unless they are surrounded by thinner stained areas that are 

enhanced. In practice this does not constitute a problem, as thick stains tend to be easily visualized using 

oblique lighting or IR photography. 

Substrate features have the potential to interfere quite a lot with the enhancement. Materials that 

absorb well leave little residue on the surface to be enhanced. Reflection off of any light colored components 

of the substrate is not as effectively quenched under crossed polar illumination, which limits the 

enhancement possible. Some dyes and fiber types are affected by the orientation of the incident polarized 

light and may require some experimentation with different filter rotations to achieve the best darkening of the 

background. Uneven surfaces are harder to work with, as the area which can be successfully brought under 

extinction is smaller. Any manual flattening out of surfaces should be done carefully in order to minimize 

potential dislodgement of stains or other materials. 

The area which can be covered by each frame is limited not only by the lens and working distance, 

but also because thin, faint stains and small spatter require close up imaging to be detected. It should be noted 

that these stains are also rarely distinguishable though the viewfinder or the LCD display of the camera and 

require the photograph to be viewed on a larger screen, such as that of a portable computer. 

Page 14 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

The testing of false positive, false negatives and dilutions suggest that as long as a stain retains a red 

hue, this redness will be enhanced. The darker appearance of thicker bloodstains on white and light colored 

substrates may explain why they are not as well enhanced as the thinner stains that appear red. 

Fibers and many other small particles were also enhanced so this method may also be useful for 

finding and documenting other types of evidence. 

Implications for policy and practice 

Virtually every law enforcement agency in this country has occasion to investigate crimes against the 

person in which patterns of bloodstains are encountered and require photographic documentation for 

subsequent bloodstain pattern analysis and crime scene reconstruction. There are three main aspects of 

bloodstain analysis that this visualization and documentation contribute to. 

The first one of these is the detection of blood in the early stages of the investigation. This allows for 

proper measures to be taken for documentation and preservation of the blood evidence. The presence, 

location and morphology of blood stains are often of great importance in any investigation, and the earlier 

this information is available, the better. This technique provides a method for early screening of surfaces that 

is temporally and logistically convenient. 

The second point to be made is that of intelligence driven sampling. Stains are commonly analyzed in 

order to confirm that they are blood, and often further analyzed to determine their origin. Being able to 

visualize the stains allows for selective processing of the surface. The morphology of the stain provides 

information about how it was deposited on the surface, which allows for selection of the more pertinent 

stains to sample. In cases where the surface examined is large, fewer samples need to be taken as the 

sampling can be focused on specific areas. Being able to focus on more heavily stained areas also ensures the 

collection of ample sample for further analyses. Where there are multiple sources of blood, the occurrence of 

mixed profiles in consequent DNA analysis can be minimized by sampling stains individually. More focused 

sampling also lessens the likelihood of disturbing or contaminating other potential evidence on the surface. 

The third area where this visualization and documentation is important is that of the interpretation of 

the evidence. The location and morphology of the stains are key elements not only in the investigation, but 

Page 15 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

also in any event reconstruction efforts. The ability to assign a DNA profile to a particular stain as opposed to 

a surface or collection of stains is important both in cases with multiple sources of blood or DNA but also 

where there is a single source of blood or DNA. 

Thorough testing and documentation of the enhancement technique has not only determined the 

optimum conditions and limitations of the technique, it can also serve to satisfy the scientific testing required 

of forensic methods presented in the courts of law. 

Page 16 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Final Technical Report 

I. Introduction 

Statement of the problem 

Accurately visualizing and documenting bloodstains and patterns is an integral part of crime scene 

investigation and provides crucial information for both the analysis of evidence in the laboratory and crime 

scene reconstruction efforts. 

Visualization of bloodstains is trivial on white or lightly colored surfaces. However, on darkly 

colored or black surfaces, it can be extremely difficult. The failure to visualize and thereby recognize blood 

and bloodstain patterns on darkly colored surfaces has had seriously adverse consequences for important 

criminal investigations. 

In the Principal Investigator’s experience there are two aspects to the problem. First, the presence of 

blood may not be recognized at critical stages in the investigation. Second, where the presence of blood is 

recognized, the pattern of blood-staining may not be appreciated. Sampling of articles bearing bloodstains for 

DNA typing and other analyses must take place with knowledge of the bloodstain patterns. Otherwise 

important information may be destroyed. In a significant number of cases knowing how the bloodstains were 

formed is more important than knowing the biological source of the stains. In most cases the two types of 

information are complementary. 

In the O.J. Simpson case the defendant’s black nylon dress socks were inspected and manipulated by 

defense pathologists before bloodstains later identified as having come from Nicole Simpson were visualized 

and documented by the Los Angeles Police Department Laboratory. The defense pathologists later claimed 

that they had seen no blood. This led to a series of problems that adversely affected the prosecution. Despite 

the flaking off of blood due to the unnecessary handling, blood was later visualized on the critical sock. It 

would have been far better if this had been done earlier. In the Carolyn Warmus or “Fatal Attraction” 

homicide case, bloodstains on black cashmere gloves were not recognized initially. This lack of recognition 

led to serious problems for the prosecution. 

Page 17 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Photography represents a nondestructive method of documenting stains. Traditionally, photography 

uses color filters to either lighten or darken a stain against the surrounding background to elucidate the 

forensic information contained on a difficult substrate. This technique, however, provides little benefit with 

bloodstains on very dark and reflective surfaces. Observing and documenting bloodstains on these surfaces is 

problematic due to the glare reflected off of the surface as well as the lack of contrast between the stain and 

substrate. 

Previous studies have shown the usefulness of chemical enhancement techniques on bloodstain 

patterns, including luminol, amido black, and leucocrystal violet, with the drawback of potentially 

compromising DNA analysis and altering the morphology of the stains. Documenting the result of some 

chemical enhancements also requires specialized photographic techniques. 

Performing background corrections on digital images and the combination of digital photographs 

taken at two or three wavelengths have also been shown to lead to enhanced visualization of blood on some 

strong colored substrates. With this method there is a significant time lag between capturing the image and 

being able to visualize the stain. 

IR photography has also been used to enhance the contrast between bloodstains and certain substrates, 

especially those that are multicolored with dyes that do not absorb IR. 

During the course of examining evidence in less well-known cases, we did some exploratory work 

using polarizing filters over the light source and the camera lens. We observed stunningly dramatic 

improvement in the contrast between the otherwise subtle or even unrecognized bloodstains and the dark or 

black background. 

In one bludgeoning case spatter-type bloodstains on the black nylon jacket of the defendant were 

easily visualized by the technique we developed. This was important evidence in the prosecution of the case. 

More recently, the full extent of bloodstains on a black leather jacket was missed by DNA analysts in a large 

state laboratory. The case involved a father accused of stabbing his seven year-old daughter multiple times. 

The defense offered the explanation that the victim had frequent nosebleeds. In such a situation DNA typing 

would have limited value. Our technique of visualization via polarized light photography revealed 

Page 18 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

bloodstains produced by airborne droplets and projected blood, as well as those produced by contact on 

significant areas of the jacket. The type and totality of the stains on the jacket proved crucial in the 

prosecution of the case. 

Review of relevant literature 

Visualizing and documenting the presence of bloodstains on substrates has long been recognized as 

an integral part of crime scene investigation. Blood evidence can be associated with many types of crimes 

and can be analyzed in terms of reconstruction as well as being associated with particular individuals as 

possible sources (7). For instance, Pizzola, Roth and DeForest (1986) discussed the dynamics of blood 

droplets that make them useful for reconstruction efforts (19,20). The first step in recognizing the presence 

of bloodstains is to visualize them on the substrates on which they are found. Often, dark surfaces pose 

problems with visualization efforts (23). 

Chemical methods of identification are numerous. Grodsky, Wright and Kirk (1951) discussed and 

compared early methods of presumptive blood testing (12). Higaki and Philp (1976) further studied 

sensitivity, stability and specificity of phenolphthalein as a presumptive blood test (13). Garner, Cano, 

Peimer, and Yeshion (1976) evaluated tetramethylbenzidine as a presumptive test for blood (8). Bodziak 

(1996) proved the usefulness of leucocrystal violet to enhance shoeprints in blood (2). Theeuwen, van 

Barneveld, Drok, Keereweer, Limborgh, Naber, and Velders (1998) further classified the usefulness of 

chemical methods on footwear impressions in blood including in their study Amido Black, Coomassie Blue, 

Crowle’s staining solution, DAB, DFO, Fuchsin acid, LCV, Merbromin, Ninhydrin, o-Tolidine, and TMB 

(25). Lee, Gaensslen, Pagliaro, Guman, Berka, Keith, and Phipps (1989), however, showed that many 

presumptive test reagents including fingerprint enhancing chemicals can have a significant destructive effect 

on subsequent serological testing of the bloodstain (15). 

In addition to chemical methods of visualization, Lytle and Hedgecock (1977) discussed 

chemiluminescence methods to aid in the visualization of bloodstains (16). Gimeno and Rini (1989) 

presented a full flash photo luminescence method of photographing luminol bloodstain patterns (7). Laux 

(1991), however, studied the effect of using a chemiluminescent method of visualizing bloodstains 

Page 19 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

establishing that, while luminol did not affect some subsequent confirmatory and ABO typing tests, it did 

affect genetic marker analysis (14). 

Visualizing bloodstains can also be done via methods of light source enhancement. Anderson and 

Bramble (1997) discussed using argon ion lasers, Polilight V, Polilight green, Superlite and shortwave UV 

for enhancement of bloodstains, but also found that shortwave UV for more than 30seconds precluded further 

PCR analysis of the stain (1). Platt (1982), however, showed that the extended use of an argon laser to 

visualize bloodstains resulted in little or no reaction using presumptive reagents afterwards (21). Shipp, 

Roelofs, Togneri, Wright, Atkinson, and Henry (1993), using white cloth substrates and limited exposure 

times and wavelengths, found no destructive effects of argon laser light, ALS and cyanoacrylate fuming on 

subsequent RFLP analysis (24). Hyperspectral Imaging is a liquid crystal-based imaging technique that 

combines standard digital imaging with common spectroscopic methods, such as Near-IR, Colorimetric and 

Fluorescence imaging and has been used to visualize and document bloodstains on a variety of otherwise 

difficult substrates (4). 

Infrared photography has also been used in documenting bloodstains. Raymond and Hall (1986) 

presented an early article regarding the application of this technique to bloodstains, showing that the success 

rate is dependent on the condition of the blood, the substrate on which it is deposited and the region of the 

infrared spectrum being used (22). Perkins (2005) applied traditional (non-digital) infrared photography 

methods to bloodstains found on clothing, but had problems using this method on fabric samples that showed 

glare (18). Miskelly and Wagner (2005) discussed using spectral information in forensic imaging, 

specifically digital photography (17). 

The use of digital photography in forensic science is an excellent way of documenting evidence. 

Goldthorpe and McConnell (2000) discussed the use of digital photography and video recording as a 

successful method of recording clinical forensic evidence for court presentations (10). Dalrymple, Shaw and 

Woods (2002) presented optimized digital recording protocol for crime scene impressions (6). Bullard and 

Birge (1996) established an application for a digital darkroom in a forensic science laboratory (3). The use of 

digital photography in forensic science often elicits some concern regarding evidence alteration. However, 

Grady (2001) showed that Adobe Photoshop’s channel mixer served as a viable method for evidence 

enhancement (11). Crispino, Touron and Elkader (2001) worked to define strict guidelines for forensic 

scientists regarding digital equipment and the use of Adobe Photoshop software (5). More recently and 

Page 20 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

applicable to our study, Wagner and Miskelly (2003) offered background correction options for digital 

photography of blood evidence (26,27). 

Rationale for the research 

Our work prior to this project had been preliminary. There was much more to be done to elucidate the 

mechanism of the dramatic enhancement we had observed, determine the optimum equipment and 

parameters for the enhancement, and to thoroughly document it so that it can be shared with other forensic 

scientists. 

This project has developed and introduced an improved method of photographing these dark, 

bloodstained substrates without the use of chemical enhancement techniques, specialized film needs or postexposure manipulation of digital images. 

II. Methods & Results 

The methods and results of this study are described below along with descriptions of the samples and 

equipment used. The methodology has been broken down into the three main objectives of the research, 

finding the optimum parameters, determining the mechanism behind the enhancement and investigation of 

the limitations of the method. 

