In this article we take two forensic technologies used to generate facial renditions of suspects, forensic DNA phenotyping (FDP) and facial composite drawing, to think through innovation in policing. Comparing more mundane, taken-for-granted approaches of facial composite drawing with ‘high-tech’ facial renditions generated using DNA traces, we complicate the value of technological innovation in the criminal investigation. Drawing on participant observations conducted with the Dutch police, forensic genetic laboratories and interviews with investigators and geneticists, we detail some of the technicalities behind the making of faces using these technologies, and show the differences in how the technologies are perceived and applied in policing. With our comparison, we show that although facial composite drawing is often quickly dismissed as being subjective and unreliable, the practice holds important lessons for FDP, in particular FDP's promise of producing a photographic likeness of a suspect. With that, we demonstrate that besides introducing ‘new’ things, innovation may also be located in more mundane and taken-for-granted technologies such as facial composite drawing. We conclude by suggesting that police and technology developers alike take existing technologies and practices more seriously, redirecting the focus of innovation towards the affordances of the mundane., Peer Reviewed