The missing woman was indeed in the photo on the previous page, yet she was not quickly located.  Why?  Several factors played into this.  First and foremost was a lack of skills and experience on the part of the personnel for reviewing such data in the field.  Here are a few more:

• Because of the environment (100° temps), the CSI unit was uncomfortable, and images were briefly scanned rather than analyzed
• The viewers had no real experience in the analysis of aerial images.
• Inadequate training/experience on the part of the personnel with regards to operating the analyzing software
• Only half of the images provided on CD to staff in an office setting were reviewed because of lack of experience in exploring the contents of a photo CD
• The volume of data collected and the amount of overlap was excessive, leading to complacency in viewing slight "off angle" images.

Partial review by RPFS personnel resulted in the return to the scene to further explore possible targets, however nothing conclusive was discovered. We then turned to using software to analyze the photographs. The same image from the previous page was scanned by a specialized software.  Using this software, we were able to isolate a target which appeared to be a human body.  A ground search of the area, identified by GPS tags on the previous photo, confirmed that we had in fact discovered human remains which were later identified as those belonging to the missing victim.  Shown below is the image produced by our software.