The study compared the specific minutiae clearly represented in the distal phalange of both inked and live scan rolled impressions of three adult males. A total of 2,370 minutiae were scored. Minutiae on the electronic fingerprint cards were 60.1 percent in agreement with those of the inked standard, were 16 percent inaccurate (minutiae types changed), and were 23.9 percent anomalous (minutiae dropped or falsely generated). In the 16 percent that were inaccurate, the presence of a protuberance or bridge connecting a ridge ending to an adjacent ridge was sometimes visible. In the majority of cases, however, there was no visual cue indicating the change, as ridge endings were connected to adjacent ridges at the oblique angle of bifurcation. The 23.9 percent of minutiae that were anomalous present a more difficult problem for the fingerprint examiner as, unlike inked prints, no visual cues to explain the apparent discrepancy are available. The distribution of inaccuracies and anomalies was random and evenly spread throughout the distal, proximal, radial, ulnar, and pattern areas of the impressions. While the electronic fingerprint card excels in clear and well-defined ridge detail, the percentage of anomalous minutiae renders it unacceptable as a known standard for latent print to ten print comparison and identification. 5 figures.