Samples and equipment 

Setup 

Unless otherwise specified, all images were taken with the camera and sample on a Polaroid MP4 

copy stand. Ambient light was minimized by the lack of windows, closing the door and turning off overhead 

lights. None of the images were enhanced or treated with Photoshop© or other image manipulation software. 

Page 21 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Polarized Light Method Setup & Components 

Camera 

Linear polarizing 

filter 

Intense 

white light 

source 

Linear polarizing 

filter 

Sample on a black 

background 

Fig. 1 

Camera equipment 

The camera used for this project was the Fuji ISPRo. It was chosen mainly for its IR capabilities as 

we wanted to compare the polarized light enhancement with that obtainable by IR photography. The lenses 

used were the Nikon 60mm f/2.8 macro lens and the Nikon 50 mm f/2 lens. The Peca 916 visible pass filter, 

which blocks most of the UV and IR that the ISPro CCD is sensitive to, was used for all regular and 

polarized light photography in order to have the IS Pro mimic the performance of a regular digital SLR. 

Micrographs were taken using a Nikon D70 and an Olympus BX41 PLM. 

Page 22 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Substrates 

Plain black cotton, leather, wool, silk and polyester purchased from a fabric store were used for the 

majority of the experiments. These represent common synthetic and natural clothing materials. Use of other 

substrate types and materials was limited to the ‘substrate characteristics’ portion of the project. 

Making bloodstained samples 

All stains used were prepared by the project staff using fresh blood. The blood was obtained, in 

accordance with IRB approved methods, by piercing the tip of a finger with a lancet designed for that 

purpose. Four different types of stains were produced. ‘Smear’ stains were produced by smearing a thin layer 

of blood across the surface of the substrate using the pierced finger. ‘Contact’ stains were produced by 

blotting the surface of the substrate with the pierced finger. ‘μL’ stains were produced by pipetting a given 

μL amount of freshly bled blood onto the surface of the substrate. ‘Small spatter’ stains were produced by 

dipping the bristles of a toothbrush into fresh blood and creating small spatter by flicking a finger across the 

bristles while holding the toothbrush over the substrate. All stain making methods were tested on white paper 

in order to ascertain that the stain making methods resulted in the type of stains we were intending to make. 

These four stains cover most of the sizes and thicknesses of blood stains one could expect to find in case 

scenarios. 

A full listing of the stains made can be found in appendices 1 and 2 (all the substrates listed in appendix 2 

were stained with all 4 types of stains). 

Stain Types on White Paper 

Contact Smear 10μL drop Spatter 

Fig. 2 

Page 23 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Image Analysis 

The histograms of a selection of images from the ‘optimum parameters’ were analyzed in order to 

attempt to obtain a more quantitative measure of the enhancement than visual evaluation. A stained area and 

a background area were selected from each image and the values of luminosity, red, green and blue of those 

areas entered into an excel table for processing. White and black areas from the reference scale in one of the 

images were sampled to provide an estimate of maximum contrast for comparison purposes. A number of 

calculations were performed using these values and their suitability to the task at hand evaluated by 

comparing the results between photographs where the difference in enhancement was obvious. This excel 

spreadsheet is attached as Appendix 3. 

The World Wide Web Consortium has developed equations for brightness difference and color 

difference in order to provide guidance in selecting appropriate background and foreground color 

combinations for web pages. To determine the brightness difference one first converts the RGB values into 

YIQ values before performing the subtraction. The equation for the RGB to YIQ conversion is ((Red x 299) 

+ (Green x 587) + (Blue x 114)) / 1000. The maximum color difference is 255, between white and black, and 

the suggested minimum value by the W3C is 125. The equation for color difference is (maximum Red value - 

minimum Red value) + (maximum Green value - minimum Green value) + (maximum Blue value - 

minimum Blue value). The maximum color difference is 765 and the suggested minimum value by the W3C 

is 500. The brightness difference between the white and black reference areas was 232.20 and the color 

difference 715.84. 

Weber contrast, Michelson contrast, Lightness difference and Luminance ratio values were also 

calculated. These four equations focus on the luminance of colors as opposed to their red, green and blue 

components. Luminance is a value designed to account for the fact that lights of equal power but different 

wavelengths do not appear equally bright. Luminosity is a relative measure of luminance and was substituted 

directly for luminance in our calculations. 

These calculations take into consideration two features, the difference between the luminances in 

question and visual adaptation. Visual adaptation is the response of vision to a temporal or spatial change in 

the physical power of a stimulus. The eyes react strongly to temporal changes in the applied power of the 

Page 24 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

stimulus but respond less to, or adapt to continued steady application of the same power. As a result of this, a 

luminance difference that produces a large brightness difference on a dim background will produce a smaller 

lightness difference on a brighter background. 

The Weber contrast is designed for use in instances of small features on a large even background 

where the background luminance is approximately equal to the average luminance. The equation is CW= LSLB/LB, where LS is the luminance of the symbol or features and LB is the luminance of the background. 

Where the background is lighter than the features, CW has a negative value between 0 and 1 and where the 

background is darker than the features, CW has a positive value. The CW value for the black and white 

reference areas was 10.88. 

The Michelson contrast is for where the background is not a large area of uniform luminance that 

dictates the observer’s brightness adaptation. The equation is CM= LMAX-LMIN/LMAX+LMIN, where LMAX is the 

maximum luminance and LMIN the minimum luminance The CM for the black and white reference areas was 

0.84. 

Lightness difference describes contrast in terms of the lightness of the features and background 

relative to the maximum possible luminance, or white point. The equation is ΔL*=116[(LS-LB)/LN]

 1/3, where 

LS is the luminance of the subject or feature, LB is the luminance of the background and LN is the maximum 

luminance. The maximum luminance was taken to be the luminance of the white standard, 253, in order to 

account for the fact that the software luminosity being substituted for luminance in these calculations is a 

relative measurement of true luminance. The lightness difference of the black and white reference areas was 

112.74 

Luminance ratio is simply the ratio between the luminance of the feature or subject to that of the 

background, CR=LS/LB, where LS is the luminance of the feature or subject and LB is the luminance of the 

background. Like the Weber contrast it assumes that the background luminance describes the visual 

adaptation, but it does not take into account the difference in the luminances. The luminance ratio for the 

black and white reference areas was 11.88. 

Page 25 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Optimum parameters 

Light source 

The lack of a suitable light source was the main problem in early experimentation using this 

enhancement method. The best results were obtained with a fiber optic light, which also caused the most 

damage to the polarizing filter in front of it. Less intense lighting options also caused considerable damage to 

the polarizing filter, even if a heat absorbing glass and air flow was present between the light source and the 

filter. Since experiments with narrow wavelength sources and polarizing filters did not yield particularly 

good results, we assumed that the entire white light spectrum would be needed. LEDs produce ‘white’ light 

without extraneous IR or UV radiation, so we started our search by experimenting with LEDs. 

LEDs use one of two technologies to produce white light. The more common method, known as 

‘white LED’, is a blue diode covered with a phosphorescent material that emits light across the remainder of 

the visible spectrum. This combined spectrum is perceived as white light. The output spectrums of these 

LEDs have a characteristic shape but do vary somewhat depending on the wavelength of blue LED and 

phosphorescent compound used. 

The two white LEDs tested did not perform well at all, producing a green tinted bloodstain and 

significantly less contrast between the stain and substrate. It is worth nothing that all current forensic white 

light LEDs use this white LED technology. 

The less common method is known as RGB LED and uses a combination of red, green and blue 

LEDs to mimic the CIE colorspace of white light. The main variables in these LEDs are the wavelengths of 

the red, green and blue LEDs as well as the output intensities of those three LEDs. 

The RGB LED tested, the Zylight Z90, turned out to be by far the best option. The enhancement 

produced is comparable to that obtained with traditional white light sources and there was no noticeable 

damage to the polarizing filter, even after over one year’s heavy use. It is the only commercially available 

RBG LED portable and maneuverable enough to be used comfortably and efficiently in a lab or crime scene 

setting. 

Page 26 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

It should be noted that even the inferior results obtained with the ‘white’ LEDs and crossed polarizing 

filters were still an improvement over the contrast seen without the crossed polarizing filters. 

RGB LED vs White LED 

Z90 Spectrum, RGB LED Blood on leather, Z90 

Foster Freeman S80 spectrum, ‘white’ LED Blood on leather, S80 

Fig.3 

Light source settings 

The Zylight Z90 allows the user to choose the output intensity as well as which color temperature and 

saturation of white light it produces. Changing the saturation setting on the Zylight shifts the white light 

towards green for the positive number settings and red for the negative number settings. The color 

temperature range that the Z90 is set for ranges from 2500-9000K and can be changed by 50K increments. 

The effects of intensity, saturation and color temperature were tested by photographing the same stain, 

keeping all other conditions constant while varying one of them at a time. For the rest of the photographs, 

Page 27 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

the camera was set to F2 film simulation and -2 exposure compensation but all other camera settings, 

including white balance, were kept at the standard or automatic settings. The photos were recorded as jpeg 

files with the highest resolution/lowest compression ratio and largest number of recording pixels available. 

Changing Z90 Color Temperatures 

2500K 5500K 8500K 

Substrates clockwise from top left: leather, polyester, cotton, wool 

Fig.4 

Changing Z90 Intensity 

Minimum Intensity, shutters speed 18sec Maximum Intensity, shutter speed 1.5 sec 

Stain: smear on wool 

Fig. 5 

Page 28 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

It appeared that the intensity did not significantly affect the enhancement, but a lower intensity 

requires a longer exposure time which can be more cumbersome in practical applications of the technique. 

The neutral or zero saturation provided the best results. Though the appearance of the image changed 

noticeably with the change in color temperature, there was little difference in the enhancement produced. 

With the higher color temperatures, the substrate background often took on a colder black color which can 

make distinguishing small or faint spatter easier, particularly on the ribbed cotton. 

Camera settings 

The Fuji ISPro has a number of setting choices for dynamic range, color saturation, tone, film 

simulation, white balance, color temperature and exposure compensation. The same stain, the ‘smear’ on 

wool substrate, was photographed while varying these settings, one at a time. 

Changing the dynamic range did not appear to impact the enhancement. Color saturation, tone and 

sharpness did show a visible difference between the high and low extremes of the settings, but did not seem 

to significantly impact the enhancement or the ability to discern the stain from the substrate. 

The most dramatic changes were seen in varying the exposure compensation and film simulation. F2, 

the Fuji film simulation choice that mimics slide film and is geared towards landscape and nature 

photography by providing a ‘vibrant reproduction of natural colors’ produced a discernibly improved 

enhancement over the other film simulation options. Within the F2 film simulation, one can also vary the 

color, tone and saturation settings. Decreasing the sharpness to -2 and color to -1 produced the best results. 

The best images were produced by a shorter shutter speed than recommended by the built in light 

meter. This was accomplished by using the exposure compensation function. It was found that a 

compensation of -2 or -3 produced the best results. Longer exposure times tended to overexpose the image, 

making small spatter in particular hard to distinguish. 

Page 29 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Changing Film Simulation 

Uncrossed F2 F2 adjusted 

Substrates clockwise from top left: leather, polyester, wool and cotton 

Fig.6 

Changing Exposure Compensation 

+/- -3 +/- 0 +/- +1 

Stain: smear on wool 

Fig.7 

Quantitative contrast measurement 

Image analysis was performed to compare dynamic range, color saturation, saturation, tone, film 

simulation, white balance, color temperature, exposure compensation, Z90 intensity, Z90 saturation, and Z90 

Page 30 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

color temperature. The stain used for this was the smear on wool. Film simulation and exposure 

compensation were used to evaluate the different contrast calculations since choosing F2 film simulation and 

-2 or -3 exposure compensation produced a markedly superior enhancement than the other film simulation 

and exposure compensation options. Weber contrast, Michelson contrast and luminance ratio were the only 

calculations that produced results consistent with the observations of the film simulation and exposure 

compensation differences. These three measurements were used to evaluate the impacts of the remaining 

camera settings. 

