I believe in the US it's ALWAYS been the case that every piece of evidence, including photographs, only be allowed if there is someone to testify that they either took the photograph or at least that the photograph is an accurate representation of what they themselves saw. Film or digital.
Digital photography is being increasingly recognized and used in law enforcement as an efficient tool that enables instant viewing and distribution of images that aid in criminal investigations. The major concern about digital photography is its admissibility as evidence in court, since it can be manipulated with computer software. Traditional film-based photography, however, can also be manipulated, either in the course of taking the original photograph or in developing the film. Under current rules of evidence, any party seeking to introduce a film-based photograph must demonstrate its relevancy (i.e., add to the likelihood that an event did or did not occur) and authenticity (i.e., a knowledgeable person must verify the image's accuracy).
