Krissy
Marrinan
Forensics
October
12th 2013
Current
Event:
From Click to Capture: Making the Case
for Digital Composite Images
In this article the
author, Michael M. Streed address how the identification tool of facial
composite images is underused. Sketch
artists are trained to draw detailed imaged from eye-witlessness yet their
talent is underused and expensive. Many polices offices have opted to hire a
cheaper untrained artist, or use other methods of identifications. But another option,
which has recently become popular, is the option to having a digital facial
composite sketch artist, where they recreate the face online or through a
program. Though at the end of the
article Streed begins to state the downfalls of the digital programs, stating
that thought transferring from pencils to pixels is easy its has glitches as
well. Like the pixel images is not very clear, and how the interview has to be
completed before the identification process can really become effective, and
sometimes the software can be really pricy and you might end up paying for more
than what you received. Thought there
are some negatives to the programs, Streed makes it clear that this technology
may be lacking in some areas it’s making the road to future identification
easier.
Because of the new technology
it affects a lot of people and certain of parts of the economy. With police
stations and investigation forces buying these programs, it’s putting people
out to business and making it harder for them to find work. Though there is a
benefit to saving money on composite sketches, police stations can put more
money and effort into other parts of there facility that may need it more or
that could benefit from new materials. It’s like a give and take situation.
Though this article
gives an accurate description of how it affects the world and police stations
it gives no description of the actual program itself. If Streed would have
included this, I think that it would have enhanced the article and brought it
readers to deeper understanding of how and what the actual program does and how
it helps the police department. I also thought that the author, whenever he
made his argument he would go back and state a point against his agreement, confusing
me while I was reading. But overall I thought the points and understanding of
the program and how it would effect the police departments.
14 comments:
I though that overall Krissy did a very good job in her article review. One thing she did well is that she gave both sides of the argument in her review. She mentioned that although the facial construction software is very accurate and popular, it does have it’s glitches and is very pricy. Giving both sides of the argument helps the reader better understand the technology as a whole. I also like how she also listed it’s affect on the real world. I was very interested to hear that the technology is putting people out of jobs in some work areas, and creating jobs for others. A third thing I thought she did well was give backround information about sketch artists before talking about the software.
There are a few minor things that could have been fixed to make the article review more strong in content. For one, Krissy did not really give the who, what, where, when, and why of the article. She only said the author of the article and what it is about. I would have liked to know when it was created, which forensic fields use the technology, and who invented it. Krissy also had a few spelling and punctuation errors in her writing which seemed to have been their because of spellcheck. Other then that, it was good.
One thing that I found very interesting about this review is that we have technologies like this available to us. It always amazes me how technologically advanced we are today and how many new problems we are able to solve.
Jimmy Purdy
I think this was a very interesting article review to read because it shows how technology has developed over time. Krissy began her article review very solidly because she got right to the point in describing what her article was about. She starts out by unfolding the story with the fact that many sketch artists are underused and expensive. Additionally, she expands her argument by backing it up with strong ideas. For example, she states that many police officers have opted to hire cheaper, untrained artists, or use other methods of identification. However, I think her strongest point in this article is that she presented the effect of both sides of the story. Instead of just focusing on the negatives of using digital programs, she also described the possible positive outcomes too. For instance, although the software can be expensive, it is making the road to future identification easier.
The review could have been made even better if she had organized her ideas more precisely. I thought that her comments shifted at times oddly and were out of place. Additionally, I think that she used confusing order of language and punctuation marks at times because I had trouble comprehending some of the statements.
I was very impressed by this article because it shows how technology has developed over time to replace the work of humans. This article affects the people and the economy because now most areas will use digital programs to determine the facial composite of a person. Additionally many people will now have a harder time finding a job. Therefore, I think it will be very interesting to see how these digital programs will play out and develop in order to make crime scene investigations more thorough.
Krissy’s review on the article “From Click to Capture: Making the Case for Digital Composite Images” is very well done. The article is about computer programs that allow digital composite “sketches” of suspects to be created through multiple witness description, greatly improving the sketch artistry process. Krissy did a very good job on explaining sketch artistry and its use. I have always heard of sketch artists and their uses for finding suspects, but I never knew the exact process. I always thought it was done by police officers at the police station, not by trained artists. Another aspect Krissy did well was explaining both sides. For example she stated how the program has some glitches and cannot always be accurate. It shows that she read the article carefully to find this. Krissy also did a good job in explaining how the programs both take away jobs of sketch artists, but also allow police funds to be allocated towards more important endeavors.
