M9reno Posted July 9, 2014 Share #1 Posted July 9, 2014 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) New airport security measures in the UK require electronic equipment carried in hand luggage to be charged and capable of being turned on for inspection, or else be prohibited from being carried onto the aircraft. This includes "cameras or other camera equipment". I wonder how many film users will get grief when they are asked to switch on their meter-less cameras, for example any Leica before the M5, or indeed any Leica camera without an LCD screen? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28226552 Can people going through UK security with such cameras please advise on their experience? Edited July 9, 2014 by M9reno Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 Hi M9reno, Take a look here Film and new airport security measures. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted July 9, 2014 Share #2 Posted July 9, 2014 A film camera is no electronic equipment. I think they forgot. Anyway you can simply turn it on by winding it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted July 9, 2014 Share #3 Posted July 9, 2014 "No complete list has been provided but the general advice applies anything "with a battery"" Given that many people are unfamiliar with Leica M film (or even just any film) cameras, it would seem logical not to load film when traveling by air just in case they want to check that there's actually no battery inside;). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted July 9, 2014 Author Share #4 Posted July 9, 2014 I figure if any one is silly enough to object to not being able to turn on an M3, they won't know the difference if what you turn on is, say, a Voigtlander or MR meter attached to the accessory shoe. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted July 9, 2014 Share #5 Posted July 9, 2014 Back in early 1980s I strayed in restricted area at Heathrow with camera in hand (Pentax MX). This mini incident was cleared with security in an instant who wanted to look through the detached lens to assure themselves it was a tube filled with glass and not some sinister contraption full of Semtex. Problem today is security staff working than are retired now. Nowadays I would suggest travelling with empty camera so you can open film compartment to show nothing inside. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted July 9, 2014 Share #6 Posted July 9, 2014 Nowadays I would suggest travelling with empty camera so you can open film compartment to show nothing inside. That would be my approach. If you run into a Barney Fife TSA type, you can take your lens and camera base plate off, set the shutter to B, hold down the shutter release, show Deputy Fife the open hole in the shutter gate and say "See? No bomb." Hopefully that will satisfy the good Deputy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted July 9, 2014 Author Share #7 Posted July 9, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes - the response should be: a meterless film camera is always ON and cannot be turned OFF. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 9, 2014 Share #8 Posted July 9, 2014 Anyone who says to a security man or woman at an airport "See, no bomb", deserves the full rubber glove treatment, if you ask me. These people have a crap job to do in very difficult and stressful circumstances. Wise cracks should always be treated with an appropriate response. Just my 2p'th 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted July 9, 2014 Share #9 Posted July 9, 2014 Passing through a West Germany airport in 1979 with an SLR, the security lady made me take a picture to show it was a functional camera. I ran across the slide of her last year in old boxes. Things really haven't changed much! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted July 9, 2014 Share #10 Posted July 9, 2014 These people have a crap job to do in very difficult and stressful circumstances. I've been dealt with by security people who managed to be professional, polite and pleasant whilst doing their job thoroughly. I've also met idiots who were none of the above. IMO those who lack professionalism probably can't do their job as well as those who are professional in their approach, and I'm happier and feel more secure dealing with someone displaying a professional attitude. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 9, 2014 Share #11 Posted July 9, 2014 That's really my point. There are good and bad people in every profession, but wise-cracking someone who has had a bad night's sleep or just rowed with their husband, is not likely to turn out well. It demands a "professional" approach from those of us who are passing though security to enable everyone to have a good experience. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 9, 2014 Share #12 Posted July 9, 2014 Anyone who says to a security man or woman at an airport "See, no bomb", deserves the full rubber glove treatment, if you ask me. These people have a crap job to do in very difficult and stressful circumstances. Wise cracks should always be treated with an appropriate response. Just my 2p'th Actually, cracking a joke like that can get you pulled from the line and have you answering difficult questions whilst the plane departs.... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M9reno Posted July 9, 2014 Author Share #13 Posted July 9, 2014 The problem is not with professionalism, but with the same kind of stubborn incomprehension that leads UK security to ignore a request to hand-check film because "going through X-rays will do nothing to it." Likewise I expect a perfectly professional agent these days might well wonder why there are no batteries in a film camera and lend only a deaf ear to the explanation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted July 9, 2014 Share #14 Posted July 9, 2014 Had one experience about 5 years ago when the security lady could not comprehend a camera without an lcd screen on the back. The M6 and three lenses were put through a 'sniffer' to make sure there was no trace of explosive. No harm to the film that was in it Gerry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 9, 2014 Share #15 Posted July 9, 2014 I had my M7 I had at the time fully swabbed, lens off, bottom off checked when leaving an airport once. It was at Frankfurt. They must see lots of Leicas going through Frankfurt.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted July 9, 2014 Share #16 Posted July 9, 2014 At a time, in the digital era, while I was carrying out industrial site inspections, I was allowed to use my M2 on a large North Sea gas terminal site. I had to leave my MR meter at the site safety office, but they were otherwise satisfied that it offered no risk. I guess those guys have to be fairly knowledgeable to understand fire & explosion hazards. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted July 10, 2014 Share #17 Posted July 10, 2014 Paul - While I was still a steely-eye killer with USAF, stationed in North Dakota they issued us all natural fiber parkas since we would be in Minuteman launchers and didn't want to risk a static electric spark possibly caused by nylon shelled parkas. Never mind that a blow torch applied directly to the solid full in the first stage would not ignite it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Lemon Posted July 10, 2014 Share #18 Posted July 10, 2014 Every flight I travel with an M - film or not - I get hand luggage searched in major airports. This has happened recently in UK, Australia, UAE and USA. I asked security at Heathrow recently why I was always pulled over and he said the denseness of the M body meant that they could not see through it. That why I was stopped. On Latin American flights with my film M they always insist on scanning the film rather than swabbing each canister - have given up fighting it and just take digital M there now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Lemon Posted July 10, 2014 Share #19 Posted July 10, 2014 The problem is not with professionalism, but with the same kind of stubborn incomprehension that leads UK security to ignore a request to hand-check film because "going through X-rays will do nothing to it." Likewise I expect a perfectly professional agent these days might well wonder why there are no batteries in a film camera and lend only a deaf ear to the explanation. I was told by a guy who worked at Ilford film once that... 100 speed = 10 airport scans safely 400 = 7 scans safely 800 = 4 scans safely I have had Delta 400 scanned 8 times in Latin America and no problems in processing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Lemon Posted July 10, 2014 Share #20 Posted July 10, 2014 I was told by a guy who worked at Ilford film once that... 100 speed = 10 airport scans safely 400 = 7 scans safely 800 = 4 scans safely I have had Delta 400 scanned 8 times in Latin America and no problems in processing. Sorry should add these are hand baggage scans - hold baggage no chance! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.