Help Me Catch the Crook...

Mikee wrote on 6/9/2004, 6:04 PM
The Victim:
My Car

The Crime:
Putting two creases/dents in the right-rear quarterpanel.

Suspect:
Underpaid lawn boy.

Modus Operandi:
Careless use of backpack blower.

Alleged Motive:
Big corporate profits earned by mowing lawns quickly.

The Evidence:
5-7 fps, black and white security footage from 3 cameras, split onto one screen.

The Mission:
Review/critique my use of Vegas to enhance the video.



* Obtain VHS tape. Record the full screen "4-cam" video through VCR to my Sony MiniDV.
* Capture MiniDV to hard drive, import to Vegas 4.
* Split/copy to 3 different clips, 1 from each of the 3 cameras.
* Set project properties: interlace->interpolate
* Event Pan/Crop zoom in on each area in each clip.
* Apply max slow motion by control-drag edge.
* One clip was shot using an indoor camera shooting through a window. It was sunny outdoors so the view is nearly white, but shadows of the backpack and wheels of the car can be seen. To help, I added the "Levels" plug-in to video event FX. Using the Video Scope "histogram view", I adjusted the "input start" and "input end" (of the Levels plug-in) to make the graph occupy the entire scope, removing any black from the edges of the Video Scope histogram. I think this pulls out the most contrast?Is this right?


Any other tricks I can try? I don't have the equipment like you see on CSI where it magically pulls details resolution/frames from "fairy-land". Since the angle of the cameras, coupled with the 5-7 frames per second for each, and the old VHS tape, I think it would be difficult to win if the guy vehemently denied it.

thanks,
Mike


Comments

BJ_M wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:00 PM
CSI has no basis in reality in any shape or form ...


TheHappyFriar wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:08 PM
If this goes to court, and the kids lawer is smart, they'll say you edited the video. Write down what you do & be able to reproduce it.

Is that a good tip? :) I know, it's not helpfull to the video, bu it could be helpfull to you.
goshep wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:21 PM
This sounds like a job for "Inspector Spot."

wolfbass wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:36 PM
BJ_M:

Wadda ya mean CSI isn't real?

Say it isn't so!
filmy wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:42 PM
BJ_M said:

>>> CSI has no basis in reality in any shape or form ... <<

because Mikee said:

>>>I don't have the equipment like you see on CSI where it magically pulls details resolution/frames from "fairy-land"<<<

I say - I don't watch CSI however the very real equipment that pulls details out is called dTective and is out of most peoples price range. Aside from that it is based around an Avid NLE.

Aside from that - I would try supersample for the blowups and frame rate changes. You will get pixelation and have to live with it - but if you add a small amount of blur it will soften it up somewhat. You could also try exporting the single frames and than resize with Photo Zoom Pro and re-import into Vegas for the pan/crop. I know some people have done a DV > HiDef uprez with this method and gotten great results.
johnmeyer wrote on 6/9/2004, 7:47 PM
Check this out:

Focus Magic

I found about it in this thread:

Out of Focus - Can it be 'Fixed'

If you explore their site, you will find an example of exactly what you are trying to do. Ah ... here's the link:

License Plate

I downloaded the demo and played around with it. The standalone is somewhat limited compared to what the Adobe plugin can do. Unless the Vegas 5 version supports Adobe plugins, you will have to get an Adobe product to get the full features they offer.

I was not able to get the standalone to perform all the "magic" in their demos, but it wasn't a complete bust either.
bStro wrote on 6/9/2004, 8:14 PM
If you do a whole lot of fancy editing on this, won't you likely just be accused of doctoring the video?

Rob
jsteehl wrote on 6/9/2004, 8:54 PM
Forget about the video, I say you photoshop him in a compromising position with the neigbhors cat and black mail him.

Send a couple to his high school and he'll empty his college fund into your account :)
BillyBoy wrote on 6/9/2004, 9:04 PM
One word: EVIDENCE.

You can't fiddle, edit, tamper with or change in any way. ANYTHING. Period. Once you do, its not evidence anymore.

