Pictures as proof?

This seems as good as place as any to post this but if I got it wrong feel free to move it.

I asked this question in the Double Moon thread but decided to post it here as a new thread

A picture used to be a thousand words as the old say goes but now day they are almost worthless. With cameras being able to see things the naked eye can not and with all the camera lens flares and other camera anomalies there are and photo shop I do no care what you see with the naked eye you might as well forget taking a picture of it because the picture will be useless as proof to what you seen. And even if you do not take a picture of it but just tell what you seen people will still bring up the camera problems even if no camera was involved (I know that from a fact). So I do not care who you are or what you see taking a picture of it to show others is all but pointless. In fact the picture you try to use as proof may just backfire on you like it has so many others. To be truthful about the mater pictures are no longer valid as proof of anything. We have depended on pictures as proof for some long what are we going to do now that has been taken from us. If pictures can not be used as proof any more what can we use in there place?

Crayons and sidewalk chalk..

That is the only proof most people will believe these days..

sad, isn't it?

reply to post by fixer1967


S & F for bringing up a point that has largely gone unspoken, but is well understood by many. The same goes for videos and voice recordings. All can be edited with the use of a simple computer, one that nearly every child knows how to use.

The only "real" proof I can think of would be direct access to a person's memories, but that may be some time away, and there are downfalls to that, such as...
- Do you really want someone poking around inside your head?
- Will your memories be able to be manipulated like a picture or video can be now?
- Will the party accessing your memories have the 'keys to the entire kingdom'?
- What if the party accessing your brain accidentaly hits the 'format drive B' command?

Stuff to think about...

There, there, it will all become clear in time...

reply to post by fixer1967


Found your new thread Star and flag.

I think, that even if a photo isn't been manipulated that some people will still think it is - simply because the technology exists to do so. (In my opinion just because something can be done doesn't mean it has been done, but not everyone will think that way).

I have seen people talking about EXF data that can somehow 'prove' that a photo has been changed in some way - but how far does this go?

For instance whenever hubby and I download pictures from our digital camera they always come out really large on the computer, so we resize them so they fit on the screen but would this show in the EXF data as manipulated? Cos in one sense it is, but nothing in the actual picture has been altered, only the size of it. So my point is if someone took a picture of a genuine anomoly then resized it after downloading, it might show as manipulated even though the subject of the photo wasn't changed?

But as for alternative proof if photos are no longer reliable - I don't think there is any alternatives. Video maybe but can be altered too?

Like I said on other thread - it seems like the more technology we get, it allows us to have less proof instead of more. It's kinda sad, when you think about it.

Photo's and vids are still reliable. You just have to have some logical deduction of what is shown.