Summary of Contrast Calculation Results 

Feature 

Michelson Contrast Weber Contrast Luminance Ratio 

mean max min range mean max min range mean max min range 

D-range 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.01 1.44 1.48 1.43 0.05 2.44 2.48 2.43 0.05 

Color saturation 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.01 1.42 1.44 1.41 0.03 2.42 2.43 2.41 0.02 

Tone 0.41 0.52 0.30 0.22 1.45 2.18 0.86 1.32 2.45 3.18 1.86 1.32 

Film simulation 0.52 0.65 0.41 0.24 2.32 3.69 1.41 2.28 3.32 4.69 2.41 2.28 

White balance 0.40 0.41 0.37 0.04 1.34 1.41 1.30 0.11 2.34 2.40 2.17 0.23 

Color temperature 0.39 0.41 0.37 0.04 1.31 1.39 1.18 0.21 2.31 2.39 2.18 0.21 

Exposure compensation 0.33 0.39 0.23 0.16 1.02 1.29 0.61 0.68 2.02 2.29 1.61 0.68 

Z90 Intensity 0.57 0.62 0.57 0.05 2.71 3.25 2.41 0.84 3.71 4.25 3.41 0.84 

Z90 Saturation 0.42 0.44 0.40 0.04 1.48 1.59 1.33 0.26 2.48 2.59 2.33 0.26 

Z90 Color temperature 0.63 0.67 0.62 0.05 3.16 4.05 3.87 0.18 4.48 5.05 3.87 1.18 

Fig. 8 

The three highest mean contrast figures and highest single values were the same with all calculations: 

9000K Z90 color temperature with automatic white balance metering, lowest intensity Z90 illumination and 

F2 film simulation. The range, which would indicate having a large impact on the contrast, was highest for 

film simulation and tone with all three methods, with the third being exposure compensation with the 

Michelson contrast, Z90 intensity with the Weber contrast, and Z90 color temperature with the luminance 

ratio. The tone differences are shown below. 

Page 31 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Changing Tone Setting 

Org (CW 0.86,CM 0.30,CR 1.86) Hard (CW 2.18,CM 0.52,CR 3.18) Standard (CW 1.44,CM 0.42,CR2.44) 

Fig.9 

Polarizing filters 

A number of pairs of linear polarizing filters, both low end and high end, were purchased. The 

extinction ratio or polarizing efficiency of the filters was measured by crossing them and measuring the 

transmittance of light from 400-700nm. This measurement was made with a Cary 100 UV/VIS 

spectrophotometer, with a scan rate of 200nm/min and data intervals of 0.333nm. 

Transmission of Crossed Polarizing Filters 

Blue = B&W, Red = Heliopan, Khaki = Hoya, Green = True Pol 

Fig.10 

Page 32 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

The difference between crossing two of the same make and efficiency polarizing filter and crossing 

two of different makes was also looked at. 

Transmission of Crossed Mixed Filters 

Red = Heliopan, Purple = B&W, Blue = B&W and Heliopan 

Fig. 11 

Photographs were taken with the polarizing filters in order to compare the transmittance profiles with 

the enhancement produced. The stains used for this included small spatter and contact on leather, smear and 

drop on wool and contact on cotton. 

Page 33 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Stains Photographed with Different Polarizing Filters 

Uncrossed (SS 1/6) Hoya (SS 7.1) B&W (SS 4) 

Heliopan (SS 7.1) True Pol (SS 4) B&W and Heliopan (SS 4.5) 

Substrates clockwise from top left: cotton, leather (contact), leather (spatter) and wool 

Fig.12 

The polarizing filters with the better extinction ratio, ie which transmitted the least light while 

crossed, produced the better enhancement. The span across which the filter showed near-zero transmission 

was a better indicator of its performance than the maximum transmission. Though the True Pol had a lower 

maximum transmission than the Hoya and Heliopan, the two latter ones showed near zero transmission 

across more of the 400-700nm range and produced better images. The filters that produced the better results 

also required the longer exposure time under the same settings. 

Combining a lower grade filter with a higher grade filter, the resulting transmission curve and 

enhancement was better than the lower grade filter but inferior to the higher grade filter. 

As was the case with the LEDs, the enhancement produced with the inferior polarizing filters was still 

markedly better than that seen without any polarizers. 

Page 34 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Light angle 

The effect of changing the angle of incidence of the polarized light was also explored. Substrates 

containing four types of stains, smear, contact, small spatter and 5μL were photographed with different 

incident light angles. The Z90 was kept at a constant distance of 15-20 cm from the stains in order to ensure 

the most even lighting across the substrate. The angles were measured by keeping a Sears craftsman 

protractor flush on top of the Z90. The angles used were 90°, 45°, 20° and 0°, measured relative to the plane 

of the stained substrate. 

Having the incident light at 90 or 45 degrees produced the best overall enhancement, partially 

because the surface examined was more evenly darkened at those angles. This held true for close up 

photographs of stains as well. 

Changing the Angle of Incident Light 

90° 45° 

20° 0° 

Substrates clockwise from top left: leather, suede, wool, silk, polyester, cotton 

Fig. 13 

Page 35 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Orientation of the incident polarized light 

The effect of the orientation of the plane of incident polarized light was found to be substrate 

dependent. Some substrates like wool and leather did not react noticeably to the orientation of the plane of 

incident polarized light. Others such as polyester and silk were strongly influenced. 

In the case of one polyester sample, rotation of the incident polarized light changed the substrate 

appearance from red to black. Stains were more visible when crossing the polarizers resulted in a darker 

background. It should be noted that this change between red and black of the substrate is not readily apparent 

through the viewfinder. 

Effect of Orientation of Incident Polarized Light on Polyester 

Uncrossed Crossed Crossed rotated ~20° 

Fig. 14 

In the case of silk, rotation of the incident polarized light affected the darkness of the background 

under crossed polar illumination. When the incident polarized light was rotated to produce the darkest 

background, the small spatter and drop stain were at their most enhanced. Rotating it to where the 

background was at its lightest, the redness of the small spatter and drop is less prominent, but a darkening of 

the substrate can be observed where the smear and contact stains are. 

Page 36 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Effect of Plane of Incident Polarized Light on Silk 

Uncrossed Crossed Crossed rotated ~20° 

Fig. 15 

Additional filters 

When this method has been used in conjunction with black and white photography, it was 

recommended that a red filter be used in conjunction with the polarizing filter in order to enhance the 

contrast by lightening the grey produced by the red blood. We added a red 29 filter to the camera lens and 

photographed stains using both the color and the black and white mode of the camera. 

When comparing the crossed polar image with the black and white image, both with and without the 

red filter, it becomes clear that the image in color without the 29 filter is better for distinguishing between 

bloodstains and other debris. In particular, light colored fibers and flecks of dust are indistinguishable from 

bloodstained fibers and smaller bloodstains when using the additional red filter or black and white mode, 

making it appear that there is more staining present than is actually the case. 

Page 37 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Small Spatter on Wool-Filter Effects 

Uncrossed Crossed polars + filter 29 in BW mode 

Fig.16 

Mechanism 

Scatter 

Scattering of light by the stain was tested by observing the reflectance of a red laser pointer from the 

stain. The scattering of the stain surface relative to the substrate was tested by first shining the light at an 

unstained portion of the substrate and then shining it on a stained portion. There was little difference between 

the scattering from the leather and that of the 10μL stain. With the contact stain on leather a small but 

discernable difference was observed between the two. This suggests that the contact stain surface scatters 

light differently than the surface of the drop stain. 

Page 38 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Surface Scatter of Red Laser 

Leather 10 μL Leather Smear 

Note that red dot is where the laser hits the surface, not the stain 

Fig.17 

Glare reduction 

It is readily apparent from the photographs that turning the two polarizing filters to extinction reduces 

the glare from the surface of the substrate as well as the stain. This phenomenon was further explored by 

observing the stains under higher magnification. 

These stains were observed with an Olympus BX41 Polarized Light Microscope (PLM), using the 

Z90 to produce reflected polarized lighting. Both the difference in color between the thick and thin portions 

of the stain and the reduction of glare from the stain and substrate are apparent. As is most evident in the 

micrograph of the smeared bloodstain on wool, some portions of the bloodstained area appeared equally red 

both with and without the incident light being polarized or viewing through crossed polarizing filters, 

suggesting that there is no specific interaction between plane polarized light and blood contributing to the red 

color being visualized. 

Page 39 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Micrographs 

Smear on leather x40 Uncrossed Smear on leather x40 Crossed 

Smear on polyester x40 Uncrossed Smear on polyester x40 Crossed 

Spatter on cotton x40 Uncrossed Spatter on cotton x40 Crossed 

Smear on wool x40 Uncrossed Smear on wool x40 Crossed 

Fig.19 

Page 40 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Features & Limitations 

Stain characteristics 

Stains that were absorbed into the substrate and did not leave a thin film on the surface of the 

substrate were harder to visualize. Often the contours of these stains were more prominent. Blood that 

formed thick stains on the surface of the substrate were not enhanced but were easily detected with the use of 

oblique lighting. 

Small spatter tended to be deposited in small spheres on the surface of the substrates and was 

particularly successfully enhanced on most dark substrates. Due to its small size, some zooming in on larger 

surface area images is necessary in order for the smaller spatter to be properly resolved. It should be noted 

that this small spatter was very seldom apparent when looking through the viewfinder. 

Different Stain Types 

Contact on wool, leather & cotton Smear on wool, leather & cotton 

10μL drop on wool, leather & cotton Small spatter on wool 

Fig.19 

Page 41 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Substrate characteristics 

Initial experimentation with the five different substrates confirmed that all substrates did not interact 

with the blood or the polarized light in a uniform manner. 

With some materials, crossed polar illumination can diminish glare and shadow effects which can 

hinder the ability to locate stains by observing a change in the surface of the substrate. In the case of suede, 

some blood stains can be more distinguishable, albeit not red, with regular lighting as it results in a localized 

matting of the surface. With crossed polar illumination, this subtle matting can be less apparent and it can be 

more difficult to locate the stain. Two of the suede materials we tested behaved differently, with one the 

stains were easier to distinguish; with the other it was virtually impossible to visualize them. In both cases, 

there was no red color apparent, other than in the small spatter on the surface of suede #2. 

Stains on Suede 

Uncrossed suede #1 Crossed suede #1 Uncrossed suede #2 Crossed suede #2 

Fig. 20 

Stains on substrates which contain one or more lighter colored elements show barely any 

enhancement. The lighter colored elements reflect a large amount of light even with crossed polarizers, 

significantly shortening the shutter speed and dominating over the red from the stain. If the pattern of the 

substrate allows for it, this reflection from the lighter portions can be minimized by covering them with a 

dark swatch or choosing the field of view so that it contains only the dark portions of the sample. When the 

sample or object being examined is small, it should be photographed on a dark matte surface to minimize any 

stray light interfering with the enhancement. 

Page 42 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Black/White Upholstery Fabric with Smear and Spatter 

Uncrossed Crossed 

Fig. 21 

Uniformity of the plane of the substrate can also be an issue. If the substrate is uneven, it can be 

difficult to illuminate sufficient portions of it so that the entire field of view is under crossed polar lighting 

simultaneously. 

A selection of different materials used for upholstery, wallpapering, carpeting and clothing was 

obtained. A swatch of each of them was stained with small spatter, a smear and a 5μL drop. 

Grey Black Striped Carpeting with Smear and Spatter 

Uncrossed Crossed 

Fig. 22 

Page 43 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Leather Upholstery Fabric with Smear and Spatter 

Uncrossed Crossed 

Fig. 23 

Dark Grey Wallpaper with Smear and Spatter 

Uncrossed Crossed 

Fig. 24 

Effects of Dilution 

Successive dilutions of blood with distilled water were made to test the approximate concentration of 

blood required for the stains to be visually enhanced when photographed with crossed polarized light. 

Page 44 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Approximately 50μL of each were pipetted onto the substrate and spread out into a 1 cm diameter 

round stain. The substrates used were leather, wool, cotton and polyester. Stains made on white butcher 

paper with the same technique and dilutions were used as a control. 

Effects of Dilution 

Uncrossed on Wool Crossed on Wool On paper 

Whole blood in center 

Clockwise from top left: 1:5, 1:25, 1:50, 1:100, 1:1, 1:2, 

Fig.25 

Diluting the blood had an effect on how well it was absorbed by the substrates which contributed to a 

significant change in the appearance of the stain. On the wool substrate, dilutions up to 1 in 25 were visually 

enhanced. For the leather and cotton substrates, dilutions up to 1 of 10 were enhanced and for polyester the 

limit was 1 of 2, mainly due to the spreading out of more dilute stains. 

