# Evidence Photography?



## 3of11 (Nov 22, 2008)

I was asked by a law firm yesterday what I would charge to come out and take pictures of injuries for them.  I have no idea what to tell them.  Any ideas?  Is there anything that I should make sure to say I will or wont do?


----------



## skieur (Nov 22, 2008)

3of11 said:


> I was asked by a law firm yesterday what I would charge to come out and take pictures of injuries for them. I have no idea what to tell them. Any ideas? Is there anything that I should make sure to say I will or wont do?


 
Your expenses as in gas, travel, etc. plus a little less than your standard rate since it is easier to do, than some photographic work in that the emphasis is on accuracy and documentation with no "artistic" needs.

You should ask however whether you might have to testify in court related to taking the photos. It is a possibility.

skieur


----------



## icassell (Nov 22, 2008)

In this era of digital manipulation, you should find out (someone here might know) what you need to do to make sure the authenticity of your images is not questioned in court.  I know Canon makes a gizmo that tags images on their cameras to prove they authentic, but I dont know how necessary that is.

http://www.adorama.com/ICADOSKE3.html?searchinfo=osk-e3&item_no=1



Ian


----------



## jlykins (Nov 22, 2008)

I know my uncle is the lead detective for the police station that he works at, and he does all of the shots for them with a D80. No special verification gizmo, so maybe you wouldn't need one.


----------



## skieur (Nov 22, 2008)

icassell said:


> In this era of digital manipulation, you should find out (someone here might know) what you need to do to make sure the authenticity of your images is not questioned in court. I know Canon makes a gizmo that tags images on their cameras to prove they authentic, but I dont know how necessary that is.
> 
> http://www.adorama.com/ICADOSKE3.html?searchinfo=osk-e3&item_no=1
> 
> Ian


 
Authenticity of photos is not usually questioned in court unless they are possibly in conflict with other evidence which is extremely rare.  If that were the case, then the photographer might have to testify.

skieur


----------



## pixeldawg (Nov 22, 2008)

Make sure if you DO agree to this work that the law firm understands that you get paid upon completion of the work rather than when the case settles. I had a law firm request similar images and then after delivery informed me that they intended on paying me when the case settled and that this was "customary" for law firms. It is not, and don't allow them to do this to you.


----------



## Snyder (Nov 22, 2008)

Ive done hundreds of Evidence Photography jobs, Just a few tips macro lenses help. Make sure to get long, medium and close up shots. And make sure to shot 1:1 lighting ratio. You dont want soft lighting to cover up any scars or bruises on the person body.


----------



## 3of11 (Nov 22, 2008)

You guys are awesome!  I hadn't even thought of some of this stuff.  Great to get the advice.


----------



## SlimPaul (Nov 22, 2008)

wow. Taking photos of bodies. Thats an interesting job...


----------



## skieur (Nov 22, 2008)

pixeldawg said:


> Make sure if you DO agree to this work that the law firm understands that you get paid upon completion of the work rather than when the case settles. I had a law firm request similar images and then after delivery informed me that they intended on paying me when the case settled and that this was "customary" for law firms. It is not, and don't allow them to do this to you.


 
I can't say anything positive about the law firm you were dealing with.  I am working with a lawyer to prosecute a lawsuit and so far about $250,000 has been payed out before settlement for various disbursements and expenses.  That is "customary" for reputable firms.  

skieur


----------



## skieur (Nov 22, 2008)

SlimPaul said:


> wow. Taking photos of bodies. Thats an interesting job...


 
Somewhat depressing when you are covering a death scene photographically of a young student at school.

skieur


----------



## SpeedTrap (Nov 22, 2008)

If youshoot Nikon you may want to look into this.

http://www.nikon.ca/en/Product.aspx?m=16012

This is the reason most police services use Nikon


----------



## MikeBcos (Nov 22, 2008)

skieur said:


> Somewhat depressing when you are covering a death scene photographically of a young student at school.
> 
> skieur



Extremely depressing, I have a contract at work that involves the duplication of evidence documents, including photographs, some of them are far from "interesting".


