Jump to content

The Leica Forum uses cookies. Read the privacy statement for more info. To remove this message, please click the button to the right:    OK, understood.

Photo
- - - - -

film ruined by airport security


  • Please log in to reply
122 replies to this topic

#1 sksaito

sksaito

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 103 posts
  • City / Ort:Hawaii

Posted 03 December 2011 - 17:05

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)
I HAD to take a roll of Ilford delta 100 still in my camera through airport security. I'm a beginner photographer so I have no experience in this matter. I thought the lower ASA films are okay and the higher ASA films have problems from security scanning. It got ruined; none of the exposures came out. Is there a canister or some protective case I can use to transport film through the airport? If so, where do I get them?

#2 bill

bill

    Sponsoring Member

  • Members
  • 11,906 posts
  • City / Ort:Frimley

Posted 03 December 2011 - 18:22

Wen you say "didn't come out" can you be more specific? Blank? Black? Fogged? Sprocket holes visible? Banding? I doubt that you have suffered from x-ray damage. I suspect something considerably more mundane.

Regards,

Bill
Bill Palmer

#3 andybarton

andybarton

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 26,690 posts
  • Location----- Airstrip 1 ----- 53°17'46'N, 03°05'02'W

Posted 03 December 2011 - 18:27

Airport scanners are perfectly safe with films, even with multiple passes. If you put film in lead bags or similar, they just turn up the x-rays do that they can see inside. I put mine in a clear plastic bag and place that separately on the conveyor, which means they don't need to use a higher power. I have never had a fogging problem, even with films that have been on several trips.

Try another film now you are not going through the airport and see what the results are.

Edited by andybarton, 03 December 2011 - 18:41.

Andy

 

 

Any comment here is just my opinion. Yours may differ.

Posts made with my Moderator hat on are in Bold Dark Red



Website: 18th January 2015
Blog: "Still My Turn This Year?": 25th May 2015


Leica User Book 2014


#4 Chuck Albertson

Chuck Albertson

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 405 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 18:33

If your film was really ruined by an x-ray scanner (unlikely these days), you can always do a book with the pictures:

photo-eye Bookstore | Rob Hornstra: Safety First | photo book

#5 stunsworth

stunsworth

    Sponsoring Member

  • Premium Member
  • 20,973 posts
  • City / Ort:The grim North

Posted 03 December 2011 - 18:33

As Bill says can you explain what you mean by "didn't come out"? If you could post an example that would be even better.
Steve

Website
Flickr
Twitter

#6 theendlesshouse

theendlesshouse

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 194 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 18:52

Depends on the airport, depends on the scanner but never completely blank? Was it in your carry on or in the cargo?
'The planet remains divided, the first world in a crisis of excess, the third world in a crisis of need.' Salgado

#7 NB23

NB23

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,395 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 18:53

You simply developed a blank roll.

#8 theendlesshouse

theendlesshouse

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 194 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 18:56

TSA: Traveling with Film
'The planet remains divided, the first world in a crisis of excess, the third world in a crisis of need.' Salgado

#9 Messsucherkamera

Messsucherkamera

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,077 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 21:29

If your film was really ruined by an x-ray scanner (unlikely these days), you can always do a book with the pictures:

photo-eye Bookstore | Rob Hornstra: Safety First | photo book


Safety First is entirely composed of negatives which were damaged by x-ray scanners during our stay in Grozny. In the Chechen capital, these scanners are not only placed at the entrance to the airport or government buildings, but also to shops, gyms, restaurants and outside on squares.

This was probably due to ancient scanners that put out about half the radiation of the Chernobyl reactor disaster.

Modern scanners in modern airports are supposed to be safe for all film that is ISO 1600 or slower. Key word being supposed.

My approach is to always ask for a hand inspection of my film. In U.S. airports, security people are required by law to hand check your film. In other nations, hand checks are a crap shoot - so I have read.

#10 andybarton

andybarton

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 26,690 posts
  • Location----- Airstrip 1 ----- 53°17'46'N, 03°05'02'W

Posted 03 December 2011 - 21:35

I had a hand check at Gatwick last year, but it pays to suss out the underlying ambience in the security room. I had a roll of Delta 3200 in my clear plastic bag, especially. I'm growing rather fond of that roll - it's been on holiday with me many times.

If they're busy, forget it. If not, ask very nicely, and they will probably do it for you. Chances are they'll swab your toothbrush for Semtex too, though.

Given that x-rays at airports are safe for film these days, it's not something that worries me at all.

Andy

 

 

Any comment here is just my opinion. Yours may differ.

Posts made with my Moderator hat on are in Bold Dark Red



Website: 18th January 2015
Blog: "Still My Turn This Year?": 25th May 2015


Leica User Book 2014


#11 earleygallery

earleygallery

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 12,885 posts
  • City / Ort:Gtr London

Posted 03 December 2011 - 21:52

Airport xray machines are safe for multiple passes of even fastest film. You either processed a blank roll, or didn't load it properly, or have a faulty camera.
  • billib said thank you to this
Regards,
James

croydonconfidential.blogspot.com

#12 AlanG

AlanG

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 5,714 posts

Posted 04 December 2011 - 02:25

Airport xray machines are safe for multiple passes of even fastest film.