False Positives 

A number of commonly found red and brown materials were collected in order to determine to what 

extent the enhancement observed was unique to bloodstains. The following materials were tested: red 

Sharpie permanent marker ink, red Pentel Rolling Writer pen ink, red nail polish by Milani, Benjamin Moore 

paint in Spanish red, Rust-oleum gloss regal red paint, Rust-oleum rusty metal primer paint, red M.A.C. 

lipstick, red and brown Rose Art Crayons, FD & C Red #4 dry powder and water solution, 0.1% congo red, 

‘vampire blood’ from a vampire make-up kit, Heinz tomato ketchup, Smucker’s red raspberry jam, red wine 

Page 45 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

(Shiraz by Woop Woop), red Crayola modeling clay, red recorder ink from Ralph Gerbrands Company, and 

Ward’s simulated blood. 

Approximately 50μL of each test substance were pipetted onto the substrate and spread out into a 

1cm diameter round stain. For the pens and crayons, the stains were made by direct contact with the 

substrate to make a 1cm diameter round spot. The substrates tested were silk, leather, wool, cotton and 

polyester. Stains made on white butcher paper with the same technique and dilutions were used as a control. 

False Positives 

Uncrossed on Wool Crossed on Wool On paper 

Blood in center 

Clockwise from top left: 

FD+C red #4 in dH2O, Rustoleum primer, Rustoleum gloss 

Benjamin Moore paint, Ward’s simulated blood, Red nail polish, 

Mac red lipstick, Red Sharpie 

Fig. 26 

There were a number of substances tested that produced stains similar in color and appearance to that 

of a bloodstain, others, despite being equally enhanced, did not produce stains that looked like blood on the 

dark or white background. The red nail polish, Rust-oleum regal red paint, red lipstick, and Ward’s 

simulated blood were among those which most closely resembled bloodstains. The ‘vampire blood’, 

ketchup, Smucker’s red raspberry jam, red wine, brown crayon, and red modeling clay were easily 

distinguished from bloodstains. 

Page 46 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Just as is the case with stains on lighter substrates, one should be aware of the potential for a number 

of common household substances to produce stains with an appearance similar to blood. 

False Negatives/Interferences 

In order to test for possible interferences with the enhancement, blood was mixed in a 1 to 1 ratio 

with a variety of materials. The following liquids were tested: water, saliva, semen, Chlorox bleach, Windex, 

Lysol, saline, 4M and 0.4M sodium hydroxide, 3% hydrogen peroxide, concentrated hydrochloric acid, and 

glacial acetic acid. 

Approximately 50μL of each mixture were pipetted onto the substrate and spread out into a 1 cm 

diameter round stain. The substrates used were polyester, wool, leather and cotton. Stains made on white 

butcher paper with the same technique and dilutions were used as a control. 

False Negatives/Interferences 

Uncrossed on Wool Crossed on Wool On paper 

Blood with dH2O center left, blood with saline center right 

Clockwise from top left: 

Conc HCl, bleach, glacial acetic acid 

Windex, 4M NaOH, 3% H2O2, Lysol 

Fig.27 

Though the color hue of some of the stains was different than that of blood diluted with water, the 

majority of the stains remained distinguishable from the substrate and retained their red color and visual 

Page 47 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

enhancement with crossed polarized light photography. Just as is the case with stains on lighter substrates, 

one should be aware of the potential for a number of common household substances to affect the appearance 

of bloodstains when the two are mixed. 

Working distance & field of view 

The further away from the surface that the camera is, the larger the area covered by a single frame. 

The effects of varying the distance between the lens and the substrate was tested by moving the camera 

further away from the substrate. Most of the images from this project were captured with a lens-substrate 

distance of 10-20cm. With the camera moved up to ~50 cm, the area covered by the field of view was 

approximately 20cm x 30cm. The crossed polar enhancement was still visible at this distance, but the 

exposure time was greatly increased due to the fact that the light also had to be moved further away from the 

substrate in order to ensure even lighting across the field of view. Also, the ability to resolve small spatter 

stains was compromised by the loss of resolution when zooming in on the photo to find them. 

Larger Field of View-Smear, Contact, 10μL and Spatter 

Uncrossed Crossed 

Clockwise from top left: wool, polyester, leather, cotton 

Fig. 28 

Page 48 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Wool-Digital Zoom vs Optical Zoom 

Digital Zoom(from above picture) Optical Zoom (closer working distance) 

Fig. 29 

Drying process 

During our stain making process we observed that the stains would not retain their red color while 

drying. When first deposited on the substrate, the blood would appear very bright. During the process of the 

stain drying, the bright red would fade away and then reappear as the stain dried, if the stain was a thin stain. 

Thick stains remained dark. Once the stain was dry, there was no discernible change to the color or 

enhancement. 

Page 49 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Drying of a Smear on Wool 

0 min 5 min 10 min 

15 min 20 min 25 min 

30 min 35 min 40 min 

Fig.30 

 Drying of Drops on Leather 

0 min 35 min 60 min 

Drop size from top left: 2 μL, 1 μL, 5 μL, 10 μL 

Fig. 31 

Page 50 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Aging & Heat exposure 

Contact and smear stains on wool were heated in an oven at 72C between 30mins and 6hrs. No 

change in the enhancement was observed. Stains were also photographed up to one year after they were made 

and no visible change in the enhancement was observed. 

Comparability to IR Photography 

IR Photography is another bloodstain visualization and documentation method that does not involve 

any chemical or physical alteration of the surface being examined. Due to the development of digital cameras 

with IR sensitivity, IR photography has gained popularity. 

In terms of equipment, crossed polar illumination does not require a specially configured camera. 

Taking the photograph is also easier because one can observe the subject through the viewfinder. With IR, 

the lens needs to be focused prior to the addition of the IR filter because the filter blocks out light in the 

visible range. The live view function available on some cameras can be used to guide the aim of external IR 

sources and shutter speed selection, but does not provide sufficient resolution for focusing the lens. 

Six of the plain substrates with all four types of stains on them were photographed using both 

methods. A Foxfury 850nm handheld IR light was used for the IR photographs. With respects to stain 

thickness, IR is complementary to crossed polar illumination as thick stains are visualized well with IR. 

Certain substrates like silk and polyester that can be more difficult to visualize with crossed polarized light 

are better visualized with IR. 

Crossed Polars vs IR 

Uncrossed Crossed IR 

Substrates from top left: cotton, polyester, suede, silk, leather, wool 

Fig.32 

Page 51 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

In order to compare the visualization of small spatter, we focused in on a few swatches in particular. 

We took close up photographs of the silk and polyester swatches with the 60mm lens. Silk and polyester 

were chosen because bloodstains on them were enhanced the best with IR photography. Even though the 

smears, contact and drop stains are more enhanced with the IR, the small spatter is not discernable at all 

under IR. 

Silk and Polyester, Crossed Polars vs IR 

Uncrossed Crossed IR 

Close up of Small Spatter 

Uncrossed Crossed IR 

Left: silk, Right: polyester 

Fig. 33 

Other Materials 

Through our work, particularly in testing for false positives, we observed that cross polarized 

illumination also enhances the visibility of other materials on dark surfaces. We photographed a selection of 

fibers and glass shreds on wool and observed an increase in contrast where the fibers were of a lighter color 

than the substrate. Glass shreds were better visualized with an exposure compensation of -3 as opposed to the 

-2 that is recommended for stains and fibers. 

Page 52 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Fibers, Glass and Bloodstain on Wool 

A 

D 

B 

C 

E 

C 

A 

D 

B 

C 

E 

C 

Uncrossed Crossed (+/- -3) 

Bloodstain (A), Red Acrylic fiber (B) Glass shards (C) 

Green Olefin fiber (D), Blue Rayon fiber (E) 

Fig. 34 N.B. Scale in inches 

Blood and Glass on Leather 

Uncrossed Crossed 

Fig. 35 

Page 53 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

III. Conclusions 

Discussion of findings 

This research further confirmed the utility of crossed polar illumination in visualizing and 

documenting bloodstains on dark surfaces. Though there are limitations to the technique, the instances in 

which it can be of great value are plentiful. 

Micrographs show that even seemingly matte surfaces like wool have a significant amount of white 

light reflected from them. They also show that the stain surface reflects white light as well. Crossed polar 

illumination eliminates this reflection from both surfaces, resulting in the two appearing more true to their 

intrinsic colors. This glare reduction appears to be the key element in the enhancement. 

The light source and polarizing filters are the most imperative components of this method. LEDs 

produce intense white light with the least heat damage to the filter in front of the source and RGB LED is the 

preferred LED technology. The poor performance and blue green tint of the bloodstain produced using the 

‘white’ LED technology may be partially due to its output in the 400-450nm area being stronger than that 

across the remainder of the visual spectrum and the crossed polarizing filters not being able to block the 400­

5000nm range as effectively as the 450-700nm wavelengths. 

The difference between the performances of most polarizing filters is less drastic than that of the 

different LED types. In terms of the transmission curve of two crossed polarizers across the visual range, the 

wavelengths across which there was virtually zero transmission was more indicative of better performance 

than the maximum intensity of transmitted light. For filters with similar ranges of near-total extinction, the 

ones with a lower maximum transmission were better. Given the dependence of the enhancement on the 

effective blockage of glare, this is to be expected. 

Even when using the worst performing illumination and polarizing filters the bloodstains were far 

easier to visualize and document than with regular lighting. 

Though it may seem counterintuitive, seeing better enhancement with a negative exposure 

compensation, which produces a darker photograph, is in line with Weber’s law for light and sound 

Page 54 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

perception and the theories behind visual adaptation. The less brightness there is from the background, the 

more contrast is produced by even a small luminance difference between the stain and the background. Other 

camera settings which improve the enhancement are hard tone settings and slide film simulation. 

Another essential tool for this method is a tripod, copy stand or other camera support structure. 

Despite the better enhancement with underexposed images, the exposure times were always well beyond the 

limits of handheld photography. Even with the ISO simulation on the digital camera pushed to 3200, the 

maximum of the camera we used, the shutter speed required was 1/15 or 1/30 which is too long for 

successful handheld photography. Such a high ISO setting and an unstable camera compromise the resolution 

when zooming in on the image, which affects the ability to detect small spatter. Besides being used with a 

tripod or with a copy stand, this illumination method can also be adapted to a stereoscope or rolling scope for 

more detailed examination and screening or surfaces. Small spatter can in some instances be visualized 

without photography with the increased magnification provided by the stereoscope but the attachment of a 

camera to the stereoscope and photography of the surface s is still recommended. 

The stains that are enhanced the best with this technique are medium thickness stains such as smears 

and contact stains and small spatter. Thick stains are harder to locate using this method unless they are 

surrounded by thinner stained areas that are enhanced. In practice this does not constitute a serious problem, 

as thick stains tend to be easily visualized using oblique lighting or IR photography. 

Substrate features have the potential to interfere quite a lot with the enhancement. Materials that 

absorb blood well leave little residue on the surface to be enhanced. Reflection off of any light colored 

components of the substrate is not as effectively quenched under crossed polar illumination, which limits the 

enhancement possible. Some dyes and fiber types are affected by the orientation of the incident polarized 

light and may require some experimentation with different filter rotations to achieve the best darkening of the 

background. Uneven surfaces are harder to work with, as the area which can be successfully brought under 

extinction simultaneously is smaller and the glare from any areas not under extinction interferes with the 

enhancement. Any manual flattening out of surfaces should be done carefully in order to minimize potential 

dislodgement of stains or other materials. 

Page 55 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

The area which can be covered by each frame is limited not only by the lens, working distance and 

illumination, but also because thin, faint stains and small spatter require close up imaging to be detected. It 

should be noted that unlike larger, medium thickness stains, these stains are also rarely distinguishable 

though the viewfinder or the LCD display of the camera and require the photograph to be viewed on a larger 

screen, such as that of a portable computer. 

The testing of false positive, false negatives and dilutions suggest that as long as a stain retains a red 

hue, this redness will be enhanced. The darker appearance of thicker bloodstains on white substrates may 

explain why they are not as well enhanced as the thinner stains that appear red when on white substrates. 

During this research, ambient light was minimized by closing the door and turning off overhead 

lights. The best results are produced when the vast majority of the light hitting the target surface is from the 

polarized source. A computer screen was adjacent to the copy stand but having it turned on or off did not 

seem to affect the enhancement so a complete darkroom is not necessary. Where the minimization of ambient 

light is difficult, having a shorter working distance and the polarized light closer to the surface and using 

screens to block off ambient light improves the enhancement produced. 

