stray cat Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46001 Posted January 18, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Wayne I never let film rolls (in their Domke anti-Rays bags showed above) in checked luggage, but always with me in cabin , during all my humanitarian missions and also during vacation travels I have no problem when I develop myself at home. You're right about strong bombardment when your checked luggages pass X-Rays doors. X-rays are harmful to human health when you travel a lot , that's why x-rays porticos are less strong for you and for security employees Best Henry Henry - last time I went to the USA I took film in the Domke lead-lined bags. All was good going through Australian customs but at LAX the duty inspector decided he didn't know what the bag was all about so he called on his senior officer - who was unavailable for about the next half an hour. So I was held up while they sorted themselves out - they really didn't know what to make of the Domke bag and in the end it cost me about 45 minutes of standing around like a... well, you know what like. I've had Tri-X film scanned and fogged (when I went through a lot of scans - all in on-board bags) but apart from that I've had no problems with a few X-rays. It is worth asking for a hand inspection, Wayne - sometimes they grant you one, other times not - but at least you'll probably avoid some scans if someone does agree to hand inspect. Just don't carry film in checked luggage - ever. Or your cameras for that matter - if you are like me, you'd rather know they are safely with you. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 18, 2018 Posted January 18, 2018 Hi stray cat, Take a look here I like film...(open thread). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Doc Henry Posted January 18, 2018 Author Share #46002 Posted January 18, 2018 For Phil and Adam not taken at the same time : one in winter 2018 , one in summer 2017 not the same camera , not the same lens , not the same film ... but at the same place Leicaflex SL-Summicron 50-Kodak Portra 160 dev in Tetenal 38°C-Nikon Coolscan 5000 16bits Tiff >Jpeg Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Leica M7-35 Summicron Asph-Cinestill 50 dev in Tetenal 38°C-Nikon Coolscan 5000 16 bits Tiff>Jpeg Your thoughts ? Best Henry 10 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Leica M7-35 Summicron Asph-Cinestill 50 dev in Tetenal 38°C-Nikon Coolscan 5000 16 bits Tiff>Jpeg Your thoughts ? Best Henry ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?do=findComment&comment=3442776'>More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted January 18, 2018 Author Share #46003 Posted January 18, 2018 Henry - last time I went to the USA I took film in the Domke lead-lined bags. All was good going through Australian customs but at LAX the duty inspector decided he didn't know what the bag was all about so he called on his senior officer - who was unavailable for about the next half an hour. So I was held up while they sorted themselves out - they really didn't know what to make of the Domke bag and in the end it cost me about 45 minutes of standing around like a... well, you know what like. I've had Tri-X film scanned and fogged (when I went through a lot of scans - all in on-board bags) but apart from that I've had no problems with a few X-rays. It is worth asking for a hand inspection, Wayne - sometimes they grant you one, other times not - but at least you'll probably avoid some scans if someone does agree to hand inspect. Just don't carry film in checked luggage - ever. Or your cameras for that matter - if you are like me, you'd rather know they are safely with you. .... perhaps you are a victim of one rather zealous Australian customs officer Phil Best Henry 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46004 Posted January 18, 2018 Love the drama, Jean Marc; just the right amount. I have the same camera and had a blast with it on my last family vacation in the water. The lens is pretty good and it is so easy to use. Love the Acros, too, btw. From the Nikon L35 AW with Acros 100 whilst kayaking at sea :-) Buziós by JM__, on Flickr Cheers, JM. Thanks, Edward. You might be right about the colors although it was very dark outside so there really wasn't much color. I actually am rather impressed at how the greens in the side of the bridge came through as they really were not very apparent at the time. And also am impressed that I got minimal orange cat from the street lights, which I think the portras would have given me more of. I really like the Ektar version. The colors seem slightly more muted, perhaps due to the long exposure? Hi Henry - just to be clear, I have no problem with the green cast. I actually thought it was a photo from Iceland northern lights as I was first scrolling down. I am just offended by the schmootz as I don't see how anyone could accept this as a final product to hang on a wall. Adam , it's correct , just to try but I prefer Portra or Ektar , it reminds me Fuji with sometimes green veil Best Henry Wow, fantastic colors, Phil. Congrats on the successful home development!! It would be interesting to see the schmootz on the Cinestill 50 if you are willing. There are some who think it is an aberration (e.g., per a thread in the "Film" forum) and recent examples are helpful to dissuade folks and put them on notice. We've just developed our second batch of three C41 films - two Agfa Vistas and a Cinestill 50. Unfortunately the Cinestill has a fair bit of schmootz (is that the word?) and, as well, I'm finding it is difficult to scan. However the Agfa Vista 400 is sensational. I really like this film: Rosebud Carnival 2018 Canon F1N, FDn 50mm f3.5 macro, Agfa Vista 400 (home developed in Tetenal chemicals) 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46005 Posted January 18, 2018 For Phil and Adam not taken at the same time : one in winter 2018 , one in summer 2017 not the same camera , not the same lens , not the same film ... but at the same place Leicaflex SL-Summicron 50-Kodak Portra 160 dev in Tetenal 38°C-Nikon Coolscan 5000 16bits Tiff >Jpeg Image2rxcatkp16lxslrlhvn+++550.jpg Leica M7-35 Summicron Asph-Cinestill 50 dev in Tetenal 38°C-Nikon Coolscan 5000 16 bits Tiff>Jpeg Image17cinestillm7vvsatrlhvn+++550.jpg Your thoughts ? Best Henry Henry - If the Cinestill 50 is good, I have always said that it is very similar to Portra 160 except that (i) is has a slightly more native golden cast and (ii) is a little more work in the editing phase to bring to life. Having said this, thee is visible schmootz in the upper left corner of your image, which make the portra 160 the winner by default 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46006 Posted January 18, 2018 From the Nikon L35 AW with Acros 100 whilst kayaking at sea :-) Buziós by JM__, on Flickr Cheers, JM. Reposting, oops ! Buziós by JM__, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46007 Posted January 18, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Another from the Acros 100 - Nikon L35 AW roll: Buziós by JM__, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46008 Posted January 18, 2018 Acros 100 SWC Hasselblad Vedado, La Habana by JM__, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post edwardkaraa Posted January 18, 2018 Popular Post Share #46009 Posted January 18, 2018 M7 ZM 50/2 Provia 100F by edward karaa, on Flickr 23 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46010 Posted January 18, 2018 I have heard that, at least in USA, film will undergo much stronger x-ray bombardment if it is packed in checked luggage, rather than in carry-on luggage. