Digital technology in general is almost immediately associated with digital forensics, including computer crimes, cyber terrorism, child pornography on computer hard drives, and other “digital threats” that require special training, expertise, and equipment to investigate. Media attention is widespread, grant opportunities abound, and a seemingly endless supply of resources have been made available to address the needs of our new digital world.

At the same time, the use of digital photography for documenting and collecting evidence at crime scenes has been evolving at a similar pace and doing so mostly under the radar. Digital cameras have surpassed film to become the norm; it is now rare to find a film camera being used for law enforcement purposes. The cameras look the same, operate the same, and produce the same results—sometimes. When the results are less than optimal, operator error is the assumed culprit.

The Problem
What hasn’t been widely recognized, however, are the vastly different steps, processes, limitations, and vulnerabilities involved when creating a digital photograph. While the transition from film to digital happened with little fanfare and has mostly gone unnoticed, it has not been completely ignored within the law enforcement community. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), the Scientific Working Group on Imaging Technology (SWGIT), the Evidence Photographers International Council (EPIC), and others have developed guidelines, standards, and training to help law enforcement make this transition. Guidelines, standards, and training that have yet to be fully grasped and appreciated.

The reason for that is inherent in our law enforcement system. By necessity, law enforcement is a reactive, crisis management-oriented organization. There is little time to be proactive, so the problems lurking in the background too often go unnoticed or are ignored until they become a crisis. A major challenge regarding how digital images are captured and the resultant workflow and storage of the images has yet to be realized. Predictably, standard operating procedures (SOPs) involving digital image integrity and workflow are largely unaddressed by law enforcement.

What most agencies fail to realize is that the lack of SOPs and a sound workflow means images submitted for court purposes may not survive if challenged by a knowledgeable attorney. These digital complexities have not yet been realized, so images taken by photographers will likely fail one of three very basic criteria:

1. The date and time setting in the camera is incorrect.
2. The wrong lens focal length was used, resulting in an inaccurate depiction of the scene.
3. Embedded information may indicate the image has been modified.

“These points were not an issue with film, but we do NOT live in a film world anymore. We now live in a digital age, and it changes everything we once believed about how photographs are treated in law enforcement,” says D. Eric Johnson, CEP (Certified Evidence Photographer instructor and retired First Lieutenant, Michigan State Police). A strong advocate of digital image integrity, education, and certification, he feels it is crucial for all who work in law enforcement to understand the following: “A ‘true and accurate representation’ is no longer the only qualifier—and is a court challenge waiting to happen. The only question is when and where.”