It was observed that fibers, dust and other small particles were also enhanced by this method. This 

suggests that crossed polar illumination is useful for screening surfaces for a number of different types of 

evidence. 

Implications for policy and practice 

Virtually every law enforcement agency in this country has occasion to investigate crimes against the 

person in which patterns of bloodstains are encountered and require photographic documentation for 

subsequent bloodstain pattern analysis and crime scene reconstruction. There are three main aspects of 

bloodstain analysis that this visualization and documentation contribute to. 

The first one of these is the detection of blood in the early stages of the investigation. This allows for 

proper measures to be taken for documentation and preservation of the blood evidence. The presence, 

location and morphology of blood stains are most often of great importance in any investigation, and the 

Page 56 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

earlier this information is available, the better. This technique provides a method for early screening of 

surfaces that is temporally and logistically convenient. 

The second point to be made is that of knowledge driven sampling. Stains are commonly analyzed in 

order to confirm that they are blood, and often further analyzed to determine their origin. Being able to 

visualize the stains allows for selective processing of the surface. The morphology of the stain provides 

information about how it was deposited on the surface, which allows for selection of the more pertinent 

stains to sample. In cases where the surface examined is large, fewer samples need to be taken as the 

sampling can be focused on specific areas. Being able to focus on more heavily stained areas also ensures the 

collection of ample sample for further analyses. Where there are multiple sources of blood, the occurrence of 

mixed profiles in consequent DNA analysis can be minimized by sampling stains individually. More focused 

sampling also lessens the likelihood of disturbing or contaminating other potential evidence on the surface. 

The third area where this visualization and documentation is important is that of the interpretation of 

the evidence. The location and morphology of the stains are key elements not only in the investigation, but 

also in any event reconstruction efforts. The ability to assign a DNA profile to a particular stain as opposed to 

a surface or collection of stains is important both in cases with multiple sources of blood but also where there 

is only a single source of blood. 

The described method for enhancing bloodstains has great potential to improve the visualization and 

documentation of bloodstains not only in a laboratory setting but also at crime scenes. The procedure is nondestructive and produces time and cost efficient results without the use of potentially harmful chemicals or 

radiation. These chemicals are not only logistically demanding, but also have the potential to interfere with 

the subsequent recovery and analysis of the stains or other items on the surface. 

Even with the use of film based SLRs the image in the viewfinder can be used to inform and direct 

the sampling of stains during the documentation. Caution is necessary with respect to small airborne droplet 

stains that may be too small to be seen in the viewfinder. Digital photography has an advantage in this regard 

if the image is transferred to a computer and enlarged to allow visualization of these airborne stains prior to 

sampling. 

Page 57 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Thorough testing and documentation of the enhancement technique has not only determined the 

optimum conditions and limitations of the technique, it can also serve to satisfy the scientific testing required 

of forensic methods presented in the courts of law. There is also the potential for developing an off-the-shelf 

apparatus to provide the polarized light that the technique requires. 

Further research 

Our findings could be used to develop off the shelf apparatus to further simplify the application of 

this method. The most useful would be a RGB LED source to produce the polarized white light required, 

particularly as the forensic light sources currently available all utilize the inferior ‘white’ LED technology. 

Some form of hood like contraption to block off ambient light from the area being analyzed could be 

useful where a darkened workspace is not available. A portable viewing screen system could be considered to 

eliminate the need to download the photographs onto a computer or other device for viewing and analysis. 

This would most likely require some cooperation with camera manufacturers to ensure the compatibility of 

the viewing screen device with the cameras. 

Work could also be done to adapt the technique to video recording devices for the purposes of 

scanning a larger area for stains or other evidence. Considering the shutter speeds required with regular 

digital cameras, even when pushed to an ISO equivalent of 3200, this might require waiting for the 

development of more sensitive digital imaging detector technologies. 

Page 58 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Dissemination of Research Findings 

The products of this research were presented at the 2008 American Academy of Forensic Sciences 

Annual meeting in Washington DC, the 2008 International Association of Forensic Sciences triennial 

conference in Louisville Kentucky, the 2008 International Association for Identification Educational 

Conference in New Orleans Louisiana and the Australia New Zealand Forensic Science Society Biennial 

Meeting 2008 in Melbourne. Poster presentations will also be made at the 2009 FBI Trace Evidence 

Symposium and, pending acceptance, the 2009 European Academy of Forensic Science. 

The results were formatted into an article and will be submitted for publication in Forensic Science 

International. Technical notes will be submitted for publication or other distribution to the International 

Association for Identification, the International Association for Bloodstain Pattern Analysis, The 

International Association of Forensic Sciences, The FBI Bulletin and any other relevant association that we 

can establish contact with. In addition, a practical, quick guide to the method, seen in appendix 5, has been 

composed in pdf form and will be distributed to people in the forensic community. 

Page 59 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

IV. References 

1. Andersen, Julio and Bramble, Simon. (1997). “The Effects of Fingermark Enhancement Light 

Sources on Subsequent PCR-STR DNA Analysis of Fresh Bloodstains”. Journal of Forensic Sciences 

42(2): 303-306. 

2. Bodziak, William. (1996). “Use of leuco crystal violet to enhance shoe prints in blood”. Forensic 

Science International 82: 45-52. 

3. Bullard, Barry and Birge, Brian. (1996). “Applications of a digital darkroom in the forensic 

laboratory”. Proceedings of SPIE – the international society for optical engineering 2941: 75-82. 

4. Chemimage Application Note (2008). “Hyperspectral Imaging Enables Straightforward Visualization 

of Bloodstains. www.chemimage.com/markets/forensics (Accessed 01Feb2009) 

5. Crispino, Frank, Touron, Patrick and Elkader, Atef Abd. (2001). “Search for a Digital Enhancement 

Protocol for Photoshop Software”. Journal of Forensic Identification 51(5): 479-495. 

6. Dalrymple, Brian, Shaw, Len and Woods, Keith. (2002). “Optimized Digital Recording of Crime 

Scene Impressions”. Journal of Forensic Identification 52(6): 750-761. 

7. DeForest, P.R., Gaensslen, R.E., and Lee, H.C. (1983). Chapter 9: “Blood” in Forensic Science An 

Introduction to Criminalistics. McGraw-Hill, Inc.: New York. 

8. Garner, D.D., Cano, K.M., Peimer, R.S. and Yeshion, T.E. (1976). “An Evaluation of 

Tetramethylbenzidine as a Presumptive Test for Blood”. Journal of Forensic Sciences 21(4): 816­

821. 

9. Gimeno, Fred and Rini, Gary Alan. (1989). “Fill Flash Photo Luminescence to Photograph Luminol 

Blood Stain Patterns”. Journal of Forensic Identification 39(3): 149-156. 

10. Goldthorpe, S.B. and McConnell, P. (2000). “A new method of recording clinical forensic evidence”. 

Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine 7: 127-129. 

11. Grady, David P. (2001). “Using Adobe Photoshop’s Channel Mixer as an Evidence Enhancement 

Tool”. Journal of Forensic Identification 51(4): 378-384. 

12. Grodsky, Morris, Wright, Keith, and Kirk, Paul. (1951). “Simplified Preliminary Blood Testing”. 

Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology 42: 95-104. 

13. Higaki, R.S. and Philp, W.M.S. (1976). “A Study of the Sensitivity, Stability and Specificity of 

Phenolphthalein as an Indicator Test for Blood”. Canadian Society of Forensic Science 9(3): 97-102. 

14. Laux, Dale L. (1991). “Effects of Luminol on the Subsequent Analysis of Bloodstains”. Journal of 

Forensic Sciences 36(5): 1512-1520. 

Page 60 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

15. Lee, Henry C., Gaensslen, R.E., Pagliaro, Elaine M., Guman, Mary Beth, Berka, Karen M., Keith, 

Tim P., and Phipps, Pamela. (1989). “The Effect of Presumptive Test, Latent Fingerprint and Some 

Other Reagents and Materials on Subsequent Serological Identification, Genetic Marker and DNA 

Testing in Bloodstains”. Journal of Forensic Sciences 39(6): 339-358. 

16. Lytle, L.T. and Hedgecock, D.G. (1977). “Chemiluminescence in the Visualization of Forensic 

Bloodstains”. Journal of Forensic Sciences 23(1): 550-562. 

17. Miskelly, Gordon M. and Wagner, John H. (2005). “Using spectral information in forensic imaging”. 

Forensic Science International 155: 112-118. 

18. Perkins, Michael. (2005). “The Application of Infrared Photography in Bloodstain Pattern 

Documentation of Clothing”. Journal of Forensic Identification 55(1): 1-9. 

19. Pizzola, P.A., Roth, S., and DeForest, P.R. (1986). “Blood Droplet Dynamics – I”. Journal of 

Forensic Sciences 31(1): 36-49. 

20. Pizzola, P.A., Roth, S., and DeForest, P.R. (1986). “Blood Droplet Dynamics – II”. Journal of 

Forensic Sciences 31(1): 50-64. 

21. Platt, S.R. (1982). “The Effects of the Argon Ion Laser on Subsequent Blood Examinations”. Journal 

of Forensic Sciences 27(3): 726-728. 

22. Raymond, Michael Anthony and Hall, Robert Lyndsay. (1986). “An Interesting Application of Infrared Reflection Photography to Blood Splash Pattern Interpretation”. Forensic Science International 

31: 189-194. 

23. Shaler, Robert C. (2002). Chapter 10: “Modern Forensic Biology” in Forensic Science Handbook 

Volume I, 2nd Ed. Richard Saferstein (ed.). Prentice Hall: New Jersey. 

24. Shipp, Ed, Roelofs, Renee, Togneri, Enrico, Wright, Raymond, Atkinson, David, and Henry, Berch. 

(1993). “Effects of Argon Laser Light, Alternate Source Light, and Cyanoacrylate Fuming on DNA 

Typing of Human Bloodstains”. Journal of Forensic Sciences 38(1): 184-191. 

25. Theeuwen, A.B.E., van Barneveld, S., Drok, J.W. Keereweer, J.C.M., Limborgh, W.M., and Velders, 

T. (1998). “Enhancement of footwear impressions in blood”. Forensic Science International 95: 133­

151. 

26. Wagner, John H. and Miskelly, Gordon M. (2003). “Background Correction in Forensic Photography 

I. Photography of Blood Under Conditions of Non-Uniform Illumination or Variable Substrate Color 

– Theoretical Aspects and Proof of Concept”. Journal of Forensic Sciences 48(3): 1-11. 

Page 61 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

27. Wagner, John H. and Miskelly, Gordon M. (2003). “Background Correction in Forensic Photography 

II. Photography of Blood Under Conditions of Non-Uniform Illumination or Variable Substrate 

Color- Practical Aspects and Limitations”. Journal of Forensic Sciences 48(3): 1-10. 

