Forensic photography: A subject that is far from being mainstream yet I have recently been in contact with a young woman who is studying forensic. She kind of picked my brain on the...

Rongnongno Loc: FL

A subject that is far from being mainstream yet I have recently been in contact with a young woman who is studying forensic. She kind of picked my brain on the photo aspect of it but honestly beside knowing how to take macro pictures with a ruler for insurance purposes I was not of any help at all.

Then I recently saw one UHH user who seemed disappointed that a thread I created was not about forensic photography.

So, this is a wide open thread to share information, technology on that subject.

A few years ago the Fuji IS pro was deemed a good camera...

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

Response deleted following rude remarks by OP on related thread!

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

Even this thread is not fully about forensic photography, but I cannot understand what point you are trying to make. I for one, think that the Fuji S5 pro is still a good camera. Just thinking out loud!

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Pablo8 wrote:

Even this thread is not fully about forensic photography, but I cannot understand what point you are trying to make. I for one, think that the Fuji S5 pro is still a good camera. Just thinking out loud!

There is no point. It is just an open ended discussion for those interested in forensics.

The s5 Pro, IS a good camera. I am wondering if it has been replaced by something else since.

crimesc324 Loc: West Palm Beach, Florida

Rongnongno wrote:

A subject that is far from being mainstream yet I ... (show quote)

Not sure what your question is but I take "forensic photographs" everyday in my line of work. Generally use a scale to show a size relationship, take overall, mid range and close up photos and generally center subject and fill the frame. No creativity and NO post processing. It is what it is. If you mess up the shot, no deletions, just retake it and keep both

Rongnongno Loc: FL

There is no question. This for folks like you who have something to teach in being exact, even cold when it comes to photography. Forensic is, in my eyes (opinion) a wide open field that is often ignored yet it records so much of human activity, both good and bad as forensic does not necessarily mean crime.

It is used in archeology, medical field, architecture and so forth...

Yet no one really speaks about it.

crimesc324 Loc: West Palm Beach, Florida

Rongnongno wrote:

There is no question. This for folks like you who have something to teach in being exact, even cold when it comes to photography. Forensic is, in my eyes (opinion) a wide open field that is often ignored yet it records so much of human activity, both good and bad as forensic does not necessarily mean crime.

It is used in archeology, medical field, architecture and so forth...

Yet no one really speaks about it.

I agree that it is rarely spoken of. It is limited in practitioners based on the greater scheme of people who use photography. It is also very technical and as I said earlier, at least as far as the courts are concerned, unalterable which precludes any post processing. I'm not sure how big a following there is or whether it would warrant its own thread.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

Forensic Photography is very much a Professional job,and one in which there are areas of security regulations. I have done legal work for solicitors over the years, and protocol dictated that I did not talk about it while court cases were involved. A few years ago, digital images were NOT accepted, and film photographs were still the order of the day. I can only speak of UK rules of course. Now that the UK police use digital images for their own evidence, they have to accept digital from defence counsel.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

As far as I know and I know little, I came to the understanding that ONLY raw recordings were accepted as they are not alterable.

I am not sure if there are many interested either but I am so it is enough for me to start this and hopefully learn from 'practitioners' like you.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

crimesc324 wrote:

Not sure what your question is but I take "forensic photographs" everyday in my line of work. Generally use a scale to show a size relationship, take overall, mid range and close up photos and generally center subject and fill the frame. No creativity and NO post processing. It is what it is. If you mess up the shot, no deletions, just retake it and keep both

Do you use ring lights or flash guns on a bracket?

Also, what is the range of lenses; wide angle... macro... telephoto?

And what is the chain of custody procedure for digital images? Do you turn over the memory card, or download to a computer? Or does COC begin after you print the image(s) out?

Thanks in advance...

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

I used to practice forensic photography in my job as an accident investigator; For most of my work, I sed either a leica M6, or a pentax
with a wide angle lens. Occasionally i had to use a telephoto lens as in Haz Chem accidents, but that was to keepme out of the way of nasty chemicals !

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Rongnongno wrote:

A subject that is far from being mainstream yet I ... (show quote)

There's a member whose avatar is a chalk outline of a body, and he has "I see dead people" somewhere in his box. If you can track him down, he'd probably be able to provide some information.

mldavis2

I retired as a CSI and lab technician. I'd be happy to contribute to this discussion if I knew what the question(s) are.

There are many different types of "forensic photography." I worked at crime scenes, but also in a crime lab using advanced techniques for visualizing, capturing and preserving fingerprint evidence which is a subject all to itself. The FBI gives lengthy training opportunities to practicing technicians in specific areas of interest - fingerprints, shoe prints, tire prints, crime scenes, etc. There is a board certification available for crime scene photography from the American Board of Criminalistics.

bwjones0029 Loc: Missouri

I am a police officer and currently work directly with our traffic crash reconstructionists (and was a reconstructionist 20 years ago - seems like yesterday). Early on, our courts required RAW format photos, but started to accept JPEGs several years ago. Our officers are advsied not to delete any photo (we check to see if the file names are sequential) and not to alter the photo in any way. The bottom line with photos in court is the photogrrapher has to be able to testify the photos are a true and accurate representation of what they saw.

mldavis2

Things are a bit different in lab work than field work. We follow the SWGFAST guidelines (Standard Working Group on Friction Ridge Analysis, Study and Technology) for lab documentation.
In lab work we are allowed to photograph in only RAW and then do whatever is available to us to enhance an image for best contrast and visibility as long as it conforms to editing available to traditional darkroom techniques. In other words, we can use dodging, burning, channel enhancements and such for enhanced visualization of a difficult image. When providing the image for evidence in court, we must be able to provide the original RAW image and then, using the Photoshop history function, show each and every step going from the original image to the enhanced image. The image may be "enhanced" but not "modified."