An in vitro Comparison of Accuracy Between Three Different Face Scanning Modalities

Page Start
Page End
  • George Michelinakis
  • Dimitrios Apostolakis
  • Emmanouil Velidakis


A mannequin head was digitized using a reference scanner (Scan in a Box) to acquire the reference mesh. Subsequently it was scanned with a structured light scanner (Einscan Pro HD), a stereophotogrammetry scanner (RayFace100) and a laser scanner (Proface 3D Mid) to acquire test meshes.Resulting meshes were delineated in four horizontal areas and discrepancies calculated for the complete face and different facial partitions. One-way Anova and pairwise comparisons tests were used to compare trueness and precision between scanners across different areas. Significant differences were detected among scanners for complete face (F (3, 27) =776, P < 0.01)) and for delineated face areas (F (11, 99) =200.1, P < 0.01)). Einscan had significantly higher accuracy for the complete face (P<0.01) and significantly higher trueness for each facial partition compared to other scanners. RayFace had significantly higher trueness when scanning the middle part of face compared to other facial parts. Proface had significantly lower upper facial third trueness compared to other facial parts. All scanners had accuracy levels below the 2.00mm threshold. Facial scanning accuracy was influenced per scanner used. Scanning trueness per device was influenced by location of surface area. All scanners had accuracy levels within the acceptable accuracy threshold.

Laser Scanner
Face Scanner
Structured Light Scanner