Hi, Alan,
What people buy and why they buy it is a pretty darned complex issue.
[...]
frank theriault
And never discount stupidity. Folks are pretty dumb on average. When I was
selling cameras and audio I watched a training film which shared some market
research indicating that 75% of
27, 2002 8:00 AM
Subject: Re: law and image
Hi, Alan,
What people buy and why they buy it is a pretty darned complex issue.
--snip--
My household pathologist uses digital and film for her photos. It makes no
difference in court which is presented.
Mark,
I really couldn't argue with you when my only evidence is 'CSI' :-) I
admit I have no up-to-date knowledge of the UK system, I only know that
digital has been
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Wendy Beard wrote:
And have you noticed how *noisy* all the cameras are. They all have a
huge flash on them that sounds like it's powered by explosive powder
and all the shutters go CLUNK very loudly. They are all usually
mechanical cameras too that they have to wind on
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Rob Studdert wrote:
Well if you've seen any images out of Bali in the last ten days of so
the teams of evidence gathering personel all seem to have digicams in
hand, I haven't seen a film camera yet.
Not to disagree or anything but... if you are as addicted to 'crime' TV
So what you saying is things are back to normal?
Feroze
- Original Message -
From: Dr E D F Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 9:34 PM
Subject: Re: law and image
Daniel,
Few of DeChaso's last dozen messages make any sense at all
Chris wrote:
Not to disagree or anything but... if you are as addicted to 'crime' TV
programmes such as CSI, Silent Witness, Dalziel Pascoe, etc as my
flipping family seem to be then all you tend to see is film cameras being
used by forensics/pathologists.
In the news coverage of the sniper
Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: law and image
I've attemped to establish film as a medium having a
faithful connection to reality
Holy shit!
Dr E D F Williams
http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams
Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery
Updated: March 30, 2002
- Original Message -
From: Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: law and image
Well if you've seen any images out of Bali in the last ten days of so
the teams of evidence gathering personel all seem to have digicams in
hand, I haven't seen a film camera yet.
Not to disagree or anything but... if you are as addicted to 'crime' TV
programmes such as CSI, Silent Witness,
Well, thank you, Dan! :-)
Every so often, shadows of my past life are drawn out of dark quarters of my
mind by memory triggers. I guess this thread is one of those triggers...
BTW, my comments related to criminal trials, but the same rules of evidence
regarding exhibits would apply to civil
On 23 Oct 2002 at 7:24, Chaso DeChaso wrote:
This topic is being debated tremendously in legal
circles with nothing approaching uncontested or
universal agreement on the matter...which is odd
considering the two media are viewed in precisely the
same way according to so many on this list.
And so...? (Make a conclusion, if you will.)
--- Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23 Oct 2002 at 7:24, Chaso DeChaso wrote:
This topic is being debated tremendously in legal
circles with nothing approaching uncontested or
universal agreement on the matter...which is odd
Please cite your authority for the proposition that digital photographs
are treated differently under the law than traditional photographs.
Chaso DeChaso wrote:
This topic is being debated tremendously in legal
circles with nothing approaching uncontested or
universal agreement on the
Can I cite coursework? The problem is I don't know a
reference where the issue has been settled - and
herein lies the non-existence of a standard.
--- Daniel J. Matyola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please cite your authority for the proposition that
digital photographs
are treated differently
Your reply makes no sense to me at all.
Chaso DeChaso wrote:
Can I cite coursework? The problem is I don't know a
reference where the issue has been settled - and
herein lies the non-existence of a standard.
Sorry. Let me research it a bit and get back to you.
I don't have any actual citations yet is what I was
saying - and then I was using the word citations in
a poetic sense below when refering to coursework.
Just now I have emailed a co-associate about it and
we'll look for some references if
Folks:
It's been my experience, as an insurance investigator, that the standard has become whether or not the photographer can testify as to the authenticity of the photograph. That the substance of the photograph has not been compromised, They, the judges and atorney's, do not appear to be
You are essentially correct. The photographer -- or someone else
who observed the scene being depicted -- must testify that the image accurately
reflects the conditions in issue at the time in question. No one
every inquires as to whether the image was originated by traditional photography
or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Folks:
Snip>
So
long as the original is available,
Snip
And would someone like to define "original"? I'm always
very careful about how much weight I give an "original." A
lot of things can happen between the object of interest and the film/sensor.
Or, am I missing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Folks:
Snip
So long as the original is available,
Snip
And would someone like to define original? I'm always very careful
about how much weight I give an original. A lot of things can happen
between the object of interest and the film/sensor. Or, am I
Original picture, not subject.You have to remember that the most
important thing is to have the person who took the picture say, "it looked like
that".
BR
-Original Message-From: Otis Wright, Jr.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Snip
And would someone like to define "original"?
My meaning of the original, I've been told, is the first photo as it exists on the negative or the disk.
Thaks for asking.
Paul G.
This is very interesting because we have the existence
of originals in all art forms before electronic media
in which the idea of the original looses its sense.
The original is a difficult thing to define. Like the
color red, it is something that can be defined the
best one can, and then easily
Well, I haven't done a trial in many years, but I think that what many
here (obviously not you, Dan) don't realize, is that the vast majority
of photographs submitted as exhibits in a trial are ~not~
controversial. They depict crime scenes - where the body was found, a
smashed window where entry
Try contacting the Evidence Photographers International Conference, they're
located in Pennsylvania.
Ken Waller
- Original Message -
From: Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 12:23 PM
Subject: Re: law and image
Sorry. Let me research
On 23 Oct 2002 at 7:41, Chaso DeChaso wrote:
And so...? (Make a conclusion, if you will.)
It's an observation (reality), make of it what you will, I'm not partaking in
the joy of argument.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Daniel J. Matyola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are essentially correct. The photographer -- or someone else who
observed the scene being depicted -- must testify that the image
accurately reflects the conditions in issue at the time in question. No
one every inquires as to whether the image was
- Original Message -
From: Daniel J. Matyola [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: law and image
Your reply makes no sense to me at all.
Chaso DeChaso wrote:
Can I cite coursework? The problem is I don't know a
reference where
29 matches
Mail list logo
