Objective: The Back Mapper is one type of Rasterstereography and it can be used in the clinic without radiation exposure. The purpose of our study was to prove the reliability and validity of the Back Mapper and to compare it with the Spinal Mouse, which is an assessment tool for spinal curvatures using a wheeled mouse, and the Cobb angle by X-ray. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Twenty healthy adults participated in the test to investigate for the inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability, and concurrent validity. The tests were performed with assessment devices for scoliosis such as the Back Mapper, Spinal Mouse and Cobb’s angle. Data was analyzed by an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) value and a standard error of measurement for reliability and correlation analysis for validity. Results: Intra-rater reliability of the Back Mapper was good (Cronbach’s α=0.821-0.984, ICC=0.696-0.969) except for assessing the lordotic angle. Inter-rater reliability was good (Cronbach’s α=0.870-0.958, ICC=0.770-0.919) in assessment for trunk imbalance, rotation of scapulae, thoracic angle, lumbar angle, and kyphotic angle. The kyphotic angle in the Spinal Mouse had a significant correlation icompared with the Back Mapper (r=0.510, p<0.05), and the Cobb’s angle from an X-ray had a significant correlation with trunk inclination (r=0.532, p<0.05). Conclusions: These findings provide good intra-reliability of the Back Mapper in healthy subjects, but the Back Mapper requires more experienced practice to have good inter-reliability. Also, the variables of the Back Mapper does not seem as appropriate compared with the Cobb angle by X-ray.