FORENSIC SOLUTIONS / IMAGE AUTHENTICITY
Follow the traces behind an image.
Investigate suspected duplication, compression history, file structure and provenance with complementary image-forensics tools. Move from a specific question to a targeted visual exhibit, with the source file kept separate from derived outputs.
01 / EXAMINATION CAPABILITIES
Ask a better question.
See more of the evidence.
Does the image contain a duplication, provenance record or inconsistent image signal?
Duplication & manipulation signals
Locate a prominent copied region, inspect a suspected splice area and compare local diagnostic maps.
Explore duplication & manipulation signalsProvenance & source characteristics
Check embedded content credentials, inspect file structure and compare sensor-pattern or encoding characteristics with suitable references.
Explore provenance & source characteristicsGeometry & clearer viewing
Test annotated shadow correspondences, make calibrated image measurements and reduce noise using captured information.
Explore geometry & clearer viewing02 / FROM SOURCE TO OUTPUT
A practical route
through the evidence.
Region maps, duplication correspondences, provenance checks and diagnostic measurements.
- 01
Preserve the source file
Work from the original image where possible. Screenshots and social-media re-encoding can remove metadata, provenance and compression signals.
- 02
Triangulate the question
Combine duplication search, compression diagnostics, local image statistics or content-credential checks according to the suspected issue.
- 03
Make the signal visible
Inspect mapped regions and correspondence points alongside file-level outputs. Create a separate non-generative viewing copy when noise obscures the image.
The original image, suitable native-resolution references where required, and a defined region or question.
03 / A MORE CONNECTED PROCESS
Less fragmented work.
More visible context.
Bring repeatable processing and measured comparisons into the workflow. Time and cost depend on the source material, selected methods and reporting scope.
| The task | Manual workflow | With Admissible Lab |
|---|---|---|
| Prepare material | Organise files and prepare each comparison separately. | Use defined input requirements and linked source material. |
| Inspect relevant features | Locate features and record observations individually. | Combine targeted processing with quantified or mapped outputs. |
| Connect the record | Collect notes and derived exhibits across separate tools. | Carry selected outputs and source context into reporting. |
| Assess performance | Effort varies with the material and the examination task. | Evaluate suitability and validation for each specific method. |
04 / PRACTICAL QUESTIONS
Know what
to bring.
Technical scope
Compression-based workflows require a suitable JPEG. Sensor comparison requires at least eight appropriate reference frames and has limited validation. Missing provenance is inconclusive, and a diagnostic map is not a tampering verdict.
Can image analysis prove that a photograph is authentic?
The workflows address specific signals rather than universal authenticity. An intact provenance manifest provides a different kind of evidence from compression, duplication or synthetic-image screening.
Can I analyse a social-media image?
Some visual workflows can operate on a downloaded image, but re-encoding may remove the signal required by a particular method. Original files usually preserve more useful information than screenshots or reposts.
Does enhancement generate missing detail?
No. The image enhancement workflow reduces noise using existing captured information. It creates a viewing copy and does not perform generative reconstruction or super-resolution.
YOUR NEXT INVESTIGATION
Start with the question.
See what is possible.
Explore the workflows with your evidence requirements in mind.