It was difficult to take something that was qualitative and make it quantitative without losing some of the accurateness. When quantifying a visual quality assessment, it was hard to be consistent in assigning quality numbers.

            Lifting consistency was also a source of error in this experiment. It was difficult to maintain the same pressure when smoothing a lift or to make sure to get into all the grooves of the uneven surfaces.

There weren’t enough trials done on each item or each material type. If more trials had been done, it would have given a more accurate representation of the quality of lifts from each item, surface, material or reagent.

Statistical analysis was done using an SPSS program. Chi-Square tests showed that the data wasn’t significant. This was most likely because the QFES scale only went from one to ten, so the difference between the qualities weren’t considered significant by the chi-square test although the difference in print lift qualities was quite obvious. If the scale of the QFES had been one to one hundred, the results might have been considered more statistically significant.