NonRevKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (11 years 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2396 times:
I searched the forum on this, maybe I missed it. This may seem like a dumb question, but how do you prove that you own the copyright on a digital photo? It's not like a print where you can produce the negative. Sure it's on the memory card, but what about when that gets erased?
2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2374 times:
Well the original file should contain all the details about the photo, including the camera etc...this is the exif info I pulled with Breezebrowser from a photo in my files:
File size: 1,714KB
Image Serial Number: 180-8035
Camera Model: Canon EOS D60
Camera serial number: 0420XXXXXX
Firmware: Firmware Version 1.0.0
Date/Time: 2003.01.15 14:38:39
Shutter speed: 1/350 sec
Exposure mode: Auto
Metering mode: Evaluative
Drive mode: Single frame shooting
Lens: 28.0 to 70.0 mm
Focal length: 70.0 mm
AF mode: AI Focus AF
Focus point: [Center]
Image size: 3072 x 2048
Image quality: Fine
White balance: Auto
If you can produce the original unedited file of a photo you should be able to prove where the photo came from.
Joe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 54
Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2365 times:
This is why you shoot in RAW mode- if you shoot jpg mode its a jpg which can be played with- a RAW can only come from one place- a canon DSLR- as long as you hold that RAW file in your hardrive or a disk you can prove it instantly- just like a negative.
NonRevKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2348 times:
2912n, how do you get breezebrowser and how do you get that information? It seems like that information can confirm a photo came from a specific camera. I'm shooting with a D30 in HQ jpeg, and I do have the original files saved on my computer.
I'm still kinda new to the intricacies of digital shooting.
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2300 times:
The important thing is not who has the RAW or JPG, but who owns the camera with the matching serial number. Any file, including RAW, NEF, etc, can be copied or transmitted, but only one person will have the camera with the serial number that matches.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2298 times:
All this data is available from either the RAW or jpg BUT as Joe points out, a jpg has no authenticity as it can be tampered with without detection - a RAW can't. At least it can't in any practical way - I guess any sort of file could be faked by manipulation at binary level with suffcient expertise. However, I'm sure I have read somewhere that a RAW file will be treated as a negative for legal purposes.
Glenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2193 times:
I perform a small amouint of cropping on most images. Therefore, mine original Jpegs will have at least extra detail that the others don't have. Also, the sequence of what else is available generally proves that there is a legitimate claim on my part.
The RAAF has devised a unique ystem to cover the legalities of original or tampered images. And I must say, is not the way I would prefer it but till the pendulum stops swinging, that's the way they are doing it. Won't go into specifics at this point. Ask me in 10 days when i have time