Besides, that's what INSURANCE is for.

This is one of the sillest threads in months. ;-)
TorS wrote on 6/10/2004, 12:48 AM
>>CSI has no basis in reality in any shape or form ...

Not very productive towards the initial question, but then neither is this:
If you were on a forensic or law enforcement thread such a statement might have made a little sense for a minute - at least one would understand what you were on about. But here in the world of video, where reality is what most of us are trying to leave behind (or improve), I can not understand your statement. Do you mean that CSI should have been based on reality? Should Snow White, Star Wars? What do you mean?
Tor
kameronj wrote on 6/10/2004, 4:48 AM
Snow White and Star Wars are not based in reality either???

Oh man!!!

Next ya'll are gonna be telling me there in no such thing as Virginia.
farss wrote on 6/10/2004, 5:41 AM
Me thinks BBs right, if you're going to use 'enhanced' video in court it has to be done by an independant expert that will have credibility in front of the court.
AlanC wrote on 6/10/2004, 6:32 AM
Mike

Assuming you have approached the offending company, what was their response?
Are they refuting it?
If so, have you told them that you have video evidence?
Have you cancelled your contract yet?
They will have insurance to cover such damage so if your claim has any foundation then they should just go through the formalities of making a claim through their insurers. They are more likely to co-operate if you haven't cancelled your contract yet.

If this went through a UK court, you would have to submit the original tape together with an audit trail showing who loaded the tape, who recorded the event, who unloaded the tape, who viewed it, where it was stored, who copied it, how many copies were made etc etc etc...

You would also need to prove that the images had not been 'tampered with' so editing and/or enhancing are a definite no no.

To be honest, if you need or plan to take this all the way, then you would probably stand a better chance of winning your case without using the video.

<Edited>
Unless you have good quality footage that clearly shows the act taking place, without any if's, but's or maybe's.

Alan
Mikee wrote on 6/10/2004, 12:39 PM
Thank you for all the replies!

I suppose I could have phrased the question more like "what can I do to improve the quality of black and white footage?" to be more productive.

I'm not to court yet. I'm contacted the business owner today and he is going to take a look. He seems reasonable so we may work something out since it would probably be less than my insurance deductable.

On other notes, I can't believe I couldn't enhance the contrast, or zoom the video for use in court. If it goes that far I consult my attorney friend. I wanted to improve the video enough to show the detail enough to be reasonably conclusive.

thanks,
Mike
bStro wrote on 6/10/2004, 12:46 PM
BillyBoy wrote:

This is one of the sillest threads in months. ;-)

So you missed the "Grazie switch to FCP" thread somehow? ;-)

Rob
Jsnkc wrote on 6/10/2004, 1:45 PM
"You can't fiddle, edit, tamper with or change in any way. ANYTHING. Period. Once you do, its not evidence anymore."

I edit surveillance tapes for lawyers and private investigators all the time, never had any problems with them being used in court. The key is to not edit the part of the video that shows the crime happening. You can easily take stills from the video and attempt to enhance them in order to show the crime or the suspect more clearly. You just need to have a un-edited copy available if they ask to see the original copy so that can see what work if any you did on the tape.
corug7 wrote on 6/10/2004, 2:13 PM
Okay, if you are going to fudge around with the tapes, at least add some foley. You know, a "boing!!!" when the schlep hits your car, preceded by a wiseacre comment from a has-been comedian and an overly obnoxious laugh track "HA HA HAAAA HA HA". Just a thought.

Corey
BillyBoy wrote on 6/10/2004, 2:47 PM
You kidding Jason? Editing as in cutting the 30 minutes before and after is one thing, but ENHANCING what gets introduced as evidence even a little is a BIG no-no. Its called evidence tampering and is illegal.

Define what you mean by "edit".

What "court" accepts "edited" or "enhanced" videos as evidence?

You ever actuallly TESTIFY in court as a professional witness?

I have. Many times.

With today's technology and in skilled hands you could do almost anything. Want to see O. J. stabbing his wife? Want to see Bush in red and blue tights and in a cape leaping over tall buildings?