01-03-2008, 07:15 PM #1
Firstly I would like to say that I have the greatest respect for forensic artists. The painstaking task of developing a face from skeletal remains is absolutely amazing. Still I often wonder why they are left to look so plastic and doll like. I personally have a difficult time seeing what that person would have looked like. With just a little modification to lighting and tint, I feel that these reconstructions could look more life like and I don't believe it takes away from identification. I'd love other Websleuther's opinions about this. Just for an example, I randomly found a clay reconstruction on the Doe Network (case 036UFPA) and modified the lighting and tint slightly. Does anyone have any feedback on this? Would it help or distract from identifications? I'm certainly not an expert at doing this, but what about the idea?
01-04-2008, 12:37 AM #2
Oh wow- I think it looks much more lifelike.
I wonder if it's a question of resources? Since the technology to do this is relatively recent, there would be quite a backlog of reconstructions to update.
I wonder if LE would let volunteers work on a project like this or if all modifications would have to go through the original artist?
Anyway, it's a great idea!
01-04-2008, 12:42 AM #3Former Member
- Join Date
- May 2006
Awesome Zanko! I think it makes a tremendous difference. Could you do that w/ a light/medium and dark complexion? Kinda like seeing what the person would look like w/ the typical skintones that are out there?
01-04-2008, 03:44 AM #4
I don't have even one little bit of information on why they don't tint, except that there really isn't any way to know color or features (such as if someone had severe acne or scars, hair color, shape of the nose and ears etc.)
The only information I do have to share, is that I found a facial reconstruction picture from a skeleton of a victim that a serial killer pen pal of mine had murdered and led police to. I sent him the reconstruction photograph and asked him how accurate it was, telling him the location of where this woman had been found, etc. He told me it actually looked nothing like her, and the reconstruction looked like a person who may have Mexican features, yet the victim had been caucasion, the hairstyle and hair texture were completely off as well.
Interesting to me, they never asked him what she looked like, so they could get a better description. She may have been important to someone, and a missing person description may be going un noticed because of the discrepancy in looks of the reconstruction.
So, whenever I see a facial reconstruction, I'm always curious to know how accurate they really feel these things are in other cases. I'd be interested in the photograph comparisons when they do actually locate the name of the person they are reconstructing.FUN... is a renewable resource!
01-04-2008, 04:17 AM #5
Hi GlitchWiard, As an artist, I would think the sketch itself should be good enough to give the feeling for ethnecity. The tinting would only be a bonus, and a welcome one at that.
I can hardly believe a serial killer led police to the grave of a victim and the police did not follow thru with getting a true ID of that person with a photograph taken at some stage of their life! Unless you are saying they never ID'ed the victim.
Actually, I don't know that I would take the word of a serial killer for salt, being as screwed up as they have to be to do what they do in the first place. An interesting study they are, yes, I will grant you that. But real truth, I don't think so. They are masters of deceit to be able to get away with what they do. Just ask Pat Brown. She is an expert in this field.
PS: It is good to see you GlitchWizard. I remember you from a case here where the wife went grocery shopping and was supposedly murdered by her brilliant writer husband, or SS. Wonder what ever happened in that case? It was around the time of the Scott Dyleski tragedy.Remembering Madeleine McCann ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui2zI...eature=related
01-08-2008, 07:23 AM #6
Do you think you could do anything with these pictures of an unidentified Jane Doe (reconstruction from skull) from The Doe Network (and from this thread at WS)?
If so, thanks so much!----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*My posts are my opinions, expressed freely thanks to the First Amendment.*
01-08-2008, 09:04 AM #7
Speaking of reconstructions, did anyone see where a lady named Lisa Holland was identified? Here is a link where I posted her recon and actual pic. It is so far off it's scary. Not to mention they listed the UID as Asian or Hispanic.
http://bringushome.19.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=215Happy New Years
01-08-2008, 10:39 AM #8
This guy's victims were prostitutes. It's extremely hard to trace the true identitites of some of them, the ones that never tell their true name because of whatever reasons. It may be this person was identified at a later date than the picture I found, I never researched that far because he didn't know who she was either. I just know the reconstruction wasn't right. (It was one where they do a 3D clay face thing, not a sketch.)
I doubt he led them to her prior to them finding her. I think they found her, tried to identify her through the recreation and then when he was caught for another killing, he admitted to her and everyone else. We do not talk about his crimes, actually, this was one of maybe a total of three questions I've asked of him regarding his crimes. Mostly we talk about his family or his past - as a person, not as a criminal. I'm not really interested in details of crimes from my pen pals -
I'm not delusional, I know many are deceitful for their own gains, but we don't discuss anything that lying would benefit him about. I don't send Gerald any money, or stamps. I do send books now and then, but he doesn't get any benefit from me except letters otherwise. I get them from him, he gets them from me.
Yes, Gerald is screwed up. Paranoid Schizophrenic from what I can tell by his letters. He's delightful for me to know though, and I really enjoy his letters. He doesn't say stuff like, say, Ramerez would, though. He doesn't grandstand or say he did something good or right. He's suprisingly real. That's what is so interesting to me. They get away with it for so long because they are so NORMAL, but they aren't normal or they wouldn't do it.
Makes you wonder about the people you see everyday and don't suspect of anything...
FUN... is a renewable resource!
01-09-2008, 08:17 AM #9