What's the right thing to do?

Tigger.ufo said:
So he has sent it to Calumnet.

...what did they say? Is the wiggly line that you can see a scratch or not? or is there actually another scratch which has been caused by him trying to clean it?
Click to expand...
He said that they said it was a scratch. Must have been a scratch that can change position and flip upside down.
 
The23rdman said:
He said that they said it was a scratch. Must have been a scratch that can change position and flip upside down.
Click to expand...


Now, did they say that the wiggly line was a scratch or that the sensor was scratched?

...makes a difference...
 
Tigger.ufo said:
Now, did they say that the wiggly line was a scratch or that the sensor was scratched?

...makes a difference...
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that they said it was the wiggle line.
 
If it was me and due to the inconsistencies,
I'd be thinking "photoshop"
As I was hinting at in a previous post ;)
 
Tigger.ufo said:
Yes, but Dean has it on his image too!
Click to expand...
But in that image it apears a lot smaller and fainter too.
The other one just looks a little to prominent to me.

But of course not having had that issue, Its purely conjecture on my part ;)
 
Ask him for a written quotation from Calumet following their inspection. Chances are he wont be able to produce one. Even if there is a scratch what can never be determined is 'how' or 'when' this occurred and therefore cannot be proved. Therefore, this can not be 'proved' or attributed to any individual. Unless, you have an original frame (exif data). Even so proving your camera / computer was set at the right time / date is yet another issue.. This isn't going anywhere put the onus back to him to prove it, then challenge it, then ignore it.
 
Says he has the report...
 
I've asked him for it.
 
yip it seems very prominent to me to im sure you would have seen that sticking out like a sore thumb dean was it just me or did it flip upside down , i didnt look at your photo bud but could it be that what they used to clean the sensor with has went into the crack/scratch and is showing up more? its a wieird one thats for sure
 
How do you know the photos were taken when he said? Surely all he has to do is change the date.
 
After a month I wouldn't even be entertaining his complaint to be honest. You sold it on gum tree as is. He has no right to return the camera and certainly not after a month regardless if the sensor is scratched or not. Anybody could have scratched it.
 
hoochy1 said:
yip it seems very prominent to me to im sure you would have seen that sticking out like a sore thumb dean was it just me or did it flip upside down , i didnt look at your photo bud but could it be that what they used to clean the sensor with has went into the crack/scratch and is showing up more? its a wieird one thats for sure
Click to expand...
I've no idea, but, yes, it does appear to have magically flipped. :S

munch said:
How do you know the photos were taken when he said? Surely all he has to do is change the date.
Click to expand...

Agreed, except that the market photos were taken in Northampton and I know he doesn't live here.

ecoleman said:
After a month I wouldn't even be entertaining his complaint to be honest. You sold it on gum tree as is. He has no right to return the camera and certainly not after a month regardless if the sensor is scratched or not. Anybody could have scratched it.
Click to expand...

I just want to be fair.
 
Did he actually say he had sent it to Calumet or just that they'd said it would cost hundreds? might be he just asked them what a new sensor would cost and it really is only a hair or fibre on the surface. I can't see how it would be possible for a scratch to move the way it seems to in his images unless he's been shooting at crazy angles and doing some editing.
 
Steep said:
Did he actually say he had sent it to Calumet or just that they'd said it would cost hundreds? might be he just asked them what a new sensor would cost and it really is only a hair or fibre on the surface. I can't see how it would be possible for a scratch to move the way it seems to in his images unless he's been shooting at crazy angles and doing some editing.
Click to expand...
He has sent it in and had a report back. I don't get it either, but then he does like shooting at f22 for no reason...
 
I tend to favour shooting at a very small aperture such as f22 or f16 for maximum depth of field for many subjects so that in itself is not unreasonable. Zig zag scratches now that is very questionable, most scratches are in a straight line or perhaps with a slight curvature. One end will invariably be deeper as the entry point as it tapers off at the end. Even if we are talking nano mills at this junction. A straight scratch could be accidental but a zig zag.... I'll let you conclude. A permanent mark will remain in the same place (stating the obvious apologies). Anyway nothing further to add at this stage. Good luck with this but I wouldn't worry as I stated earlier.


Sent from my iPad using Talk Photography Forums
 
He has accepted that it's a hair. He's going to send the hair back to me instead of the camera. ;)
 
I'm glad you "won"... and he saw reason (also, probably a message here about sending repairs to Calumet... )

Thanks for a really entertaining thread - I've gone through a bag of peanuts and 2 bottle of Peroni reading it :ty::beer:
 
Good result in the end. Either repairs are rubbish or the buyer was bluffing!!
 
I thought as much I'm very cynical, I like to give people the benefit of doubt. But there are so many people who try it on.
 
Thanks to all for being a decent sounding board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top