Date stamp on digital camera question - please help

If it's an actual date-stamp, that could probably be fiddled with.

If, however, it's Exif information; I don't think you can alter that and that shows date/time.

SecretScribe said:

Bmwhtly - thanks for the reply, what is Exif information?

Click to expand...

Exif Information is data embedded in many digital photos (depending on the camera & file format) showing when it was taken and with what equipment.
Let me see if I can dig up an example. brb.

Do you want the detectives to eventually discover the time stamp is wrong? I have an idea if you do.

Hi Secret - I agree that the date/time can (and are) set by the camera's owner and that there would not be a trail left to show they had been altered. It's also possible to set the camera up so the date and time don't show. I'm not sure whether the cameras are updated when they're docked on a computer. I'm also not sure whether it's possible to set the date and time back - but if that can be done, that would certainly be one of the lines of questioning that would come up in a trial. My thoughts - Puma

Bmwhtly said:

Exif Information is data embedded in many digital photos (depending on the camera & file format) showing when it was taken and with what equipment.
Let me see if I can dig up an example. brb.

Click to expand...

I can't find an example, but If you've got any pictures you took on your computer, open one. Right click and click on properties. On (I think the security tab) one of the tabs, it'll show all that stuff.

Bmwhtly said:

I can't find an example, but If you've got any pictures you took on your computer, open one. Right click and click on properties. On (I think the security tab) one of the tabs, it'll show all that stuff.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't copying the files change that? Or would the original data still be embedded somewhere?

alleycat said:

Wouldn't copying the files change that? Or would the original data still be embedded somewhere?

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, the data stays embedded. Since it's part of the file as much as the pixels that make up the picture.
I can't show you an example because all the pictures here are hosted, so the only info we get is the URL.

SecretScribe said:

Thanks for all the help! To clarify a bit further - the detectives don't later find out that the time/date was wrong. This suspect is eliminated and it turns out at the end that the murder was in fact committed by someone else. So the date/time on the photos is correct and was never tampered with.

The problem was that when I mentioned this plot point to someone, they immediately said - but how do you know the date wasn't tampered with. And the thing is, I think many readers would have exactly this response, so I wanted to pre-empt the inevitable chorus of objections. The thing is that eliminating this suspect forces the detectives to move on to other posibilities, so the suspect needs to be eliminated. If the camera thing is a real issue, then I may have to change the plot on this point. - BIG Sigh -

Click to expand...

You can have them discover that the time stamp is indeed correct. Have one of the photos show part of a newspaper or a television in the background. The detectives don't pay any attention to it as first until the issue of the time stamp come up. They are able to blow up the photo and tell by the newspaper that the photo couldn't haven't been earlier (kind of like terrorists making a hostage hold up a newspaper); or if you use the TV idea, that the show on the televison was only on at a certain time.

SecretScribe said:

Bmwhtly - if I wanted to use your suggestion, any idea how to phrase it? Could it be something like - 'We have looked at the Exif data and the photos are all from the night of the murder, spanning a time period from eleven in the evening until two the next morning.'

Click to expand...

If you like. Although you may want to tell your readers what exif is. If this is a trial, you could phrase it simply for the jury's benefit.
But, it's up to you.

Bmwhtly said:

As far as I can tell, the data stays embedded. Since it's part of the file as much as the pixels that make up the picture.
I can't show you an example because all the pictures here are hosted, so the only info we get is the URL.

Click to expand...

I just copied a photo over; the properties show a new "created" date. Of course, there may still be something hidden; I'm no expert on the data associated with a digital camera file.

Bmwhtly said:

If you like. Although you may want to tell your readers what exif is. If this is a trial, you could phrase it simply for the jury's benefit.
But, it's up to you.

Click to expand...

I would probably use something like "the file data" or "the data associated with the digital photo files" rather than throw in a technical term. Just an idea.

alleycat said:

I would probably use something like "the file data" or "the data associated with the digital photo files" rather than throw in a technical term. Just an idea.

Click to expand...

That's what i was thinking, although I lean more towards techno-babble; "Digital Tags" or something.

Now, I found an example if you like.

Take a look at this post from the family album:
Now, if you look at the properties of the picture, it won't tell you anything.
But, if you save it to your computer (right click, save as). Then look at the properties of the copy on your computer.
Click on the summary tab and you'll see that Exif tells us the model of camera that took it as well as the date and time it was taken.

That also answers your point, Alley. The data remains with the file.

Totally fake-able.

I could do it.

As long as I knew ahead of time that I was faking it and the date and time required. If we are talking premeditated, to create a specific alibi for a specific event, and I was stting it up AFTER the event, I could cover all the bases, even time specific content within the pic.

However, were I a detective, I might be a little suspicious of asomeone taking pics of themself without a bloody good reason. "Oh yeah, detective. I just happened to have my camera ou and started taking picture of myself in the mirror." would set alarmbells ringing for me.

wordmonkey said:

Totally fake-able.

I could do it.

As long as I knew ahead of time that I was faking it and the date and time required.

Click to expand...

And there's the point. Since the only reference point for the data is the time and date on teh camera which, i assume, can be set.

However, if the pictures are from a third party (Cop, PI, Tourist or whatever) then the data could stand.

To fake it, you need to know ahead of time. And even setting the wrong date, you'd still need to be careful you don't catch, for example, the wrong days newspaper in the shot. Not all that easy if it's a public shot.

But is your suspect a techie? I have two digital cameras. Both are Kodak, but on one I can alter, or completely remove the time/date stamp. On the other, it's embedded in the files and can't go away unless I make copies of the photos and fiddle.

The average Joe doesn't bother with this stuff, wouldn't know you could change it and wouldn't even realize it's there.

SecretScribe said:

Wordmonkey - if you did this, would a tech-savvy person be able to track the change, or somehow figure out that the change had been made?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure. The way I would do it, would be to reset the dates on the camera AND computer. That way, when I sinc them up, the file creation date would match on both machines. That's the simplest. I could go inot photoshop and edit it too, but the dates would be the simplest.

Now I'm sure some tech-wiz would be able to take the backend coding apart and see that the date had been changed. So I would err on the side of caution and say yes, a serious techie could work out it was a fake.

But in theory, from what you said, your photo evidence actually would lead the cops to verify the suspects alibi and while he might be guilty of something else, that would eliminate him in that investigation, so they wouldn't need to look further and you would be good to go.

As far as tech people pointing out errors, Dan Brown has a screamingly obvious techie flaw in "Angels and Demons" that would have resolved the entire "ticking clock" plot in mere seconds. The sales I suspect were enough that he didn't sweat the odd letter from a tech savvy person saying, "Hey, why didn't they just do this and find the bomb?"

(Note: It wasn't a bomb, so I didn't spoil it for anyone!)

All you have to do is set the date on the camera to what you want and take the pictures.

EXCIF data is editable.

Editing the date and time on the image might leave traces of editing in the pixels.