Does anyone know the answer?
Apr 6, 2012 11:52:23 #
This topic deals with the Legal field. Photo investigation if you will. If this is covered in another string then please lead me to it so I can read. I just have not seen anything as of yet.
An opportunity has come about that requires a date stamp on my RAW photos for court cases and insurance fraud..
My 7D will not do a date stamp on the actual photo. Does anyone know if the courts and litigation departments that hire me can use the information off the Meta Data that is stored with every RAW photo be sufficient enough for litigation?
Any help would be appreciated.
An opportunity has come about that requires a date stamp on my RAW photos for court cases and insurance fraud..
My 7D will not do a date stamp on the actual photo. Does anyone know if the courts and litigation departments that hire me can use the information off the Meta Data that is stored with every RAW photo be sufficient enough for litigation?
Any help would be appreciated.
Apr 6, 2012 12:01:34 #
Apr 6, 2012 12:14:24 #
Interesting field of work.
I would think they would be more interested in your testimony that your images are a correct representation of what you saw on the day you saw it and photographed it.
I could be wrong. Imagine, that?? LOL
Are your image original image files ever used or do they rely on prints?
Pat
I would think they would be more interested in your testimony that your images are a correct representation of what you saw on the day you saw it and photographed it.
I could be wrong. Imagine, that?? LOL
Are your image original image files ever used or do they rely on prints?
Pat
Apr 6, 2012 12:20:09 #
here is another questions for you to think about.
Most courts require that images are not run thru a photo editing program (and there are programs availalbe to check to see if editing was done), RAW images by nature have to be coverted to a different format for viewing, thus need to be run thru a editing program of sorts. If someone was to take a image that was converted from RAW to say JPEG, would it show as being run thru an editing program thus making it invalid?
Most courts require that images are not run thru a photo editing program (and there are programs availalbe to check to see if editing was done), RAW images by nature have to be coverted to a different format for viewing, thus need to be run thru a editing program of sorts. If someone was to take a image that was converted from RAW to say JPEG, would it show as being run thru an editing program thus making it invalid?
Apr 6, 2012 12:26:43 #
I've spoken to three lawyers about this matter.
They all said it is up to the other side to disprove the photos. If they are legit, you have no worries.
I've shot a few photos for medical litigation cases and they never questioned the authenticity of the photos. I was advised that I might have to appear in court, but that never happened in any of them.
Your statment that they are not retouched is usually good enough.
And absolutely shoot raw!
Make sure your camera's time and date is accurate.
Would be interested to hear other feedback.
It's been a few years and things may have changed.
They all said it is up to the other side to disprove the photos. If they are legit, you have no worries.
I've shot a few photos for medical litigation cases and they never questioned the authenticity of the photos. I was advised that I might have to appear in court, but that never happened in any of them.
Your statment that they are not retouched is usually good enough.
And absolutely shoot raw!
Make sure your camera's time and date is accurate.
Would be interested to hear other feedback.
It's been a few years and things may have changed.
Apr 6, 2012 12:56:30 #
Old Timer
Loc: Greenfield, In.
Theaure was a case recently that the photos were no allowed because insurance company's lawyer got them throwed out because they had been cropped. They were ruled as being altered and not allowed.
Apr 6, 2012 13:37:03 #
a while back when i was still a cop i rember it was either canon or fuji that offered a software program for photographs used in law enforcement to detect alteration as well as lock the photograph so it couldn't be altered and to maintain the chain of custody for the evidence. i would contact canon customer service
Apr 6, 2012 13:51:57 #
sinatraman wrote:
a while back when i was still a cop i rember it was either canon or fuji that offered a software program for photographs used in law enforcement to detect alteration as well as lock the photograph so it couldn't be altered and to maintain the chain of custody for the evidence. i would contact canon customer service
When on RAL I have offered to take pictures of things that the deputy needed for evidence, but the answer has always been that the deputy needs to testify as to chain of evidence and it is much easier if the deputy takes the pictures (always on auto mode). I would suggest taling with the agnecy you are seeking to provide this service for their requirements.
Apr 6, 2012 15:55:58 #
Gallery3Ten wrote:
This topic deals with the Legal field. Photo inve... (show quote)
Will pg 192 of the manual help? Frankly, its a moot point. There is no way to prove when a photo was taken. The camera can be set with ANY date prior to taking the photos.
Apr 6, 2012 16:10:00 #
A few days ago, someone on this forum suggested giving the memory card - straight from the camera - to whoever requested it.
Apr 7, 2012 06:56:37 #
Chain of custody (of evidence), which is what chapjohn was referring to, is very important in criminal matters; less so in civil matters. That's why police departments of some size will have their own photographer (either an employee or under contract). The photographer's testimony concerning photographic evidence will generally be sufficient to verify the particulars of the images, including verification of the accuracy of the meta data. However, the point that MWAC makes is very pertinent, I think. And so, I suggest that you ask the lawyers you work with what will best serve them. (You may have to educate them a bit and they may need to do some research concerning evidentiary standards in your State.) In the meantime you might want to consider shooting everything in JPEG but then also save everything in a lossless format for your files.
Apr 7, 2012 07:05:20 #
Pablo8
Loc: Nottingham UK.
Here in England there used to be a proviso that ...Photographs for legal purposes were to be shot on film (digital was not accepted). Digital is now accepted, perhaps because the police shoot digital images for their record purposes. I retired from professional photography a few years ago, but have one on-going set of pictures shot recently on raw, memory card retained till the case is settled. The legal people have had prints and Emailed files from me.
Apr 7, 2012 08:24:10 #
I think it has to do with how much common sense, and honesty is evolved in the case at the time. And sadly, there isn't that much of it around any more!
Erv
Erv
Apr 7, 2012 08:41:38 #
Gallery3Ten,
Since you are shooting with the Canon 7D, go to the Custom Function Menu - C.FnIV: Operation/Others and then to number 3 which is Add image verification data. This is used for medical and law enforcement legal to assure that the original image has not been altered. Altering just one pixel of an image will be detected.
You can shoot in either jpg or Raw. Since Raw includes an imbedded jpg, the Raw can be viewed with appropriate software such as Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw, Adobe Photoshop, and others.
Hope this helps.
Since you are shooting with the Canon 7D, go to the Custom Function Menu - C.FnIV: Operation/Others and then to number 3 which is Add image verification data. This is used for medical and law enforcement legal to assure that the original image has not been altered. Altering just one pixel of an image will be detected.
You can shoot in either jpg or Raw. Since Raw includes an imbedded jpg, the Raw can be viewed with appropriate software such as Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw, Adobe Photoshop, and others.
Hope this helps.
Apr 7, 2012 08:48:06 #
I am a police officer and recently went through training for this very thing. In short if your photos will be used in a criminal court proceeding (at least here in Pennsylvania), they may not be altered in any way, shape or form. That is to say cropping, enhancing or in any way altering the photo being offered as evidence is a BIG NO NO and will quite possibly result in having your photographic evidence thrown out by a savvy lawyer.
As far as the date time & stamp we were instructed by the expert instructing our training, that it must be on the photo, but then again there may be courts that don't require that. I have a Nikon 3100 that will not allow me to put date time & stamps on my photos as well, so I use a separate card. Or in some instances use a cheap point & shoot camera, which is always in my state vehicle as a back up.
As far as the date time & stamp we were instructed by the expert instructing our training, that it must be on the photo, but then again there may be courts that don't require that. I have a Nikon 3100 that will not allow me to put date time & stamps on my photos as well, so I use a separate card. Or in some instances use a cheap point & shoot camera, which is always in my state vehicle as a back up.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.