Re: Further Analysis of the Last Photo

by Guest 10.11.14 22:09

Angelique wrote:"When on the night of 3rd May, at about 24.00, she was at her desk at the Tapas bar, inside the resort, when at a certain time, one of the friends of the McCann couple, Russell, asked for a USB memory stick reader, in order to print photographs of Madeleine. Immediately the deponent replied that she did not have an USB reader, but that she had a printer with this hardware, which could read from memory sticks."

I am no whiz kid regarding memory "cards" from cameras or USB sticks - but cards are shoved into a lap top and sticks into a desk computer. I recall that memory "cards" did need an "adaptor" to read when inserted into a lap top which could then print off to a printer or load onto a USB stick. But memory cards and USB sticks are two entirely different things.

I recall vaguely having read a discussion about this before.

Is the confusion deliberate?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It has been discussed before, Angelique, on the above thread, and at least one other, which I can't find.

You are right, the photos must have been on a memory stick, as the Kodak printer Amy used had a USB port which would take a stick, but no slot for a camera's memory card. It is not compatible for printing images from any other make of camera by either that camera's memory card nor by direct docking. Only a Kodak camera can dock directly onto that printer model.

So the only way that printer could have produced that image is if it was stored on a memory stick.

Which means that, in all the kerfuffle that night, they found the time and equipment to download from the Canon to the memory stick, or they had a pre-prepared stick with that photo already loaded. Why would you take an old stick with an old photo on it on holiday with you?

And if the picture was downloaded that night onto the stick from the camera, is it likely that such an old photo would still be stored on the camera's images? How many images could be stored on the Canon's memory, does anyone know?

Just questions and musings.

by rustyjames 10.11.14 22:39

Dee Coy wrote:
Angelique wrote:"When on the night of 3rd May, at about 24.00, she was at her desk at the Tapas bar, inside the resort, when at a certain time, one of the friends of the McCann couple, Russell, asked for a USB memory stick reader, in order to print photographs of Madeleine. Immediately the deponent replied that she did not have an USB reader, but that she had a printer with this hardware, which could read from memory sticks."

I am no whiz kid regarding memory "cards" from cameras or USB sticks - but cards are shoved into a lap top and sticks into a desk computer. I recall that memory "cards" did need an "adaptor" to read when inserted into a lap top which could then print off to a printer or load onto a USB stick. But memory cards and USB sticks are two entirely different things.

I recall vaguely having read a discussion about this before.

Is the confusion deliberate?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It has been discussed before, Angelique, on the above thread, and at least one other, which I can't find.

You are right, the photos must have been on a memory stick, as the Kodak printer Amy used had a USB port which would take a stick, but no slot for a camera's memory card. It is not compatible for printing images from any other make of camera by either that camera's memory card nor by direct docking. Only a Kodak camera can dock directly onto that printer model.

So the only way that printer could have produced that image is if it was stored on a memory stick.

Which means that, in all the kerfuffle that night, they found the time and equipment to download from the Canon to the memory stick, or they had a pre-prepared stick with that photo already loaded. Why would you take an old stick with an old photo on it on holiday with you?

And if the picture was downloaded that night onto the stick from the camera, is it likely that such an old photo would still be stored on the camera's images? How many images could be stored on the Canon's memory, does anyone know?

Just questions and musings.

This thread seems to have gone completely off topic, however just to correct a few things above...

From here - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ...

it seems there was the following "* You can also print directly from any digital camera with PictBridge capability, or from most popular memory cards when using the optional KODAK 8-in-1 Card Reader or KODAK 6-in-1 Card Reader."

It would be interesting to know if she had such a card reader, (or whether other unsupported card readers would work in the USB slot).

The Canon was pictbridge compatible but the Olympus wasn't.

With regard to the Canon, recent discussion has suggested it was never analysed so the capacity would be down to the unknown memory card size within it. The Olympus pair of memory cards were analaysed they had 43 pictures and 73 deleted but recovered pictures.

by rustyjames 10.11.14 22:41

The manual for the photodock is here - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It states a 60 second print speed, so that is 20 to 30 minutes of continuous printing.

by Guest 10.11.14 23:08

Thanks rustyjames.

I was taking my info from here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

....which keeps things simple for thicko technophobes like me.

The review says there's no memory card slot so I took it as read that meant docking a Kodak camera or a memory stick were the only options. It does mention the Pictbridge thing. What is that?

Anyhow, it's probably all academic as Russell claims he had a memory stick. Which was why he was asking for a printer with a USB port. Which again begs the question: Was the picture downloaded onto the memory stick that night, or did they just happen to have it with them on holiday?

(Hope this is reasonably on topic, as if it is found this picture was downloaded from the camera that night, why couldn't they have done likewise for the Last Photo and the others? Why the trip to England for the Olympus and the delays for the Last Photo and other the Canon photos?)

by Guest 15.03.22 23:12

I don't know anything about photoshopping but I don't know how you can remove Amelie and Gerry's elbow and still leave the brick wall intact.

This is fairly standard; a cloning tool was used to copy a fragment of the wall over where the intruding arm was.

by Verdi 16.03.22 0:38

chickenman wrote:

I don't know anything about photoshopping but I don't know how you can remove Amelie and Gerry's elbow and still leave the brick wall intact.
This is fairly standard; a cloning tool was used to copy a fragment of the wall over where the intruding arm was.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Can I please ask again that you don't resurrect old defunct threads without good reason.

If you need any help navigating the forum then feel free to ask, I am at your service.

Otherwise you can continue your comments about the photographic evidence, or lack of, here..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Or here on the other thread created by request..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Or here, a thread created for general discussion about photographs relevant to the case of missing Madeleine McCann..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It's no problem if you copy a quote over from an old defunct thread if deemed relevant to your commentary.

But before proceeding, may I suggest you re-read the following to re-acquaint yourself with how research has progressed beyond the naive..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

hat