Photographic technique for the recording of children's teeth for signs of enamel mottling

Abstract

A photographic method is described for recording children's teeth in large numbers on location. The essential features of the dental study were that the photography should be consistent, accurate, and fast, since the subjects were to be photographed at a rate of 45 children per hour. Details are given on how this was achieved including the technique and equipment used.

Reproducibility of Quantitative Measurement of White Enamel Demineralisation by Image Analysis

“…A second investigator, with no knowledge of the initial protocol, mounted teeth in wax blocks and took photographs of the teeth using a standard technique [Fleming et al, 1989]. Photographs were taken using a Nikon F301 35-mm camera with an Elicar Macro lens at 1:1.…”

Photographs as a means of assessing developmental defects of enamel

“…In addition, there is the problem of ‘burn‐out’ caused by the flash of the camera and reflections of light which obscures part of a tooth surface when viewed on a photographic slide. Multiple photographs taken from positions superior and inferior to the horizontal plane at varying degrees can help in minimizing ‘burn‐out’ (14–16).…”

A standardized photographic method for evaluating enamel opacities including fluorosis

“…An obvious solution to this problem would be the development of a standardized system which would provide a permanent record of the condition of the enamel at any given time point. A number of authors (1‐11) have reported photographic studies as a means of collecting epidemiological data on enamel opacities. The major benefit of a photographic system is the opportunity for blind scoring of colour transparencies from one or more studies by one or more examiners.…”

“…It has been shown that there is a positive linear relationship between the prevalence of enamel fluorosis recorded using the Thylstrup and Fejerskov (TF) index and drying periods of 15, 45, 75 and up to 105 s (12). None of these reported studies (1‐11) gives details of the enamel‐drying period before taking photographs of the teeth. Thus the contribution of the drying effect to the prevalence of opacities observed from colour transparencies in each study compared with the reported prevalence from direct observation of the teeth is unknown.…”

“…Thus the contribution of the drying effect to the prevalence of opacities observed from colour transparencies in each study compared with the reported prevalence from direct observation of the teeth is unknown. None of these studies gives details of the quality of the transparencies taken, with the exception of one study (11) where it was reported that approximately 2% of transparencies were of unacceptable standard.…”