That is not what the link to the TSA says:
----------------------------------------------------
At the passenger security checkpoint, you should remove the following types of film from your carry-on baggage and ask for a hand inspection:

Film with an ASA/ISO 800 or higher
Highly sensitive X-ray, medical or scientific films
Film of any speed which is subjected to X-ray surveillance more than 5 times (the effect of X-ray screening is cumulative)
Film that is or will be underexposed
Film that you intend to 'push process'
Sheet, large format and motion picture film
______________________________

It seems clear that the concern is over low level fogging of the film in the shadow region and they assume you won't notice this if your images are not going to be "underexposed." They certainly do not say that the X-rays do not have any effect on film. Just that it probably won't matter to you for the films that don't fall into the above categories.

So if low speed film responds to a cumulative low power X-ray exposure that can noticeably damage film after 6 times through the scanner, how is it that nothing is significantly changed on the first 5 passes?

But I agree that if the film in question was damaged by X-ray screening, there would still be images on it and the damage would not be uniform.

Edited by AlanG, 04 December 2011 - 02:33.


#13 sksaito

sksaito

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 103 posts
  • City / Ort:Hawaii

Posted 04 December 2011 - 07:59

Maybe you guys are right. Now that I think about it, the pics were blank. I swear I went through the entire roll with my Leica MP but who knows. I won't worry so much about the airport from now on. Thanks.

#14 stunsworth

stunsworth

    Sponsoring Member

  • Premium Member
  • 20,973 posts
  • City / Ort:The grim North

Posted 04 December 2011 - 10:12

Maybe you guys are right. Now that I think about it, the pics were blank


Yes, it sounds as if the film was never put through the camera. If the problem had been caused by X-rays the film would have been exposed - that's the problem.
Steve

Website
Flickr
Twitter

#15 farnz

farnz

    Sponsoring Member

  • Premium Member
  • 14,062 posts
  • LocationLondon

Posted 04 December 2011 - 11:33

Sounds to me like 'operator error'. Few of us can say that we haven't done that at some time or other.:o

Pete.
Eur. Ing. Pete F@rnsworth
Live and let live.
My tea is brewed in Russell's Teapot.

#16 earleygallery

earleygallery

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 12,885 posts
  • City / Ort:Gtr London

Posted 04 December 2011 - 16:16

I don't know what TSA is, but you can check the data on scanner manufacturers websites quite easily.

That is not what the link to the TSA says:
----------------------------------------------------
At the passenger security checkpoint, you should remove the following types of film from your carry-on baggage and ask for a hand inspection:

Film with an ASA/ISO 800 or higher
Highly sensitive X-ray, medical or scientific films
Film of any speed which is subjected to X-ray surveillance more than 5 times (the effect of X-ray screening is cumulative)
Film that is or will be underexposed
Film that you intend to 'push process'
Sheet, large format and motion picture film
______________________________

It seems clear that the concern is over low level fogging of the film in the shadow region and they assume you won't notice this if your images are not going to be "underexposed." They certainly do not say that the X-rays do not have any effect on film. Just that it probably won't matter to you for the films that don't fall into the above categories.

So if low speed film responds to a cumulative low power X-ray exposure that can noticeably damage film after 6 times through the scanner, how is it that nothing is significantly changed on the first 5 passes?

But I agree that if the film in question was damaged by X-ray screening, there would still be images on it and the damage would not be uniform.


Regards,
James

croydonconfidential.blogspot.com

#17 andybarton

andybarton

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 26,690 posts
  • Location----- Airstrip 1 ----- 53°17'46'N, 03°05'02'W

Posted 04 December 2011 - 16:18

The TSA is the Border Control Agency in the US. They are the ones with the special keys to open your luggage - the keys that no one else in the whole world has... :o

TSA | Transportation Security Administration | U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Andy

 

 

Any comment here is just my opinion. Yours may differ.

Posts made with my Moderator hat on are in Bold Dark Red



Website: 18th January 2015
Blog: "Still My Turn This Year?": 25th May 2015


Leica User Book 2014


#18 andym911

andym911

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 2,875 posts
  • City / Ort:Baden Baden

Posted 04 December 2011 - 16:28

There are no issues with AirPort xray equipment......operator error as mentioned above improbable cause..
Did you take the lens cap off ?;)

Andy
“No man hath given his child anything better than good manners.”
- Prophet Muhammad (570-632)

#19 Ronazle

Ronazle

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 672 posts
  • City / Ort:Rural in vicinity of Fort Worth

Posted 04 December 2011 - 17:09

The TSA is the Border Control Agency in the US. They are the ones with the special keys to open your luggage - the keys that no one else in the whole world has... :o

TSA | Transportation Security Administration | U.S. Department of Homeland Security


Just a slight correction for those who have an interest. TSA has considerable "border control" authority at points of entry along our borders, but is not dedicated to them. And while several entities (DEA, Customs, INS, et al,), along with TSA, have considerable presence along our borders, the only agency that is exclusively dedicated to border security is the highly efficient, very competent and often much maligned Border Patrol. Of course all of them are part of the incredibly large, confused, insanely organized, Alice in Wonderland spawned Department of Homeland Security. regards, ron
  • vanhulsenbeek said thank you to this

#20 AlanG

AlanG

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 5,714 posts

Posted 04 December 2011 - 19:08

I don't know what TSA is, but you can check the data on scanner manufacturers websites quite easily.


Since the people who actually buy and run the equipment (TSA) made those recommendations regarding scanning film, why wouldn't you believe them?




0 user(s) are reading this topic