I've always thought it'd be a good idea to keep a single-use camera in the car for use after a 'close encounter of the crumpling kind'.
Maybe through fear of pre-empting such an occurrence I've never quite got round to it.
How many BRs do keep one in the car? Although many mobile phones now incorporate a camera of sorts, I vaguely remember reading that digital images have no legal standing because they are so readily manipulated. On top of this, phone batteries have an uncanny knack of being flat when you need them most!
So should I just go to Superdrug and buy a disposable 35mm every few months or so?
|
|
Done just this for many years. Replace the camera every few years as film does not take kindly to prolonged high temperatures that car interiors reach. Never had to use it, though.
|
|
Costco had a triple pack a while ago so I got one for each driver. Now I have a fourth driver (and car) so have passed mine on...
|
|
|
|
Buy them five at a time via Ebay for about £10.00. Make sure you get flash - most accidents are not in bright sunshine.
|
|
|
I now do this, although I got mine at Poundland (how much is this?) complete with flash.
This was after another driver opened their door into the side of my motor. They apologised profusely, and offered to pay for the repair until they saw the £300 bill. At this stage I took a 'photo of the damage. My insurers were prepared to roll over and blame me for the damage when the other driver now said I'd driven into their already open door, and the repair was all to the front of my car, namely the front bumper and wing. The 'photos showed the damage to be just in front of the wheel, all to the side of the car. Case proved!
On a further note, the repairers just supplied information to my insurers to the effect that the damage was to the front wing and bumper, and wouldn't support me at all.
|
|
|
|
Yep keep a flash camera in all my cars changing them every year. I also keep a dictophone and a full set of 'Accident Detail' and 'Witness Statement' forms and copies of my 'up to date' details. I have on a couple of occasions used the camera to assist someone else in an accident and just given them the camera. On both occasions they sent me the cost of, or in one case, sent me a replacement camera. Before you ask 'Why the dictophone' Record the time/day/date/location and conditions, put it in your pocket then get out of the car. One you record what was said and secondly as you know it is there you quickly learn to stay cool and say very little just incase you are in the wrong. Regards Peter
|
|
I keep a Boots single use camera in the car and have't ever used it - yet. Digitals are getting very cheap or you might have one with you; I have heard that digital photos can be queried in court, due to the ease with which photos can be manipulated by Photo-Shop Pro and other progs! Stick to wet film, just to be sure
|
|
Correct, should a picture be presented either at a closed hearing i.e. just the insurance companies and the evidence or in a court then a Negative and supportive positive immage is deemed more acceptable and can not case doubt as to the original. Should you need use you disposable camera. Use all shots taken at two of each shot also support originality of the images and of cousre you may as well use the whole role up including a shot that happens to have the oper driver or drivers in the shot. My paperwork includes things like Phone Number, Land Line and Mobile as you may just have to provide the Mobile number of the other party as they may have been using the phone and not concentrating on driving. .Regards Peter
|
|
Wet film camera. Digital may be acceptable legally but because images are easily manipulated it opens too many doors to be challanged. Stick to 35mm.
|
|
An image captured on wet film can easily be scanned and then manipulated. But I guess you mean that the negative will be crucial if there is any scope for doubt.
|
As above. Stick to film. Absolute must in a bikers kit.
Disposables available for pennies from supermarkets Ebay etc.
|
|
Negatives are the exhibits.
|
Negatives are the exhibits.
In the case of an APS camera, it would be positives.
|
|
That's why I always use a 35mm camera. Bog standard totally traditional thus less confusing for the older clerks/magistrates.
|
I always keep a single use camera in the car. Unfortunately, when I was unexpectedly rammed from behind at a junction, in the heat of the moment I forgot about the camera and in any case my hand was shaking so much I wouldn't have got a decent photograph anyway!
--
L\'escargot.
|
A cheap film camera is a simple mechanical device, less likely to go wrong. I doubt even the cheapest digital camera would be up to the job as you'd need to keep it charged or fresh batteries in the car.
In the case of an APS camera, it would be positives
APS cameras still use C41 process "negative" film. Do you mean "slides" in which case they still wouldn't be called "positives" but "transparencies".
Slide film is generally slower in speed as well, so useless in low light situations. A disposable pocket camera with built in flash, changed every time you renew your insurance or MOT is perfect.
|
I'm not sure why a negative is viewed so highly by the legal eagles. Take the picture on film, re-touch/enhance/modify it on the PC (using scanner/CD service from Boots), print it at 6" x 4" and then re-shoot that picture onto conventional film (which is how you used to get copies made of prints if you'd lost the neg).
Present that neg to the court and even an expert could not prove you'd tampered with it. The colours would be flat and it'd be a bit less sharp, but if you are using a cheap disposable that'd be about the standard anyway.
Product of a mis-spent youth, I'm afraid.
|
|
I was a witness in Magistrates court a few months ago. They were quite happy to take my digital photos of the drunken idiot driving as evidence. In fact, my laptop ended up getting passed around the bench, prosecution and defence so that they could have a closer look at the originals not a print out.
|
|
A Photoshop wizard (like me) can spot an image that has been manipulated, unless it?s been done by a photoshop wizard (like me). Depending on exactly what you?re doing it?s difficult not to leave clues, but I guess they?d call an expert in if the RTA was serious enough.
|
Ooh whilst I think of it.....if you get booked for speeding this time of year it is worth having a look at the signs to ensure that the council (fallen out with them today) have cut back the foilage around them. Another very good reason to have a camera in the car.
Digital photos are being increasingly accepted in evidence but a wet film APS or otherwise is safer for a number of reasons outlined here.
|
>.A Photoshop wizard (like me) can spot an image that has been manipulated, unless it’s been done by a photoshop wizard (like me). Depending on exactly what you’re doing it’s difficult not to leave clues, but I guess they’d call an expert in if the RTA was serious enough.<<
He's right. I've seen him photoshop a Military size satellite dish onto a house and it was absolutely seamless.
He's very talented.
|
BBD: Haha, then I've got one just for you here ;)
Take a current isue of "Auto SWIAT" (I'm sure you've got it somewhere in your office), open it on page 9 and tell me honestly what the wizard had done to that shiny new blue Avensis sedan.
- - - - - - -
I am the only Pole over here.
|
Adam you?ve blown my cover, that was top secret military hard-ware.
I?m at home V de M so I?ll check it out tomorrow. If you?ve got a back issue of the Aygo, C1, 107 test though we couldn?t get hold of a four-door 107 so we used a two-door and I air-brushed the rear doors in. Don?t believe anything you see, it?s all lies.
|
Sorry Dave.
But hey - at least I didn't blow your contract with the US Navy and your photoshopped designs for a new Nuclear sub.
(Speaking of subs, it arrived today!)
|
|
|
|
You could always use the camera on your mobile 'phone.
|
BBD: Check this out...
img257.imageshack.us/img257/3681/ave4zr.jpg
- - - - - - -
I am the only Pole over here.
|
BTW: am I the only one who can see the... uhmmm... the face of a blondie in the left headlamp (the indicator) ... ?
- - - - - - -
I am the only Pole over here.
|
BTW: am I the only one who can see the... uhmmm... the face of a blondie in the left headlamp (the indicator)
>>
No your not the only one. Mind you, I see dead people....
|
Don?t believe anything you see, it?s all lies.
Sure thing, some say the same idea of Photoshop-ing applies to all those juicy babes in Playboy mag and alike, right ?
- - - - - - -
I am the only Pole over here.
|
And now back to motoring please.
DD.
|
|
|
|