Although Krissy did a good job with her review, it can have some improvements. For example, could have done a better job explaining the exact problems the program has. In the article itself, the author goes extensively into this subject. Krissy only mentions these weaknesses. Krissy also could have improved here grammar. Although it did not take away too much from the reading, it made some statements a bit confusing. This problem can be easily fixed, however.
Krissy’s review showed me some very interesting aspects of sketch artistry that I did not know of before. Sketch artistry was always a vague topic for me, but Krissy helped answer my questions about it. Krissy’s review was a very good read.
I think Krissy represented the main idea of the article "From Click to Capture: Making the Case for Digital Composite Images" very straightforwardly and engagingly. She didn't just dully list off what the key points of the article were. Instead, she explained why the article is important and included the controversial sides of the article. While adding new ideas, she kept the paragraph in focus and didn't stray into a different topic. Also, she showed the bad parts of the article as well instead of only presenting the good parts, which some people tend to do. Although overall I thought the review was very good, she could have taken out some unnecessary words such as "like". She could have given more insight to her thoughts as well. One interesting thing about the article I think was that it was another side of the information that we've been learning instead of textbook definitions and articles.
I thought Krissy did some good work here, most of, If not all of her material was factional and well presented. She first did a very good job on explaining sketch artistry and its use. Another thing that Krissy did very well was explaining both sides of the argument in her review which gave readers a better glance at this article. Krissy also did a good job in explaining how the sketch artists are losing their jobs because of reduction cuts, but it also allows police funds to be allocated towards more important actions. Although I thought Krissy did a good job in explaining this article there was some stuff that could have been added. She could have done a better job explaining the exact problems the program has. In the article itself, the author goes extensively into this subject. Krissy only mentions these weaknesses. Another thing that I noticed was spelling and punctuation marks, maybe next time she can re read her work over before she publishes it for the world to see. Lastly I thought it was very interesting all the technology that is at our fingertips. This article shaped the way I look at this kind of stuff and how scientist get stuff done.
Krissy summarized Michael W. Streed’s “From Click to Capture: Making the Case for Digital Composite Images” article well, because she mentioned all his main points. This includes: introducing facial composite images, mentioning why sketch artists are not commonly used, introducing digital images, explaining the pros and cons, and stating the opinion of Streed in favor of the technology. Krissy made the good point that Streed contradicts himself. First, Streed advocates that using computer software to recreate facial composites should be used, because real forensic artists require extensive training time and money, but then he says that properly trained forensic artists are still needed. Krissy made another good observation that Streed did not delve into how digital composite images are produced, which may have helped clarify the pros and cons of using the new technology.
Krissy could improve her review by proofreading it and concluding with a critical analysis of whether Streed’s points actually made sense. She agreed that Streed seemingly contradicted himself, but she could have evaluated the information he gave and decided that although digital images are cheaper, they are not very beneficial. She did, however, mention that the new technology might put some people out of business, which was a good statement against Streed’s argument.
I think that Streed’s case for digital composite images is not very strong and perhaps it will not be a viable solution until it is equal in quality as good as hiring a good composite sketch artist. Before reading the article, I never knew that police composite sketch artists needed so much training. I just assumed that nearly any talented artist who drew realistically would be able to draw a sketch.
I thought that Krissy reviewed this article well. One good aspect of her review is that it shows both sides of the argument presented in the article. She explained what sketch artistry is, and how it is used very well. She also did a good job of explaining why sketch artists are not commonly used, due to innovations like digital imaging. She could have improved her review by explaining some specific things more, like problems the program has had. She also could have included some specific details about the article itself. This article really informed me on what sketch artistry is like in the real world, as opposed to what we’re shown in movies and television.
