Page 2 of 2

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 1:48 pm
by willbird
I took my own to Defiance county, the Sarge who does the CHL stuff INSISTED I go get passport photo's.

Once again they make up their own rules, a home printed photo is good enough for ATF but not Defiance County Ohio :-)

Bill

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 4:07 pm
by SMMAssociates
Bill:

How the heck can the Sarge tell?

Other than the size, and a relatively blank background, I could take a picture of you that would look just like the one my buddy took of me, and he's really a passport photographer.

(And, of course, I can adjust the size, and the background color to make it "legal"....)

OTOH, if you're outside playing with the dog, or something like that, it'd be fairly obvious....

IAC, given that the photo you submit is not "official", it shouldn't matter as long as it's recognizable. The only downside is that they can't use it in a "lineup" or "photo spread" as easily as the standard passport size & style.

"In Plain Sight" all over again.... But this is an easy one.

My problem with using a CHL as an ID is that it's really only a "Sheriff's Department" ID, and may not really be valid in another county. More likely, though, is that it's not going to really be valid in another state. 'Course, who knows what the folks looking at it will really think....

Drivers Licenses are a little too easy to get, although they've gotten fairly difficult to fake, but those who care have books to refer to - at least they can tell that the ID was issued wherever it says it was.... Not so with the CHL....

Regards,

Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2008 10:01 pm
by cashman966
willbird wrote:I took my own to Defiance county, the Sarge who does the CHL stuff INSISTED I go get passport photo's.

Once again they make up their own rules, a home printed photo is good enough for ATF but not Defiance County Ohio :-)

Bill

No Doubt


After digging a little the AG pamphlet says
The law requires that a color photo (front view, head and shoulders,
substantially similar to a 2-inch-by-2inch passport photo) taken within
30 days of the application date accompany the completed application
and references R.C. 2923.125(B)(2) which only states
(2) A color photograph of the applicant that was taken within thirty days prior to the date of the application;
Looks like the specs for the picture listed in the pamphlet, other than the color and time frame, are not "required by law" as stated. Does anyone know where this specs might have come from? Pulled from some deep dark crevice perhaps. I think I will contact the AG's office and find out.

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 12:53 am
by SMMAssociates
cashman:

I'd guess that the need for a picture had some logic to it (for once I doubt it was included to increase the PITA level), and the AG's suggestion to use a passport photo ("similar to....") makes some sense when you consider that they're easily available, or at least the spec is....

(Some spec - 2" square and color :).)

Saying "passport photo" also implies the plain background, which is significant in photo "line ups" used in LE. (The background is a distraction, and can influence choices.)

I'd guess that the folks who drew up the law figured that the Sheriff would pass the pictures around looking for "comments". After all, Toby Hoover said that nobody would bother applying anyway, so there'd be a lot of time to do it....

Regards,

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 4:52 am
by willbird
Bill:

How the heck can the Sarge tell?
He can tell if it is printed on plain paper, and especially if it is actually 2" x 2" exactly, that is a tad bigger than a true "passport photo". Once again it is time to grovel and do the simplest thing and run over to Rite Aid and get some passport photo's, the time to argue is not when your CHL application is on his desk.

Bill

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 8:49 am
by carmen fovozzo
When I applied for my CHL in 84 I had Walgrens make several copies. I'm useing the same picture I got 4 years ago. I'm just as pretty now as I was then. :wink:

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:32 am
by Cruiser
carmen fovozzo wrote:When I applied for my CHL in 84 I had Walgrens make several copies. I'm useing the same picture I got 4 years ago. I'm just as pretty now as I was then. :wink:
I want whatever you are drinking! :) You are useing a 24 year old picture! :shock:

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:16 pm
by carmen fovozzo
Cruiser wrote:
carmen fovozzo wrote:When I applied for my CHL in 84 I had Walgrens make several copies. I'm useing the same picture I got 4 years ago. I'm just as pretty now as I was then. :wink:
I want whatever you are drinking! :) You are useing a 24 year old picture! :shock:
DUH, I did mean 2004. :oops:

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:57 pm
by SMMAssociates
Carmen:

I wasn't here, and I didn't say this, but I was considering reusing the old pic, too....

I have one "original" (it was shot on Polaroid film as four headshots from one exposure), and scanned it for additional prints for PA and NH. I'll be 62 shortly, and just haven't changed to speak of, although I did get a little wider :(....

Or Joe and I will just take each other's picture with my little digital (I didn't have it then, or didn't think of it) and I'll crop & print 'em here. My cheap inkjet does excellent color prints on the right paper.

It may help if I can find a spare flash for "slave" purposes - two light sources make a better portrait, but I don't think anybody'll care. Might just use the "leaky" bounce light technique, where some light is diverted forward anyway. It helps to have white ceilings, though, if you're going to do that....

(I used to claim "advanced amateur" status in photography. Which meant that I had a mountain of equipment and some idea what to do with it. Turned out to be a better technician than artist. When we moved here in 1989 I never set the darkroom back up, and ended up giving my daughter's girlfriend most of it a couple years ago. She fizzled out, but her little sister's using the stuff. I wonder if I gave her the Crown Graphic? Lousy snapshot camera, but it made great negatives :).)

Regards,

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:20 pm
by Brian D.
I actually used one of those little sit-down photo booths at the mall for my picture taking. Think it was $3 for four poses, and you had time to make adjustments on-screen each time before the pic was taken.

Used the first three for strictly-bizness shots that would pass the sheriff's muster, then put on my hat and posed with a cigar for the last one. (Yes it occured to me to pose with my handgun drawn for that fourth picture, but the booth was out in the middle of the mall's aisle. :wink: )