Local friction ridge quality is an assessment of the clarity of each area within an image. This is the means by which the recipient can determine whether the features marked at a given location are definitive or debatable. The colors and categories are defined in the tables below. Because accurate and consistent markup of ridge quality is essential, follow the guidelines in this section as closely as possible. In each case, if there is doubt as to which level of ridge quality to assign, use the lower quality.

•Black	Background
•Red	Debatable ridge flow
•Yellow	Definitive ridge flow, debatable minutiae
•Green	Definitive minutiae, debatable ridge edges
•Blue	Definitive ridge edges, debatable pores
•Aqua	All features definitive

Ridge quality can be generated by an automated process with human review, or it can be painted manually by an examiner. While automated systems and all examiners should ideally concur on ridge quality markup, in practice individual examiners are likely to disagree at times.

To examine the decision process in detail, please see the flowchart in Figure 17 of the Markup Instructions for Extended Friction Ridge Features.

Figure 1 shows examples of ridge quality markup. The images of ridge quality markup allow an examiner (or software program) reviewing the image a straightforward means of assessing the value and data content of the image: large Blue areas are excellent, Green areas are satisfactory, Yellow areas may potentially contain false or missed features, and Red areas are not of value.

The ridge quality map is used to define the confidence in all other friction ridge features. In addition, when the quality map indicates a high-quality region in which features are not marked (such as an open field of ridges), that information can be used as “negative features” or definitive absence of features, which may be used as support for exclusion.

	• Black	• Red	• Yellow	• Green	• Blue	• Aqua
Ridge flow
Minutiae
Dots
Incipients
Ridge edge features
Pores

Key:

	Definitive and unambiguous	Presence, absence, and location are definitive. Contradictory presence or absence of definitive features in a comparison is cause for exclusion
	Debatable or ambiguous	Features may be marked, but presence, absence, and location are debatable. Corresponding/contradictory features on a comparison are supporting evidence for individualization or exclusion
	Not discernible or unreliable	Features should not be marked and are ignored if present. No evidence for individualization or exclusion in a comparison exists.

Note particularly two critical distinctions:

• If the presence or absence of minutiae is definitive enough to be used for exclusion in future comparisons, mark the area Green or better; otherwise, mark the area Yellow.
• If the area was left as a single impression with continuity of ridge flow, mark the area Yellow or better; however, if a double tap, movement, or second impression resulted in discontinuous ridge flow, mark the separation between continuous areas with a region of Red.

Careful marking of ridge quality is most important for images with extensive discontinuities. In an image such as the one shown in Figure 9, limit the analysis of the image to the contiguous areas of Yellow or better. The small separations of Red are critical because they may mask overlap or transition between distinct impressions.

For further detail on each color’s criteria and how to handle other complex situations, refer to the Markup Instructions document.

Select a paintbrush color, then click and drag on the canvas to paint an area that color. Adjust the paintbrush size by clicking the paintbrush icon and using the slider that appears. Click on the eraser to switch your cursor to an Erase tool.

When comparing your response to the stored clarity map, note that a similar painting is acceptable. It is quite unlikely that two examiners' maps will match precisely.