I enjoyed Krissy's review on the article "From Click to Capture: Making the case for Digital Composite Images" immensly. This article discusses how the computer program that is used to create "sketches" of suspects is greatly underused and why it is so. I thought Krissy did an excellent job on explaining the role of sketch artistry. In several crime shows, I witnessed the role of a "sketch artist" and understood the basics of what they did. Krissy's article explained this to a much deeper level than I knew. What I appreciated of this review was that Krissy showed both sides, this gives us perspective and not to become close-minded towards one group.
I thought Krissy did an excellent job on her review. I found the topic to be very interesting and she drew me into this topic. I would say that something Krissy could have added to make her review even better could have been explaining in more detail the errors the program has. I would have enjoyed to read a bit more about that. Other than that I can't say I have any other improvements for her review.
Krissy explained a topic I only knew very little about. She did a great job and I look forward to reading and learning more about the future of "sketch artists."
I thought that Krissy did a good job with her article review of “From Click to Capture: Making the Case for Digital Composite Images”. One of the things that Krissy did that I thought was good was that she gave both sides of the argument about using facial construction software. She gave both the positives and negative which helps the reader come up with their own opinion on the topic. Krissy also did a great job about giving detail about the sketch artistry and how the are connected with the police in helping identify the suspect. I thought that Krissy could have made this stronger by including a little more detail on the skeet artist them self’s and the process that they go through into making a sketch. Could have talked more about the facial software and how its better then the artist sketch. I thought this would have made the article stronger. This was an interesting article. I find it interesting that newer technologies are coming into play in the forensic work area. Found out more about sketch artist that I didn’t know and how they play an important role in forensic science. Overall I thought that krissy did a great job with this article.
I thought Krissy did a good job reviewing the article entitled From Click to Capture: Making the Case for Digital Composite Images. She presented Streed's facts well. From reading the review, I know that a popular option of identification is to receive a digital facial composite sketch. This is where the face is recreated online or through a program. Streed does not describe the actual program itself in his article, and I like that Krissy touched on this. Krissy also gave us a link to where we can view the article, which I thought was a smart idea. It lets the reader see that the review is credible to what the article is stating. Krissy could have proofread the review a little more because there are some grammatical errors that make the review confusing. I also think the negative aspect of these programs could have been touched on a bit more. I like the whole idea of this new piece of equipment, but there will always be a downside. As I read the article itself, I began to think about why programs like these are putting people out of work. Its because having computers do the job is cheaper than paying workers each week. Unemployment will always be an issue when we find technology can be used more efficiently.
My peer Krissy wrote an article about how the tool of composite imagery is so in under used in today’s force. There were three facts that caught my like how many sketch artists are under used and very expensive to pay to draw a detailed image from an account from an eye witness. The second thing was how because of the under usage and how expensive their expertise is that it is much cheaper to use other methods like digital work up of someone or someone with less skill. An the third is that there is a benefit to saving money on composite sketches, police stations can put more money and effort into other parts of their facility that may need it more or that could benefit from new materials. The two things I thought Krissy could work on would be to introduce the article with the tittle and where she got it. The second thing she could have fixed was she could have included more pros and cons of the article. Overall it was an interesting summary to read and I really had no idea that we had stopped using sketch artists, fascinating!
My peer Krissy wrote an article about how the tool of composite imagery is so in under used in today’s force. There were three facts that caught my like how many sketch artists are under used and very expensive to pay to draw a detailed image from an account from an eye witness. The second thing was how because of the under usage and how expensive their expertise is that it is much cheaper to use other methods like digital work up of someone or someone with less skill. An the third is that there is a benefit to saving money on composite sketches, police stations can put more money and effort into other parts of their facility that may need it more or that could benefit from new materials. The two things I thought Krissy could work on would be to introduce the article with the tittle and where she got it. The second thing she could have fixed was she could have included more pros and cons of the article. Overall it was an interesting summary to read and I really had no idea that we had stopped using sketch artists, fascinating!
I thought this article was very informative and there really one flaw beside some spelling mistake. I could understand and the article was interesting with all the new technology and artist software. There is a lot of content in this article that we didn't learn about. At first I didn't really knew much about these type of technology but now I feel more informed and that people should be more interested in this type of technology. I hope in the future more and more people can grow up to learn more about this subject and discover new things so we can open a door to new and better things.
Post a Comment