Injury Photos

AndyBorzi · 9 Mar 2006 at 19:46

One of our neighbours has asked if I could take a few pictures of his injury following a bike accident. (Happened about 2 weeks ago and wants pictures of the bruises etc)

I have never done anything like this before so I have a couple of questions and want some advice. So I am hoping one of you guys can help?

Do I take on digital? Raw or Jpeg?
Do I hand over the files on CD or print them or both?
If I take on film do I need to prove the date somehow? i.e newspaper or something?
Do I need to sign a statement to say who I am and that I took the pictures?

Apparantly it is bruises along his back and backside so do I need to show his face as well? (I am now quietly laughing at this!!)

Any other tips?

freebooter · 9 Mar 2006 at 21:08

I would have thought film was best but other than that can't help.

webbyman · 9 Mar 2006 at 21:25

errm digi then print off should'nt be too bad, i used some of them in my an incident im currently persuing...

AndyBorzi · 9 Mar 2006 at 21:48

I just didn't want to take them and find I have prejudiced his claim because of the photo was taken incorrectly/in the wrong format etc

danza · 9 Mar 2006 at 22:57

Take the images in film. You can sooooo easily manipulate digital to tell the story you want to, so I'd deffo say film.

/edit

Assuming the pictures are for legal purposes...?

cyKey · 9 Mar 2006 at 23:06

danza said:
Take the images in film. You can sooooo easily manipulate digital to tell the story you want to, so I'd deffo say film.

/edit

Assuming the pictures are for legal purposes...?

As we are moving into a more digital only photography system surely digital is allowed? You see policemen on TV taking pictures of crime scenes with little compacts. The benefit of shooting digital is that you have the EXIF info in each shot saying the date and time when it was taken. With film you could technically argue that they were taken years ago. But then EXIF could be faked. The photos could be photoshopped. Your best bet is to say you'll do the shoot but if he can contact the company who wants the photos to find out what they specifically need.

danza · 9 Mar 2006 at 23:18

Do both then.... :cool:

themask70 · 10 Mar 2006 at 12:34

tbh, i would shoot these on RAW then it will be easier to muck about with them on your pc. hope this helps.

regards, david.

elphias · 10 Mar 2006 at 16:11

having recently done this, all shots must be on film somethng to do with stopping manipulation of the photos

Gamefreak501 · 11 Mar 2006 at 21:44

Definitely film.

That way you get a comeback, incase someone should say 'these have been modified'. All you need to go from digital to film is a good understanding of exposure, then all will be well

mrk · 12 Mar 2006 at 00:48

Gamefreak501 said:
Definitely film.

That way you get a comeback, incase someone should say 'these have been modified'. All you need to go from digital to film is a good understanding of exposure, then all will be well

Shooting raw is the same as film, same security since you cannot "modify" a RAW file without converting it to an editable format beforehand. The RAW file is not an image format but instead a negative of digital image data so must be converted before it can be modified.

AndyBorzi · 12 Mar 2006 at 09:54

Did the photos in RAW cos the guy wanted to take pictures to sols on Monday so didn't have time to take on film and get developed. Hopefully they will help!

I have offered the files if they want to see them.

Heh, my wife just walked in the door when the guy had his trousers round his ankles showing the bruises on his bum and thigh! Great timing!!

Thanks for your input guys.