Page 62 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 1 

Stains Made 

Stain # Substrate Stain Type 

01 Polyester Contact 

02 Silk Contact 

03 Wool Contact 

04 Cotton Contact 

05 Leather Contact 

06 Polyester Smear 

07 Silk Smear 

08 Wool Smear 

09 Cotton Smear 

10 Leather Smear 

11 Polyester 5 microliter drop 

12 Silk 5 microliter drop 

13 Wool 5 microliter drop 

14 Cotton 5 microliter drop 

15 Leather 5 microliter drop 

16 Polyester 10 microliter drop 

17 Silk 10 microliter drop 

18 Wool 10 microliter drop 

19 Cotton 10 microliter drop 

20 Leather 10 microliter drop 

21 Polyester Blood "splash" 

22 Silk Blood "splash" 

23 Wool Blood "splash" 

24 Cotton Blood "splash" 

25 Leather Blood "splash" 

26 Polyester spray bottle 

27 Silk spray bottle 

28 Wool spray bottle 

29 Cotton spray bottle 

30 Leather spray bottle 

31 Wool contact 

32 Wool Ward's "fake" blood 

33 Wool Ward's fake blood + cuprous sulfate 

34 Wool Ward's fake blood + ferrous sulfate 

35 Polyester Contact and smear 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 1 

Stains Made 

Stain # Substrate Stain Type 

36 Polyester Contact and smear 

37 Silk Contact and smear 

38 Silk Contact and smear 

39 Wool Contact and smear 

40 Wool Contact and smear 

41 Cotton Contact and smear 

42 Cotton Contact and smear 

43 Wool Fine spatter 

44 Wool Pipetted and spread out 

45 Wool Vampire blood 

46 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + copper metal (rust-colored) 

47 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + nickel metal (light-gray) 

48 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + ferric oxide (rust-colored) 

49 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + ferrous sulfate (light blue) 

50 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + cobalt chloride (purple) 

51 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + Magnesium Acetate (white) 

52 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + silver nitrate (white) 

53 Wool Contact, Vampire blood + lithium hydroxide (white) 

54 Black Ceramic Tile Contact and smears 

55 PVC Pipe Contact and smears 

56 Black coated metal Contact and smears 

57 Plastic Contact and smears 

58 Wood laminate Contact and smears 

59 Cotton Fine spatter 

60 Polyester Fine spatter 

61 Leather Fine spatter 

62 Silk Fine spatter 

63 Wool Smear 

64 Wool Contact 

65 Cotton Contact 

66 Leather Contact 

67 Wool Smear, contact 

68 Wool Smear, contact 

69 Wool Smear, contact 

70 Wool Smear, contact 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 1 

Stains Made 

Stain # Substrate Stain Type 

71 Wool Smear, contact 

72 Wool Smear, contact 

73 Wool Smear, contact 

74 Wool Smear, 10 ul, fine spatter 

75 Leather Smear, 10 ul, fine spatter 

76 Leather 15ul, 10ul, 5ul and 2ul 

77(a) Wool Smear 

77(b) White butcher paper Smear 

78(a) Wool Drops 

78(b) White butcher paper Drops 

79(a) Wool Drops 

79(b) White butcher paper Drops 

80(a) Wool Drops 

80(b) White butcher paper Drops 

81 Denim Smear 

82 Denim Contact 

83 Denim Fine spatter 

84 Denim Fine spatter 

85 Cotton Fine spatter, drop, smear, contact 

86 Wool Fine spatter, drop, smear, contact 

87 Leather Fine spatter, drop, smear, contact 

88 Silk Fine spatter, drop, smear, contact 

89 Polyester Fine spatter, drop, smear, contact 

90 Suede Fine spatter, drop, smear, contact 

91 White butcher paper Fine spatter 

92 White butcher paper Smear 

93 White butcher paper Contact 

94 White butcher paper 10 microliter drop 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006‐DN‐BX‐K026 

Appendix 2 

Substrates Tested

Sample 

Number Composition 

1 100% Linen 2 100% Polyester (Stain Repellant) 3 56% Viscose; 33% Cotton; 8% Polyester; 3% Poliamide 4 66% Viscose; 20% Pearl; 14% Cotton (osborne & little) 5 51% Polyurethane; 41% Polyamide; 8% Lycra 6 100% Cotton (Teflon) 7 Paper Backed Vinyl 8 85% pvc; 15% fiberglass (backing: 100% polyester) 9 96% wool; 4% nylon 

10 92% wool; 8% nylon 11 100% eco intelligent polyester 12 56% Polycotton; 41% Pearl; 3% Viscose (osborne & little) 13 47% Cotton; 35% Pearl; 18% Viscose (osborne & little) 14 100% non woven backing (elitis - # TP 124 01) - could be vinyl 15 65% Wool; 20% Polyamide; 15% CA (osborne & little - pattern # FJ022-03) 16 44% cotton, 38% polyester, 18% silk 17 european full grain vegetable tanned aniline dyed cowhide 18 100% nylon (Backing: teflon & light acrylic) 19 FACE: 68% Cotton, 22% Silk, 10% Linen; 78% Cotton, 12% Silk, 10% Linen 20 100% Viscose 21 Moore & Giles Leather 22 38% Polyamide; 34% Polyester; 28% Polyurethane 23 50% Polyacrylic; 30% Polyester; 20% Cotton 24 61%Viscose, 25% Cotton, 7% Polyester, 7% Polyamide (osborne & little) 25 67% Viscose; 33% Pearl (osborne & little) 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006‐DN‐BX‐K026 

Appendix 2 

Substrates Tested

Sample 

Number Composition 

26 58% Viscose; 23% PI, 19% Cotton (osborne & little - pattern # F1254/04) 27 69% Polyurethane; 31% Polyester 28 67% Viscose; 33% Pearl (osborne & little - pattern # F1452-04) 29 82% Rayon; 18% Silk 30 88% Polyester; 12% Polyurethane 31 100 trevira CS (Bergamo - Cachemire 7948-3) 32 63% Polyester; 37% Cotton 33 59% spun rayon; 34% cotton; 7% polyester 34 70% Mohair, 30% Silk (p); 53% cotton, 33% mohair, 14% silk (A) 35 56% Viscose; 33%; Cotton; 8% Pearl; 3% Polyamide (osborne & little) 36 69% Polyurethane; 31% Polyester 37 51% Polyester; 49% Acrylic 38 100% Cotton 39 Unlabeled 40 100% PL trevira CS = 100% Polyester trevira cs (flame retardant introduced at the molecular level) 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 

Appendix 3 

Image Processing 

STAIN 

Testing for Image Number Sampled Area Luminosity R G 

top x top y bottom x bottom y mean std dev median mean std dev median mean std dev 

d range 572 1188 1767 1497 2204 40.98 34.85 30 62.74 43.7 51 32.46 32.49 d range 573 1188 1767 1497 2204 41.98 36.51 30 64.69 46.14 51 33.04 33.97 d range 574 1188 1767 1497 2204 41.3 34.93 30 63.33 43.88 51 32.69 32.56 d range 575 1188 1767 1497 2204 40.85 34.55 30 63.22 43.68 51 32.08 32.14 d range 576 1188 1767 1497 2204 40.79 34.14 30 63.62 43.67 51 31.81 31.66 d range 577 1188 1767 1497 2204 41.24 34.44 30 64.29 43.85 52 32.16 31.99 d range 578 1188 1767 1497 2204 41.89 34.45 31 65.29 43.93 53 32.67 31.99 color sat 579 1173 1772 1482 2209 40.34 34.38 29 63.25 43.92 51 31.37 31.94 color sat 580 1173 1772 1482 2209 44.28 36.18 33 68.63 46.02 56 34.66 33.64 color sat 581 1173 1772 1482 2209 42.71 35.42 31 64.46 44.08 52 34.18 33.08 color sat 582 1173 1772 1482 2209 42.59 35.31 31 63.14 43.44 51 34.6 33.07 color sat 583 1173 1772 1482 2209 42.19 34.89 31 42.19 34.89 31 42.19 34.89 tone 584 1184 1787 1493 2224 33.75 35.64 21 56.14 46.71 41 24.97 32.64 tone 585 1184 1787 1493 2224 38.38 35.59 26 61.28 45.86 48 29.39 32.82 tone 586 1184 1787 1493 2224 48.38 34.13 38 71.09 42.86 60 39.47 31.83 tone 587 1184 1787 1493 2224 51.83 32.01 43 73.19 39.68 64 43.5 30.01 sharpness 588 1180 1748 1489 2185 40.46 39.36 27 62.47 37.19 48 31.82 37.19 sharpness 589 1180 1748 1489 2185 41.51 37.4 29 64.2 46.15 51 32.56 35.1 sharpness 590 1180 1748 1489 2185 40.85 32.05 31 63.31 41.57 53 32.02 29.52 sharpness 591 1180 1748 1489 2185 41.9 30.2 34 65.06 40.36 55 32.76 27.48 film sim 592 1184 1787 1493 2224 42.41 34.77 32 62.6 42.84 51 34.23 32.35 film sim 593 1184 1787 1493 2224 42.17 34.4 31 62.48 42.92 51 34.33 31.92 film sim 594 1184 1787 1493 2224 35.72 36.43 23 56.52 47.51 42 27.77 33.17 film sim 595 1184 1787 1493 2224 32.18 35.96 19 53.36 46.29 38 23.73 32.98 film sim 596 1184 1787 1493 2224 32.76 37.76 19 63.2 51.97 49 20.5 34.39 white balance 605 1108 1991 1417 2428 40.2 33.34 30 50.94 37.76 40 33.85 31.7 white balance 606 1108 1991 1417 2428 46.99 33.87 38 79.53 46.06 70 33.97 30.28 white balance 607 1108 1991 1417 2428 45.03 33.89 35 70.82 43.85 61 34.16 30.76 white balance 608 1108 1991 1417 2428 47.44 34.69 38 77.24 46.5 67 33.77 30.77 white balance 609 1108 1991 1417 2428 45.96 35.11 36 65.4 43.38 54 35.72 32.04 white balance 610 1108 1991 1417 2428 43.63 34.44 33 57.52 40.52 47 35.56 32.14 white balance 611 1108 1991 1417 2428 43.91 33.62 34 70.1 43.99 60 33.6 30.8 color temp 612 1108 1991 1417 2428 47.07 33.57 38 83.78 47.9 74 34.05 30.16 color temp 613 1108 1991 1417 2428 46.96 34.03 37 78.69 46.42 69 34.86 31.04 color temp 614 1108 1991 1417 2428 46.8 34.25 37 75.91 45.61 66 36.07 31.44 color temp 615 1108 1991 1417 2428 41.03 33.88 30 55.99 39.95 45 33.23 31.87 color temp 616 1108 1991 1417 2428 40.35 32.81 30 44.34 34.71 34 35.29 31.75 

Data 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 

Appendix 3 

Image Processing 

STAIN 

Testing for Image Number Sampled Area Luminosity R G 

top x top y bottom x bottom y mean std dev median mean std dev median mean std dev 

exposure comp 626 1118 2075 1427 2512 30.49 25.27 22 50.79 34.47 41 22.59 22.55 exposure comp 627 1118 2075 1427 2512 46.15 34.65 36 76.28 46.39 65 34.06 31.37 exposure comp 628 1118 2075 1427 2512 76.22 48.37 64 116.6 59.57 107 59.97 46.01 exposure comp 629 1118 2075 1427 2512 110.8 56.7 101 159 61.94 157 91.31 57.26 exposure comp 630 1118 2075 1427 2512 153.5 57.77 152 199.4 51.81 209 135.3 63.13 Z90 Intensity 707 1392 2764 1701 3201 58.57 54.57 39 95.14 65.98 81 43.85 52.09 Z90 Intensity 708 1392 2764 1701 3201 64.17 56.82 45 106.7 68.23 94 46.7 54.36 Z90 Intensity 709 1392 2764 1701 3201 65.46 56.92 47 108.8 68.05 97 47.85 54.61 Z90 Intensity 710 1392 2764 1701 3201 42.19 46.66 23 69.5 57.84 52 31.28 43.64 Z90 Sat 719 1392 2764 1701 3201 61.26 56.3 41 102.4 68.21 89 44.45 53.61 Z90 Sat 720 1392 2764 1701 3201 64.17 59.31 44 95.57 68.34 81 51.63 57.5 Z90 Sat 721 1392 2764 1701 3201 60.58 58.86 40 80.94 65.46 63 53.18 57.82 Z90 Sat 722 1392 2764 1701 3201 70.43 56.14 52 132.6 69.65 124 42.41 52.77 Z90 Sat 723 1392 2764 1701 3201 69.58 48.44 53 154.7 66.55 151 28.51 43.15 Z90 Color temp 728 1315 2778 1624 3215 39.27 52.14 15 55.4 56.1 33 32.38 50.71 Z90 Color temp 729 1315 2778 1624 3215 37.59 40.29 22 71.17 53.44 57 23.53 36.71 Z90 Color temp 730 1315 2778 1624 3215 34.41 48.3 12 50.41 52.86 30 27.59 46.55 Z90 Color temp 731 1315 2778 1624 3215 40.65 41.99 25 78.44 56.13 66 24.76 38.22 Z90 Color temp 732 1315 2778 1624 3215 35.8 49.44 13 51.97 53.95 31 28.86 47.72 Z90 Color temp 733 1315 2778 1624 3215 39.35 41.18 24 76.21 55.47 63 23.8 37.31 Z90 Color temp 734 1315 2778 1624 3215 33.34 47.23 12 49.2 51.96 29 26.62 45.39 Z90 Color temp 735 1315 2778 1624 3215 44.09 42.32 29 85.93 56.97 75 26.32 38.35 Z90 Color temp 736 1315 2778 1624 3215 32.91 46.76 12 48.42 51.41 28 26.47 45.04 Z90 Color temp 737 1315 2778 1624 3215 42.36 41.6 27 81.17 55.49 70 26.02 37.88 Z90 Color temp 738 1315 2778 1624 3215 34.69 46.93 14 54.75 53.09 35 26.48 44.76 Z90 Color temp 739 1315 2778 1624 3215 44.15 41.59 29 88.12 56.52 78 25.73 37.66 Z90 Color temp 740 1315 2778 1624 3215 33.91 44.56 15 59.77 53.4 41 23.27 41.52 Z90 Color temp 741 1315 2778 1624 3215 42.87 39.63 29 91.97 56.76 83 22.29 35.09 Z90 Color temp 742 1315 2778 1624 3215 33.87 45.66 14 55.35 53.3 36 23.16 42.4 Z90 Color temp 743 1315 2778 1624 3215 46.17 41.71 32 92.13 57.44 82 23.71 37.06 Z90 Color temp 744 1315 2778 1624 3215 39.56 47.79 19 69.52 56.8 52 28.57 45.87 Z90 Color temp 745 1315 2778 1624 3215 44.84 40.56 31 97.16 58.6 88 24.45 37.01 Z90 Color temp 746 1315 2778 1624 3215 37.47 45.78 18 66.21 54.55 49 27.08 44.02 Z90 Color temp 747 1315 2778 1624 3215 41.63 38.64 28 91.05 56.26 81 22.41 35.18 black/white 727 256 598 268 615 253.6 1.32 254 255 0.07 255 253.6 1.88 