----------



## Mike_E (Nov 22, 2008)

Ask if they want the CF card, charge them retail + expenses if they do.  Once upon a time the original file on the card it was written on was required in court.  (some places anyway)


----------



## roadkill (Nov 23, 2008)

I would find it less depressing knowing my work may lead to justice for that person


----------



## skieur (Nov 23, 2008)

roadkill said:


> I would find it less depressing knowing my work may lead to justice for that person


 
It is hardly ever that straightforward and simple.  It can revolve around spins on negligence and responsibility which are seldom clear, precise and indisputable.

skieur


----------



## DReali (Nov 24, 2008)

I have a degree in forensic science and throughout the course we where taught always to use a flash, an aperture of f11 or smaller and a focal length of 50-55mm to simulate human sight. the focal length however dpeends on whether or not you are using a full-frame camera (we weren't). If you have doubts look through through the viewfinder and find a focal length that matches your own perception. ALWAYS use a ruler next to the object being photographed to give an acccurate representation of scale. if you are photographing fingerprints or footprints make sure to use a tripod as it is extremely minute details that are paramount to these evidence types. also if you do not have a macro lens close-up filters work just as well if not better (we always used them).
hope this helps,
dave


----------



## IvyJade (Nov 24, 2008)

Many of the programs that I have encountered, to look at photos, tells you what camera was taken , in what format etc, is that program from Nikon worth it?


----------



## 3of11 (Nov 25, 2008)

DReali said:


> I have a degree in forensic science and throughout the course we where taught always to use a flash, an aperture of f11 or smaller and a focal length of 50-55mm to simulate human sight. the focal length however dpeends on whether or not you are using a full-frame camera (we weren't). If you have doubts look through through the viewfinder and find a focal length that matches your own perception. ALWAYS use a ruler next to the object being photographed to give an acccurate representation of scale. if you are photographing fingerprints or footprints make sure to use a tripod as it is extremely minute details that are paramount to these evidence types. also if you do not have a macro lens close-up filters work just as well if not better (we always used them).
> hope this helps,
> dave



Great advice, thanks.  Thanks to everyone else and your comments too.


----------



## eddiesimages (Nov 26, 2008)

Take overall photos showing the person's face for identification purposes, then close up photos of any injuries using a scale. The scale should be one that is commonly used. You may be asked to print the photos in 1:1. You will only be called to court to testify if there is a question about the photo. If you do have to appear in court you will have to testify that the photo fairly and accurately depicts the injuries as you saw it on the day the photo was taken. Just make sure that the photo looks exactly as the evidence actually looked. No big deal, if you don't mind testifying in court. But, with the possibility that you may have to go to court (maybe more than once) you will have to figure that into your price.Good luck.


----------



## icassell (Nov 26, 2008)

flyinsalt said:


> Take overall photos showing the person's face for identification purposes, then close up photos of any injuries using a scale. The scale should be one that is commonly used. You may be asked to print the photos in 1:1. You will only be called to court to testify if there is a question about the photo. If you do have to appear in court you will have to testify that the photo fairly and accurately depicts the injuries as you saw it on the day the photo was taken. Just make sure that the photo looks exactly as the evidence actually looked. No big deal, if you don't mind testifying in court. But, with the possibility that you may have to go to court (maybe more than once) you will have to figure that into your price.Good luck.




You could conceivably add a line to the contract that stipulates an additonal travel rate/hourly rate for any depositions or court appearance.  That is done in medical testimony routinely.


----------



## SpeedTrap (Nov 26, 2008)

IvyJade said:


> Many of the programs that I have encountered, to look at photos, tells you what camera was taken , in what format etc, is that program from Nikon worth it?


 

The nikon program goes a step farther.
It authenticates images, it can tell it the image has been altered in any program.
It can't show you what was altered, but it will tell you the image could have been compromised.

The point of this software is for in court, when a picture is questioned it can be proven the file has not been altered since the photo was taken.


----------



## TwoRails (Nov 26, 2008)

I've been following this very interesting thread.  Doesn't image verification info have to be tagged by the camera itself?  If it were software only based, then what would stop someone from editing an image and then tagging it as authentic in the software?  

This quote seems to support that the Nikon software works only with certain models:



> *Nikon Image Authentication software :* Nikon Corporation has announced its latest Image Authentication Software, designed exclusively for use with the *Nikon D2xs* digital SLR.


taken from:

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_8290.html


----------



## icassell (Nov 26, 2008)

The Canon solution is a combination of hardware and software which is why, I suppose, it costs a couple hundred more than the Nikon approach.


----------



## SlimPaul (Dec 1, 2008)

skieur said:


> Somewhat depressing when you are covering a death scene photographically of a young student at school.
> 
> skieur



I can imagine. My previous post was sarcastic


----------

