Comparing prints by using Vector Template Matching (comparison of nine features of a histogram of the earprint) produced significantly inconsistent results among the experts who assessed earprint anatomical features. This indicates that the current method of attempting to provide an objective characterization of earprints is invalid. This suggests that characterizations of earprint features that are dependent on operator judgments should be identified in an effort to find more objective distinguishing marks that can be standardized across operators. In order to test for differences in earprint characterizations among operators, a collection of 135 earprints was presented to 3 experts from countries participating in FearID (Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom). After print collection, earprints were annotated in a three-stage process. The first stage consisted of operators clicking the initial axis of the superstructure or super-helix structure used to represent the visible features of the ear palm. During the second stage, operators added print transition lines, which indicate the transition between print segments encountered when following the superstructure path. In the third and final stage, operators described anatomical features, minutiae, landmarks, and some other characteristics. An anatomical feature refers to a distinctive physical feature of the earprint, such as a crease or mole. Minutiae are characteristic anatomical details that may match a print uniquely to a particular live ear. A landmark is a particular predefined point on a gross feature that is unlikely to change over time. 14 figures and 11 references