READER’S FORUM

I appreciate the effort and dedication you and your team have put into your study, "Are different photogrammetry applications on smartphones sufficiently reliable?".Your research provides valuable insights into the accuracy and clinical applicability of smartphone-based photogrammetry, which is an area of great interest in modern orthodontics.I found your findings particularly thought-provoking, as they highlight both the potential and the current limitations of these emerging technologies.Q1.The study found that Magiscan (version 1.5.12;AR Generation, AR and LiDAR Technologies, Warsaw, Poland) and Qlone (version 5.6.0;EyeCue Vision Technologies, LTD-AR Technologies, Yokne'am, Israel) showed greater absolute differences compared to direct anthropometry, especially in certain measurements.Do you believe these discrepancies are primarily due to limitations in smartphone-based photogrammetry software, or could they be improved through calibration techniques or advancements in smartphone hardware?