Data 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 

Appendix 3 

Image Processing 

BACKGROUND 

Testing for Image Number Sampled Area Luminosity R G 

top x top y bottom x bottom y mean std dev median mean std dev median mean std dev 

d range 572 0 3183 309 3630 16.77 14.81 12 17.25 14.57 13 16.91 14.99 d range 573 0 3183 309 3630 16.95 15.3 12 17.29 15.08 13 17.15 15.46 d range 574 0 3183 309 3630 16.88 14.87 12 17.36 14.64 13 17.02 15.04 d range 575 0 3183 309 3630 16.71 14.74 12 17.28 14.47 13 16.83 14.92 d range 576 0 3183 309 3630 16.77 14.38 12 17.38 14.14 13 16.86 14.56 d range 577 0 3183 309 3630 16.88 14.75 12 17.46 14.49 13 16.99 14.93 d range 578 0 3183 309 3630 17.26 14.86 13 17.92 14.61 13 17.35 15.04 color sat 579 0 3183 309 3630 16.6 14.87 12 16.99 14.63 13 16.75 15.05 color sat 580 0 3183 309 3630 18.31 16 13 18.7 15.76 14 18.49 16.17 color sat 581 0 3183 309 3630 17.56 15.46 13 17.92 15.24 13 17.76 15.62 color sat 582 0 3183 309 3630 17.48 15.41 13 18.14 15.2 14 17.55 15.55 color sat 583 0 3183 309 3630 17.54 15.09 13 17.54 15.09 13 17.54 15.09 tone 584 0 3183 309 3630 10.6 13.59 7 11.47 13.48 8 10.59 13.69 tone 585 0 3183 309 3630 14.27 14.49 10 15.04 14.33 11 14.3 14.63 tone 586 0 3183 309 3630 23.32 15.52 19 23.71 15.29 19 23.52 15.68 tone 587 0 3183 309 3630 27.83 15.11 24 28.17 14.88 24 28.05 15.28 sharpness 588 24 1760 333 2197 20.36 16.27 16 20.79 16.06 16 20.59 16.44 sharpness 589 24 1760 333 2197 20.95 15.5 17 21.37 15.29 17 21.18 15.67 sharpness 590 24 1760 333 2197 20.56 13.07 17 21.03 12.85 18 20.77 13.27 sharpness 591 24 1760 333 2197 21.08 12.39 18 21.72 12.18 19 21.23 12.58 film sim 592 0 3183 309 3630 17.6 15.2 13 18.55 15.06 14 17.56 15.31 film sim 593 0 3183 309 3630 17.14 14.76 13 17.9 14.58 13 17.16 14.89 film sim 594 0 3183 309 3630 10.95 15.31 6 11.25 15.41 6 11.14 15.34 film sim 595 0 3183 309 3630 8.54 13.85 4 9.7 13.73 6 8.45 13.95 film sim 596 0 3183 309 3630 6.99 14.89 2 8.16 14.83 4 6.8 14.93 white balance 605 0 3183 309 3630 18.54 16.95 13 14.78 15.73 10 19.37 17.24 white balance 606 0 3183 309 3630 19.55 17.81 14 23.36 18.68 17 18.65 17.53 white balance 607 0 3183 309 3630 18.69 17.84 13 20.58 17.97 15 18.13 17.77 white balance 608 0 3183 309 3630 19.87 18.33 14 21.44 18.48 15 18.95 18.19 white balance 609 0 3183 309 3630 19.3 17.83 13 17.1 17.2 11 19.39 17.82 white balance 610 0 3183 309 3630 18.98 17.41 13 14.5 16.18 9 19.92 17.69 white balance 611 0 3183 309 3630 19.02 17.83 13 20.09 17.68 14 19.04 17.97 color temp 612 0 3183 309 3630 19.66 17.85 14 23.93 18.43 18 19.33 17.52 color temp 613 0 3183 309 3630 19.72 18.14 14 22.88 18.48 17 19.77 18.19 color temp 614 0 3183 309 3630 20.4 18.28 14 22.16 18.38 16 20.69 18.42 color temp 615 0 3183 309 3630 17.95 16.97 12 15.07 16.09 10 18.67 17.12 color temp 616 0 3183 309 3630 18.49 15.5 13 11.97 13.5 8 19.65 15.85 

Data 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 

Appendix 3 

Image Processing 

BACKGROUND 

Testing for Image Number Sampled Area Luminosity R G 

top x top y bottom x bottom y mean std dev median mean std dev median mean std dev 

exposure comp 626 0 3183 309 3630 13.32 12.56 10 14.67 12.49 11 13.15 12.64 exposure comp 627 0 3183 309 3630 20.7 18.91 15 21.8 18.7 16 20.61 19.04 exposure comp 628 0 3183 309 3630 36.58 29.02 27 35.72 28.15 27 37.42 29.62 exposure comp 629 0 3183 309 3630 59.06 40.08 46 57.31 38.87 45 60.28 40.95 exposure comp 630 0 3183 309 3630 95.23 50.66 81 92.84 49.13 79 96.74 51.8 Z90 Intensity 707 49 2306 358 2743 15.92 25.05 7 12.21 22.45 4 17.84 26.68 Z90 Intensity 708 49 2306 358 2743 18.3 27.79 8 14.06 25.06 5 20.43 29.48 Z90 Intensity 709 49 2306 358 2743 19.2 28.17 9 15.47 25.53 6 21.06 29.85 Z90 Intensity 710 49 2306 358 2743 9.93 19.65 4 7.42 17.8 2 11.37 20.84 Z90 Sat 719 49 2306 358 2743 23.65 32.76 10 18.93 29.91 6 26.03 34.53 Z90 Sat 720 49 2306 358 2743 26.75 34.35 12 17.1 29.11 4 31.42 37.38 Z90 Sat 721 49 2306 358 2743 26.03 32.85 12 13.38 25.84 2 32.36 36.92 Z90 Sat 722 49 2306 358 2743 28.09 35.6 13 32.03 36.39 17 24.47 34.95 Z90 Sat 723 49 2306 358 2743 27.27 31.29 15 46.43 39.71 32 13.76 26.34 Z90 Color temp 728 49 2306 358 2743 27.14 44.34 6 25.04 42.17 5 28.37 45.52 Z90 Color temp 729 49 2306 358 2743 7.45 19.49 2 7.79 19.4 3 7.56 19.62 Z90 Color temp 730 49 2305 358 2743 22.62 40.69 3 22.71 39.87 4 22.85 41.13 Z90 Color temp 731 49 2306 358 2743 10.5 22.16 3 11.59 22.26 4 10.36 22.2 Z90 Color temp 732 49 2306 358 2743 23.81 41.71 4 23.37 40.63 4 24.26 42.29 Z90 Color temp 733 49 2306 358 2743 8.73 20.85 2 9.6 20.85 4 8.63 20.91 Z90 Color temp 734 49 2306 358 2743 22.1 39.88 4 22.24 39.04 5 22.41 40.4 Z90 Color temp 735 49 2306 358 2743 10.5 22.2 3 9.69 21.36 3 11.16 22.76 Z90 Color temp 736 49 2306 358 2743 22.18 40.92 3 22.64 40.5 4 22.44 41.27 Z90 Color temp 737 49 2306 358 2743 9.68 20.8 4 8.49 19.79 3 10.65 21.47 Z90 Color temp 738 49 2306 358 2743 23.16 41.81 4 25.78 42.37 6 22.7 41.78 Z90 Color temp 739 49 2306 358 2743 9.82 21.26 3 9.65 20.71 4 10.38 21.74 Z90 Color temp 740 49 2306 358 2743 21.27 39.01 3 27.46 41.81 9 19.28 38.02 Z90 Color temp 741 49 2306 358 2743 9.23 19.94 3 11.24 20.11 6 8.92 20.04 Z90 Color temp 742 49 2306 358 2743 22.35 40.54 4 26.33 42.16 7 20.23 39.63 Z90 Color temp 743 49 2306 358 2743 10.03 21.57 4 10.07 21.15 4 9.79 21.75 Z90 Color temp 744 49 2306 358 2743 25.26 42.74 5 30.78 44.92 10 24.85 43.15 Z90 Color temp 745 49 2306 358 2743 9.85 21.6 3 13.4 22.6 7 9.62 21.7 Z90 Color temp 746 49 2306 358 2743 23.27 40.15 5 29.29 42.66 10 22.54 40.32 Z90 Color temp 747 49 2306 358 2743 9.3 20.74 3 12.9 21.74 6 8.94 20.74 black/white 727 426 560 438 577 21.35 10.87 17 30.78 12.24 26 18.48 10.37 

Data 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 

Appendix 3 

Image Processing 

W3C Luminance 

Image Stain Bkgr Brightness Color Michelson Weber 

Testing for Number Brightness Brightness Difference Difference Contrast Contrast 

d range d range d range d range d range d range d range color sat color sat color sat color sat color sat tone tone tone tone sharpness sharpness sharpness sharpness film sim film sim film sim film sim film sim white balance white balance white balance white balance white balance white balance white balance color temp color temp color temp color temp color temp 

572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 

41.49 42.49 41.81 41.36 41.29 41.75 42.40 40.85 44.79 43.22 43.10 42.19 34.26 38.89 48.89 52.33 40.97 42.02 41.36 42.40 42.91 42.68 36.22 32.68 33.27 40.70 47.49 45.52 47.94 46.45 44.13 44.42 47.58 46.98 47.31 41.53 40.83 

17.25 17.43 17.35 17.19 17.26 17.37 17.76 17.10 18.80 18.04 17.97 17.54 

11.09 

14.75 23.80 28.32 20.84 21.44 21.04 21.57 18.11 17.64 11.23 

9.05 7.52 

19.05 19.99 19.24 20.34 19.78 19.47 19.51 20.19 20.30 20.88 18.48 

18.99 

24.24 25.06 24.46 24.16 24.03 24.38 24.64 23.76 25.99 25.18 25.13 24.65 

23.17 

24.14 25.09 24.02 20.13 20.58 20.32 20.84 24.81 25.04 25.00 23.63 25.75 21.65 27.50 26.29 27.60 26.67 24.66 24.91 27.39 26.68 26.43 23.05 

21.84 

74.07 77.09 75.14 74.11 73.61 74.52 76.29 70.92 80.56 

77.4 

76.66 

80.9 

67.37 

64.89 72.46 

84 

67.28 71.68 71.12 75.46 77.34 82.05 79.49 74.67 67.14 71.88 87.01 81.71 89.61 87.27 82.48 76.62 81.59 79.91 82.82 74.39 

80.66 

0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.41 

0.52 

0.46 0.35 

0.30 

0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.41 0.42 0.53 0.58 0.65 0.37 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.39 0.39 

