photos and development

[photocist]

Suppose someone took a picture of themselves or a friend doing a crime (assault, murder, etc) and had the photos developed at a lab. If the developer notices what the photos are, do they have to report them to the police?

not asking cuz i did something like this, but just curious ^_^

 

[Josh66]

You better buy a tank and some developer.

Is this going to be an April Fool's prank?

That would be pretty cool. Drop a roll of that tells the story of you killing your best friend. :lmao:


---

Not sure what they are legally required to do, but even if they don't have to, they still might. I guess it would depend on a lot of factors...

Probably mostly how real it looked.

 

[photocist]

You better buy a tank and some developer.

Is this going to be an April Fool's prank?

That would be pretty cool. Drop a roll of that tells the story of you killing your best friend. :lmao:

lol talk about self incrimination!

this is actually something i have been wondering for quite some time. i am pretty sure they are not supposed to be looking at the negatives due to privacy laws, but then again, doctors are supposed to be confidential unless the patient says they want to kill themselves or others.

 

[Trever1t]

yes, absolutely. It's happened.

 

[Josh66]

i am pretty sure they are not supposed to be looking at the negatives due to privacy laws [...]

How are they supposed to make prints without looking at the negatives? Or even hang the film to dry? (Most 1 hour labs I've been to hang it right in the open where anyone walking by can see it, not to mention all that DUST! )

 

[dxqcanada5]

That's how pedophiles got caught in the old days.

 

[Atari1977]

Well you could just get the film developed. I don't think they'd pay much attention to what the pictures were of then. But if you get prints made then obviously they'd see.

 

[photocist]

i am pretty sure they are not supposed to be looking at the negatives due to privacy laws [...]

How are they supposed to make prints without looking at the negatives? Or even hang the film to dry? (Most 1 hour labs I've been to hang it right in the open where anyone walking by can see it, not to mention all that DUST! )

I didnt say they dont, I said they shouldn't. big difference

Thanks for the replies. guess ill develop this roll of me doing naughty things myself :lmao:

 

[thebutler4]

Yup .. they do have to report it ...

There was a case not to long ago of a guy who took a roll of film of his "vacation" into a local kinkos to get developed ... turns out he took the wrong one in and the lap developed a bunch of child porn of his children ... needless to say the cops where waiting for him to come in and pick up his photos ...

Sick bastards ..

but yes .. they have to report illegal activities ...

 

[love:multiplied]

i work in a photo lab. we send out our film but both types of lab (film and digital) have the same laws. we are required to view every photo to make sure they are not 'inappropriate'. and have to report anything that could possibly be breaking the law.

 

[Forkie]

i work in a photo lab. we send out our film but both types of lab (film and digital) have the same laws. we are required to view every photo to make sure they are not 'inappropriate'. and have to report anything that could possibly be breaking the law.

That's interesting. What does it define in those rules, as "inappropriate"? I can understand child porn, obviously, but I really can't think of anything else that could be deemed "inappropriate", since appropriateness is a somewhat subjective concept. And how do you determine whether or not the photo shows something as breaking the law?

 

[KmH]

Political Correctness sucks.

 

[love:multiplied]

i work in a photo lab. we send out our film but both types of lab (film and digital) have the same laws. we are required to view every photo to make sure they are not 'inappropriate'. and have to report anything that could possibly be breaking the law.

That's interesting. What does it define in those rules, as "inappropriate"? I can understand child porn, obviously, but I really can't think of anything else that could be deemed "inappropriate", since appropriateness is a somewhat subjective concept. And how do you determine whether or not the photo shows something as breaking the law?

it's written more specific than just inappropriate, i was just trying to be short. basically anything pornographic or illegal. if its a naked adult, we just have to destroy the photo and leave them a little card saying we couldn't give them all thier photos because such-and-such. if it's illegal, we have to notify management who will then decide if we need to get the police involved. our store has only had one case like that.

however, we have developed photos for the police (before we became a dry lab) of a very gruesome crime. i'm glad i wasn't there for that one

 

[Josh66]

That's interesting. What does it define in those rules, as "inappropriate"? I can understand child porn, obviously, but I really can't think of anything else that could be deemed "inappropriate", since appropriateness is a somewhat subjective concept. And how do you determine whether or not the photo shows something as breaking the law?

'Porn' where it is unclear that the model is of age is one thing that I can think of right off the top of my head.

Maybe it's just me, but girls these days all seem to look older than they are. Get a shot of a young model with some nudity ... might be easy to wonder if she is in fact 18...

Drug use is another one that jumps out to me... If you develop someone's roll of film with pictures of them doing lines off of a hooker - well, there's a good chance they might be breaking the law.