Facial recognition is the most efficient technology in the field of biometrics. Fingerprints are at risk for counterfeiting, as well as reaching mistakenly prevent access if your fingers are dirty or wet. Iris recognition devices are too invasive. They can generate diseases or serious conditions. Voice recognition devices may not give good results, especially when you have a sore throat. Perhaps the facial recognition isn’t perfect, but it is more advanced than most of the existing methods of identification. Speaking of facial recognition systems, 2D devices are more frequent than the 3D, although both have advantages and disadvantages. For some reason, the 2D work best under relatively modest lighting conditions, but often are affected by changes in gestures or expressions.
3D recognition systems are not as common, but tend to become increasingly cheap and fast. As a disadvantage, the database of 3D images are very few in comparison with the 2D. The fundamental difference between the two models is the most obvious: the 2D system considers only two dimensions of the face, while the 3D generates images that resemble the real object. You tend to think that 3D system ensures by itself only best results, but this has not been tested scientifically. From the point of view of experts, the 3D system is too expensive for most people, although it is also true that it tends to cheapen it. On the other hand, sometimes their effectiveness depends on the disparity of the light. Technically, the difference between the two models is the variation: in 2D there are a variation of intensity, while the 3D variation is of form. As the facial recognition system is used to distinguish faces according to the colour, intensity or other facial features, the 2D seems to be best suited to provide the required information.
The conflict may be noticed in the recognition system 3D, which only discriminates the shape of traits. Despite being considered more reliable and accurate, the 3D system still requires much development to extend its use. Experiments have shown that they will achieve better results with the combination of both technologies. Using many different biometric variables ensures greater than the best sensor accuracy for a single of them. In a recent study, it was discovered that combining 2D and 3D a 98.8% hit rate can be achieved. In conclusion, the 3D tends to become popular and promises to gain new benefits on the 2D, but is this last most used model, since it presents many advantages, it takes a while of development much greater and remains in constant improvement. The 3D can offer better results in certain cases but still requires much research and development for its consolidation. Both systems can coexist and complement without drawbacks.