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this? Best, Wayne yes it is .... NEVER leave film in a checked bag, only bring it on board. x-rays are supposed to be safe to 400, and I certainly never had any problem with 400 or less. Traveled back from London to NYC with Cinestill 800 that Adam brought to London and it was fine as well. Story from Salgado is that when you blow it up to his size prints you do see a loss from even on trip ... so, I suppose it depends on final usage ... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46011 Posted January 18, 2018 Say "Cheese" by JM__, on Flickr Provia 100 Ricoh GR1V Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46012 Posted January 18, 2018 Wayne - Yes, Steve is absolutely correct that security x-rays on checked luggage (not only in the USA) are far stronger than what is used on carry-on luggage. Back when I still traveled with film (400 & 100 ISO), I'd remove the boxes at home and put the film in zip-lock bags still in their canisters. At most airports I could successfully have them hand inspect (but never at Heathrow -- !@#$!), and when they'd tell me it's safe for up to 400 ISO I'd point out that x-ray exposure is cumulative, and I have "N" number of flights. (X-ray exposure is cumulative). We've had holidays with up to a dozen flights. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46013 Posted January 18, 2018 Wayne - Yes, Steve is absolutely correct that security x-rays on checked luggage (not only in the USA) are far stronger than what is used on carry-on luggage. Back when I still traveled with film (400 & 100 ISO), I'd remove the boxes at home and put the film in zip-lock bags still in their canisters. At most airports I could successfully have them hand inspect (but never at Heathrow -- !@#$!), and when they'd tell me it's safe for up to 400 ISO I'd point out that x-ray exposure is cumulative, and I have "N" number of flights. (X-ray exposure is cumulative). We've had holidays with up to a dozen flights. It is cummulative, recently had Portra 800 and TriX "fogged" from multiple x-ray exposures (6+) even though I had kept them in my hand luggage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ricoh Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46014 Posted January 18, 2018 (edited) yes it is .... NEVER leave film in a checked bag, only bring it on board. x-rays are supposed to be safe to 400, and I certainly never had any problem with 400 or less. Traveled back from London to NYC with Cinestill 800 that Adam brought to London and it was fine as well. Story from Salgado is that when you blow it up to his size prints you do see a loss from even on trip ... so, I suppose it depends on final usage ... This provides a good explanation of the effects of X-Ray energy on film. http://printerattic.com/2016/12/travelling-with-film/#scienceFogging occur widely unlike local ionisation from visible light. So fogging rather than latent image creation. The summary suggests a limit of 5 passes through carry-on luggage scanners, and to avoid the much higher energies associated with X-rays scanning of suitcases etc destined for the hold. Edited January 18, 2018 by Steve Ricoh 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46015 Posted January 18, 2018 Acros 100 is safe ! waiting for the storm by JM__, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46016 Posted January 18, 2018 It is cummulative, recently had Portra 800 and TriX "fogged" from multiple x-ray exposures (6+) even though I had kept them in my hand luggage. Don't forget that film goes through multiple x-rays already before it reaches you. I order my film online and it gets shipped from the US to Thailand. Who knows how many times it goes through these evil machines on its way 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46017 Posted January 18, 2018 M7 ZM 50/2 Provia 100F by edward karaa, on Flickr 13 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMF Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46018 Posted January 18, 2018 Sahart, Northwestern Sahara, Morocco by _JM_, on Flickr Agfa RSX 50 - Horizon 202 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suede Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46019 Posted January 18, 2018 Masters of patience Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Ilford hp5 13 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Ilford hp5 ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/205842-i-like-filmopen-thread/?do=findComment&comment=3442951'>More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted January 18, 2018 Share #46020 Posted January 18, 2018 ...Only film gives at the moment the true color Just look at the file of one picture > film Tiff =110 Mo and DNG M =10 Mo . Where are color and details in digital ? ...Remember when you compare digital picture versus film scan it lacks a lot of details in b&w as in color One file of film in Tiff (110 Mo) is x10 times more than digital DNG (10-12 Mo) We see in the result.. These statements simply are not true. A tiff file — because of its structure: you can read up on it — is at least 3-4 times larger than a DNG file, although they both contain the same amount of information. So, an M10 DNG is about 30MB and an exported TIFF from the DNG is about 140MB — and both contain the same amount of information. It's the structure of the TIFF files that makes scan files so much larger than DNGs. Similarly, an M9 DNG is about 18MB and the exported TIFF is about 108MB. BTW, it's been a long time since most people on this forum shot 10MB DNG files. Since I got the M10, for the last nine months I’ve been shooting digital but, now, in Chiang Mai where there is an excellent analog photo lab, I hesitate each time I go out whether to take my M10 or the old M3. My general thinking though is to shoot color digitally and to shoot film occasionally for B&W. While I like the “roughness” of the above image from Paris shot nine months ago on Portra 400, my feeling is I could probably do something similar with the M10, considering that the DR Summicron-50 would flare either way in this strong back-light at that angle. Paris _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Instagram: @mitchalland Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now