Bite mark analysis, as well as lip print identification have been cast with a shadow of doubt. Even though the use of lip prints for human identification was first suggested in 1950, it is not generally accepted in forensic science. There are no court decisions on the appellate level that support the admissibility of lip print identification, no organized body of lip print examiners, and no accepted methodology for the comparison lip impressions. Bite mark identification, on the other hand is legally admissible in courts of law, although over the past 30 years this branch of forensics has endured a number of legal challenges, most centered on the scientific efficiency of the field. Several convictions based on bite mark evidence have been reversed on later DNA testing. Bite mark analysis is based on the assumptions that human teeth are unique and that sufficient detail of this uniqueness is rendered during the biting process to enable identification. These assumptions have been challenged in recent years. Improvements discussed in the validity and credibility of both lip print and bite mark analysis include: the development of an effective processing protocol and the use of photographic science, specifically 3D or third dimension.