In the arena of cases, I had two unique experiences – A Daubert Hearing in 12/08, and Grand Jury testimony in mid-2009.

The Daubert Hearing was on image authentication (are the images real, and do they represent real people and real events). That hearing was U.S. v. Frabizio in December of 2008, and was one of the few Daubert Hearings on photography, imaging, or image authentication. It was an interesting case, as it was going to its third trial. I was retained by defense counsel to analyze and interpret the government expert’s report and findings. I provided information to the defense attorney on this report, and attended the Daubert hearing, and answered her questions on his testimony. With the limited number of Frye and Daubert hearings on forensic photography, forensic image analysis, or image authentication, it was an interesting experience to participate in this hearing.

The Grand Jury testimony was also on an image authentication case. In this instance, I was an expert witness for the government. I have testified in cases since the early 1990s, but this was my first time to testify before a Grand Jury. It was quite interesting, as there is no judge, no defense attorney, and the accused is not present, nor is a case detective. It’s the prosecutor, a court reporter, the members of the grand jury, and the witness. In this case, I was impressed by the professionalism of the prosecutor and the members of the grand jury – I can imagine a situation in which a system without the formality or presence of a judge, defense attorney, etc. moving toward chaotic – I was pleased that this was far from the case.

As to training I received, it would be a toss up between two classes I took in the field of photogrammetry. One was on reverse projection photogrammetry that I posted about earlier. The other was a class in using Photomodeler (a software application for applying photogrammetry) for close range photogrammetry, presented by Dan Mills of DCM Technical Services. Photogrammetry is taking measurements from photos, and there are several approaches to this technology. Unfortunately, there are very few classes available in close range photogrammetry or in reverse projection photogrammetry. I was fortunate to get excellent training in each in 2009.

Regarding training that I provided – it’s difficult to isolate any one specific workshop. But, I did have the opportunity to give four workshops in digital photography to the San Francisco Police Department in 2009. That agency purchased Nikon D700 cameras for their crime scene investigators and wanted each member to be trained in the use of that camera for crime scene and evidence photography. I was proud to be the trainer they chose to provide this instruction. We held four, three-day sessions, with eight investigators in each session. It was a pleasure to work with this agency and to see their dedication to providing their front-line personnel with the tools and training to do their job.

Lastly, another highlight of 2009 was being appointed chair of the Forensic Photography and Imaging Certification Board of the International Association for Identification. It is an honor to have been chosen to fill this position, and our board is working hard on several projects.

The last year was successful in many ways – looking back at a few of the highlights helps see where we are today and prepare for the future. I’m looking forward to more interesting cases and great training opportunities in the coming year.

G

The main reason why features don’t exist that you may think are obvious needs, is that Adobe doesn’t know that it’s a needed feature. If 100 people ask for a feature, then that gets their attention, but if only one person asks, it simply won’t carry the same weight of the frequently requested features.

I suggest that if there are features that you want, that you let Adobe know. You can do this by posting to the Adobe Photoshop Feature Request Forum. You’ll have to register to post, but it’s relatively painless.

What about finding solutions to problems you are having? Again, Adobe can’t fix a problem without knowing that it exists. They have a Photoshop Macintosh Forum, and a Photoshop Windows Forum.

Use these forums to let Adobe know what you’d like, what’s working and what’s not working. Another great resource is John Nack’s Blog. John is the Principal Product Manager for Photoshop at Adobe. He frequently asks readers of his blog for feedback on features. Keep an eye on his blog, and provide him with feedback when he asks for it in addition to posting on the forums listed above. If we don’t let Adobe know what we want, then we can only blame ourselves if we don’t get those features.

Reverse Projection Photogrammetry is used to measure objects in a photograph or video. It can be used to determine if an individual could be excluded or included as a suspect based on height. In addition to using this method to determine the height of an individual in an image, I have used this technique to determine the position of objects in relation to their surroundings (after the objects were removed), the distance of safety barriers in construction scenes (after the construction was completed and the barriers removed), the size of cracks in a sidewalk (after the sidewalk was repaired), etc. from photos of those scenes.

The workshop covered issues related to the methodology and foundations of this technique. Any forensic image analyst or forensic video analyst who hasn’t yet had the opportunity to take this workshop should do so. It has been offered at the LEVA conference for two or three years, and also at the IAI Annual Conference.

The first step is to determine which images to use (or eliminate). I frequently use Adobe Bridge for this. I set up Bridge in the Filmstrip workspace. If I need to compare two or three images to decide which I will use for the final comparison, I select multiple images and use the loupe tool to compare details. The loupe tool provides a 100, 200, 400, or 800 percent magnification of a portion of each image in the Preview panel. Just click on an image in this panel to activate the loupe, click and drag it to move it, click it again to close it. You can display one loupe on each image in the Preview panel, as shown here:

This image shows two images in Bridge with the loupe tool.

Once the images are selected, they can be opened into Photoshop for comparison.

If the images are of the same resolution and approximately the same cropping, then they can be synchronized for zooming and scrolling. Do this by choosing the “Zoom all Windows” and “Scroll all Windows” in the options for the Zoom and Hand tools. Now, if you tile the images side-by-side, and zoom, both images will zoom; scroll one, and the other will scroll as well.

A new blank layer can be added to each image and marks can be made on that blank layer to indicate various features. Multiple layers can be used to better separate different categories of features, etc. With the Extended version of Photoshop CS3 or CS4, the Count tool can be used to mark features.

G

In all of these, there is a common element regarding resolution – the image should have the resolution to see the details for the purpose of the analysis. In a crime scene, this may be enough resolution to see the relationship of different objects in the image to each other. In a fingerprint, this may be second or third level detail. In the security camera it may be enough to read a license plate or see individualizing features in an object or person.