0.37 

1.44 1.48 1.45 1.44 1.43 1.44 1.43 1.43 1.42 1.43 1.44 1.41 

2.18 

1.69 1.07 

0.86 

0.99 0.98 0.99 0.99 1.41 1.46 2.26 2.77 3.69 

1.17 

1.40 1.41 1.39 1.38 1.30 1.31 1.39 1.38 1.29 1.29 

1.18 

Calculations 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 

Appendix 3 

Image Processing 

W3C Luminance 

Image Stain Bkgr Brightness Color Michelson Weber 

Testing for Number Brightness Brightness Difference Difference Contrast Contrast 

exposure comp exposure comp exposure comp exposure comp exposure comp Z90 Intensity Z90 Intensity Z90 Intensity Z90 Intensity Z90 Sat Z90 Sat Z90 Sat Z90 Sat Z90 Sat Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp Z90 Color temp black/white 

626 627 628 629 630 707 708 709 710 719 720 721 722 723 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 727 

31.00 46.65 76.73 

111.25 153.98 

59.07 64.67 65.97 42.70 61.77 64.67 61.09 70.93 70.07 39.77 38.10 34.91 41.15 36.30 39.86 33.84 44.59 33.41 42.87 35.19 44.66 34.42 43.37 34.37 46.66 40.07 45.35 37.99 42.14 

254.02 

13.85 21.20 37.08 

59.55 95.72 

16.41 18.79 19.69 10.43 24.14 27.24 26.52 

28.58 

27.75 27.63 

7.91 

23.13 11.01 24.31 

9.24 

22.60 10.97 22.66 10.18 23.64 10.26 21.76 

9.71 

22.84 10.56 25.77 10.37 23.79 

9.81 

21.83 

17.15 25.45 39.65 

51.70 58.26 

42.66 45.89 46.27 32.27 37.62 37.44 34.56 

42.35 

42.32 12.14 30.19 11.79 30.15 11.99 30.62 11.24 33.62 10.75 32.68 11.55 34.40 12.66 33.66 11.53 36.10 14.29 34.98 14.20 32.34 

232.20 

45.23 62.22 

100.17 

123.34 257.22 

129.15 142.49 153.08 

85.04 

112.78 116.25 115.04 

144.49 

119.75 

61.4 

80.41 51.26 

82.3 

55.32 83.78 48.62 97.01 47.54 92.94 50.93 

101.79 

52.41 97.49 52.34 110.7 62.31 96.43 59.41 91.39 

699.4 

0.39 0.38 0.35 

0.30 0.23 

0.57 0.56 0.55 0.62 0.44 0.41 0.40 

0.43 

0.44 0.18 0.67 0.21 0.59 0.20 0.64 0.20 0.62 0.19 0.63 0.20 0.64 0.23 0.65 0.20 0.64 0.22 0.64 0.23 0.63 

0.84 

1.29 1.23 1.08 

0.88 0.61 

2.68 2.51 2.41 3.25 1.59 1.40 1.33 

1.51 

1.55 0.45 4.05 0.52 2.87 0.50 3.51 0.51 3.20 0.48 3.38 0.50 

3.50 

0.59 3.64 0.52 3.60 0.57 3.55 0.61 3.48 

10.88 

Calculations 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 4 

List of Figures 

Number Title 

fig. 1 Polarized Light Method Setup & Components 

fig. 2 Stain Types on White Paper 

fig. 3 RGB LED vs White LED 

fig. 4 Changing Z90 Color Temperatures 

fig. 5 Changing Z90 Intensity 

fig. 6 Changing Film Simulation 

fig. 7 Changing Exposure Compensation 

fig. 8 Summary of Contrast Calculation Results 

fig. 9 Changing Tone Setting 

fig. 10 Transmission of Crossed Polarizing Filters 

fig. 11 Transmission of Crossed Mixed Filters 

fig. 12 Stains Photographed with Different Polarizing Filters 

fig. 13 Changing the Angle of Incident Light 

fig. 14 Effect of Plane of Incident Polarized Light on Polyester 

fig. 15 Effect of Plane of Incident Polarized Light on Silk 

fig. 16 Small Spatter on Wool-Filter Effects 

fig. 17 Surface Scatter of Red Laser 

fig. 18 Micrographs 

fig. 19 Different Stain Types 

fig. 20 Stains on Suede 

fig. 21 Black/White Upholstery Fabric with Smear and Spatter 

fig. 22 Grey Black Striped Carpeting with Smear and Spatter 

fig. 23 Leather Upholstery Fabric with Smear and Spatter 

fig. 24 Dark Grey Wallpaper with Smear and Spatter 

fig. 25 Effects of Dilution 

fig. 26 False Positives 

fig. 27 False Negatives/Interferences 

fig. 28 Drying of a Smear on Wool 

fig. 29 Drying of Drops on Leather 

fig. 30 Larger Field of View-Smear, Contact, 10μL and Spatter 

fig. 31 Wool-Digital Zoom vs Optical Zoom 

fig. 32 Crossed Polars vs IR 

fig. 33 Silk and Polyester, Crossed Polars vs IR 

fig. 34 Fibers, Glass and Bloodstain 

fig. 35 Blood and Glass on Leather 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 4 

List of Figures 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 4 

List of Figures 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 4 

List of Figures 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 4 

List of Figures 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
2006-DN-BX-K026 Final Report 

March 2009 

Appendix 4 

List of Figures 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Visualization of Bloodstains 

on Dark Surfaces 

using Polarized Light

This research is supported by 

NIJ Grant 2006-DN-BX-K026

Findings and conclusions of the research reported are those of the authors 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Products, manufacturers, and organizations 

discussed in these materials are presented for informational purposes only 

and do not constitute product approval or endorsement by the U.S. 

Department of Justice.

For further information, contact rbucht@gc.cuny.edu

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
• Accurately visualizing and documenting bloodstains 

and patterns is an integral part of crime scene 

investigation and provides crucial information for both 

the analysis of evidence in the laboratory and crime 

scene reconstruction efforts. 

• Visualization of bloodstains is trivial on white or 

lightly colored surfaces. However, on darkly colored or 

black surfaces, it can be extremely difficult.

• There are three main aspects of bloodstain analysis that 

visualization and documentation contribute to: 

1: The presence of blood may not be recognized at critical 

stages in the investigation: 

– The presence, location and morphology of blood 

stains are often of great importance in any 

investigation, and the earlier this information is 

available, the better. 

– Where the presence of blood is not recognized, 

handling of the evidence may disrupt and 

compromise the bloodstain evidence.

Why Visualization is Important

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Why Visualization is Important

2: Intelligence driven sampling-being able to visualize the 

stains allows for more selective processing of the 

surface:

– Stains are commonly analyzed in order to confirm 

that they are blood, and often further analyzed to 

determine their origin. 

– In cases where the surface examined is large, fewer 

samples need to be taken as the sampling can be 

focused on specific areas. 

– Where there are multiple sources of blood, the 

occurrence of mixed profiles in consequent DNA 

analysis can be minimized by sampling stains 

individually. 

3: Interpretation of the evidence: 

– The location and morphology of the stains are key 

elements not only in the investigation, but also in 

any event reconstruction efforts. 

– In a significant number of cases knowing how the 

bloodstains were formed is more important than 

knowing the biological source of the stains. In most

cases the two types of information are 

complementary. 

– The ability to assign a DNA profile to a particular 

stain as opposed to a surface or collection of stains 

is important both in cases with multiple sources of 

blood or DNA but also where there is a single 

source of blood or DNA.

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
• No contact with the stain or substrate

• Easily adaptable to regular cameras

• Quick and simple procedure

• Can also be used with stereoscopes 

• Thick bloodstains are not enhanced

• Uneven surfaces and some types of substrates can be 

difficult to process

• Screen larger than camera LCD display needed for best 

results

Crossed Polarized Light Visualization: 

Advantages and Disadvantages 

BUT...

• Even under less than ideal circumstances, polarized 

light visualization produces a dramatic improvement in 

the contrast between the otherwise subtle bloodstains 

and the dark or black background.

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Polarized Light Method Setup

Camera

Linear polarizing 

filter

Intense

white light

source

Linear polarizing 

filter

Sample on a black

background

Blood on Leather

Uncrossed Crossed

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Polarized Light Method Components: 

Light Source 

Spectrum of RGB LED Blood on leather

Spectrum of ‘white’ LED Blood on leather 

• Full spectrum of white light needed

• Fiber Optics and Xenon lights work well but cause 

significant heat damage to the polarizing filter in a 

short amount of time

• LEDs do not cause heat damage to the polarizers

• Not all LEDs output a suitable spectrum, ‘white’ 

LED’s performance is significantly inferior to that of 

RGB LEDs 

• Zylight Z90 RGB LED chosen for our research

White vs RGB LED Technology

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Polarized Light Method Components: 

Polarizing Filters 

• Linear polarizing filters, not circular, are required

• The Hoya filter performed the best out of the ones 

tested

Blue = B&W, Red = Heliopan, Khaki = Hoya, Green = True Pol

Transmission of Crossed Polarizing Filters

Schneide

Heliopan Uncrossed B&W

Hoya

Performance of a selection of Polarizing Filters

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Polarized Light Method Components: 

Camera Settings

• Long exposure times required, camera must be on 

tripod or copy stand

• Exposure compensation between -1.5 to -3.0 

recommended

• On digital cameras, hard tone and slide film equivalent 

film simulation settings produce the best contrast

+/- +1 +/- 0 +/- -3

Org Standard Hard

F1 Standard F2

Exposure compensation

Tone

Film simulation

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Features & Limitations: 

Stain Types

• Stains that were absorbed into the substrate and did not 

leave a thin film on the surface of the substrate were 

harder to visualize 

• Thick stains are not enhanced, but can be visualized 

using oblique light

Uncrossed Crossed

10μL drop on leather, wool and cotton 

Smear stain on leather, wool and cotton

Uncrossed Crossed

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Features & Limitations: 

Stain Types

• Small spatter was particularly successfully enhanced 

• Small spatter was very seldom apparent when looking 

through the viewfinder

Contact stain on leather, wool and cotton

Small spatter on wool

Uncrossed Crossed

Uncrossed Crossed

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
• Substrates did not interact with the blood or the 

polarized light in a uniform manner

• If the substrate is uneven, it can be difficult to 

illuminate it so that the entire field of view is under 

crossed polar lighting simultaneously. 

Features & Limitations: 

Substrate Types

Grey/black striped carpeting with smear and spatter

Leather upholstery fabric with smear and spatter

Uncrossed Crossed

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

Uncrossed Crossed

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
• Stains on substrates which contain one or more lighter 

colored elements show barely any enhancement

• On suede, stains can be visualized with regular lighting 

by the localized matting of the surface. This subtle

matting can be less apparent with crossed polarized 

illumination, making the stains more difficult to 

visualize

Features & Limitations: 

Substrate Types

Black/white upholstery fabric with smear and spatter

Uncrossed Crossed

Uncrossed Crossed

Suede with contact stain 

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Features and Limitations: 

Orientation of Incident Light

Uncrossed Crossed Crossed rotated ~20

• The effect of the orientation of the incident polarized 

light is substrate dependent 

• This change in substrate appearance is not readily 

apparent through the viewfinder 

• The orientation of polarized light can affect the general 

color of the substrate or its darkness. 

Polyester

Silk

Uncrossed Crossed Crossed rotated ~20

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
• This enhancement method is not unique to blood

• Several red substances produced stains similar in 

appearance to bloodstains

• While mixing the blood with certain chemicals 

changed its appearance, the stains remained visible

• Dilutions up to 1:10 and 1:25 could be visualized on 

less absorptive substrates

• As is the case with blood on lighter substrates, one 

should be aware of the possibility of false positives, 

false negatives and the effects of dilution. 

Features & Limitations: 

False Positives, Negatives and Dilutions

Uncrossed on Wool Crossed on Wool On Paper

False negatives

Dilutions

False positives

Uncrossed on Wool Crossed on Wool On Paper

Uncrossed on Wool Crossed on Wool On Paper

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
• As was apparent from the false positive testing, this 

enhancement is not unique to blood

• Other brightly colored items are also enhanced

• This is particularly useful for visualizing fibers and 

small glass fragments

Features & Limitations: 

Materials other than Blood

A

D

B

C

E

C

A

D

B

C

E

C

-Bloodstain (A) 

-Red Acrylic fiber (B)

-Glass shards (C)

-Green Olefin fiber (D)

-Blue Rayon fiber (E)

N.B. Scale in inches

Blood, Fibers and Glass on Wool

-Bloodstain (A) 

-Red Acrylic fiber (B)

-Glass shards (C)

-Green Olefin fiber (D)

-Blue Rayon fiber (E)

This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not 

been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) 

and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.