Interesting article. Thanks for posting. I attended several "Evidence Photographers International Council" meeting years ago & this was the subject of much discussion then. Some of the ideas mentioned in the article were discussed @ these meetings & it was felt by some that any of these measures could be overcome.
It seemed to be the concensus then, that digital photography had the same issues as wet photography, in so far as evidence presentation goes, but it was much easier for someone to digitally alter an image. It all boils down to the credeability of the one who took the image. When I've testified in product litigation trials, a main point in the presentation of my inspection images was that I took the images & they are a true & accurate dipiction of what I saw on the day of my inspection. The images are only as credeable as the testifier. Kenneth Waller http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f ----- Original Message ----- From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: fwd: Effort Made To Restore Photography's Credibility >I thought this article published by Anick Jesdanun of the Associated > Press an interesting read. > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23342630/ > > Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