In security video, I almost always wish there was more detail, or higher resolution. These images are frequently 640 X 480 pixels or less. In addition, they are often highly compressed, the camera is at a bad angle, the lighting is poor, the optics are poor quality and dirty, and the subject of interest is frequently in the distance. Very few in the forensic video analysis field would argue that we’d all prefer security video with more resolution.

In fingerprints, I have seen some pretty good prints at resolutions as low as 300 PPI. The SWGFAST guidelines currently call for a minimum 1,000 PPI at a native resolution. So, can a fingerprint examiner use images that are less than 1,000 PPI or that may have been scanned with a scanner that interpolates when set to 1000 PPI? Of course they can – and they do.

Regarding crime scene, accident and evidence photography, many people compare digital imaging to film and suggest only using digital cameras that match the resolution of film. When I ask these proponents which film format (disc, 110, APS, 35mm, 6 X 6, 4 X 5), which film brand, which ISO, using which optics, whether they are concerned with tonal resolution as well as optical resolution, etc., they usually are unable to answer. There is nothing special about film that makes it a standard for measuring resolution.

When taking photographs, we simply need to know what level of detail is required, then be certain that we capture that level of detail. Arbitrary numbers, like the SWGFAST 1,000 PPI help us to guarantee that we are capturing enough detail, but we also need to understand that resolutions less than those recommendations don’t somehow become useless.

G

Two of the most obvious changes for forensics users are the missing Contact Sheet and the Layer Comps to PDF features. The Contact Sheet feature can be downloaded from Adobe for the Mac or Windows and installed into CS4, so there’s no need to panic. You can also create contact sheets with some greater capabilities using the Output workspace in Bridge. And, the Contact Sheet X script written by X Bytor works in CS4. Regarding Layer Comps to PDF – well, that will just take two steps now – first, use Layer Comps to Files, then create a one image per page contact sheet with the results.

Another obvious change is in the interface – Photoshop will now open images as tabs, similar to web browsers. Some users seem to love this, and it drives others crazy. I’m one of the ones who prefers the old method. To get rid of the tabs view, choose the Interface Preference and uncheck the “Open Documents as Tabs” and the “Enable Floating Document…” check boxes. You’ll be back to the way things were.

How about that Adjustments panel? This is new, as is the Masks panel. These make it easier to create adjustment layers and to modify masks. There is no need to go to the Layers panel, click on the Adjustment Layers icon, choose the type of adjustment layer you want, make your settings, then click an OK button. Now you can just select the type of adjustment in the Adjustment panel, make your settings, and you’re done. Note that it’s best to keep the Adjustment Panel and the Layers panel staggered on two different columns and at different heights so that they don’t cover each other when bouncing back and forth between them.

CS4 also added Smart Filters. This provides similar capabilities of Adjustment Layers to Filters. If you first convert your image to a Smart Object, you can apply filters and re-edit them, just as you can an Adjustment Layer.

There are a handful of other differences between CS3 and CS4 – but these are the significant ones for forensics users. That said, one of the best places to learn about many things Photoshop is from John Nack’s excellent blog. John is senior product manager for Photoshop and he frequently posts great information about changes to Photoshop, and he asks users for feedback. John even takes criticism of Photoshop well – as shown in his post to my comparing Photoshop to the Johnny Cash song, “One Piece at a Time.” I read John’s blog every morning when starting my day.

I’ll post a Photoshop tip now and then here. If anyone has any questions about a feature or method, post a comment and I’ll try to address it.

G

One of Jim’s points is that some certifications are not based on real world issues, and the correct test answers may be wrong when applied to the real world. Jim also mentioned that what he’s heard related to the certifications of the International Association for Identification (IAI) is positive.

As the Chair of the Forensic Photography and Imaging Certification Board for the IAI, I thought it would be important to discuss a bit of our process. We have two parts to our testing for certification – a written test and a practical test.

The written test is based on two texts, that is intended to show if the applicant has the general knowledge of photography and imaging to meet the standard set by the IAI for certification. Our board reviews the texts and the questions every year to attempt to keep the test relevant with current technology and appropriate for the topic of forensic photography and imaging.

The practical test currently includes ten assignments, and requires that the applicant competently complete each of the assignments to pass. These assignments are as closely molded to real world assignments as we can make them. We are currently reviewing the assignments and the wording of them so that they continue to represent real world assignments, and so that the assignments are as clear and explicit as possible.

Our board is always looking for input and I invite anyone with input to contact me at any time.

G

Enhancing the video wouldn’t provide the detail to determine who shot first, but synchronizing the three videos did.

The video of the interior of the business showed several people sitting near the window. In one frame they are sitting, in the next they are jumping away from the window and seeking cover. By synchronizing this video with those from the exterior, one can see a movement consistent with recoil in the frame prior to to the people jumping.

In this case, it wasn’t enhancement that was needed, but synchronization of multiple videos.

G

I’m George Reis and I am the owner of Imaging Forensics, Inc. providing consulting services in forensic video analysis, forensic image analysis, and forensic photography to attorneys, police agencies, and insurance companies. I also provide training in these fields, primarily to law enforcement personnel.

What’s my plan? I hope to post weekly on issues relating my work – which means, image analysis, image authentication, forensic photography, expert witness work, the training I provide, etc. Tips and techniques that I find helpful in this work will likely be included as well. I’ll try to be brief and keep things interesting.

Since I’m new at this, I’d appreciate  your input on what you’d like to see here. Please post a comment, or drop me an e-mail.

G