In addition, in this instance regarding Commission Exhibit 133B which I have just stated, I have identified as being photographed or exposed in the camera which is Exhibit 750, for this to be a composite, they would have had to make a picture of the background with an individual standing there, and then substitute the face, and retouch it and then possibly rephotograph it and retouch that negative, and make a print, and then photograph it with this camera, which is Commission Exhibit 750, in order to have this negative which we have identified with the camera, and is Commission Exhibit 749.
This to me is beyond reasonable doubt, it just doesn't seem that it would be at all possible, in this particular photograph.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Shaneyfelt, did you attempt to determine whether 133A had been photographed through the camera, Commission Exhibit 750?
Mr. Shaneyfelt. No; I did not, because in order to make an examination to determine whether a photograph is made with a particular camera, you must have the negative or you must have a print of the negative that shows that shadowgraph area, and Commission Exhibit 133A does not show that shadowgraph area.
Therefore, no comparison could be made. It is not possible.
Mr. Eisenberg. Does the shadowgraph area show on 133B?
Mr. Shaneyfelt. No; it does not.
Mr. Eisenberg. Why does it not show on either 133 A or B?
M. Shaneyfelt. Because they are printed in a normal processing procedure, where this area is normally blocked out to give a nice white border and make the picture a little more artistic. In the printing process, masks are placed over the area, or the shadowgraph, in order to cover it up, and the resulting print is a photograph with a nice white border.
Mr. Eisenberg. So that you have to have the negative to make the kind of identification you have made for us earlier?