How do you carry film through airports today?

[stray cat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently did a return trip to Europe and here is what I found:

1. I bought online the bulk of the film I'd be using in Europe (Portra 400) and had it sent to an address in Italy.

2. Melbourne Airport refused hand inspection. I was only carrying three rolls of Portra 160 which they unloaded from my Domke bag and put through their CT scanners.

3. The airport in Doha refused hand inspection and the film went through their CT scanners.

4. I used all the film on the trip and sent them to a lab in Europe (Carmencita, as it happens) for developing and sending back to me in Australia.

5. All the returned films, including the initial three rolls of Portra 160, seemed fine to my reasonably but arguably not overly critical eye. The Portra 400s seemed slightly less grainy and a tad contrastier than the Portra 160s.

6. In future, where possible, I will buy film and have it processed at the destination. This is generally slightly more expensive but saves stress. Where not possible/practicable, I'll take a Domke bag and be more insistent on its use.

7. Being polite and courteous is the way we should always act as human beings, airport staff are just doing their job no matter what we think of the policies of their management.

This all then just becomes a process and still enables us to enjoy shooting film.

 

[Aryel]

I either do what was described above: get the films delivered to my destination directly and get it processed locally. I do this when traveling with my kids on long flights.

When not with the kids, I place the rolls in a transparent zip lock, smile and gently ask for manual inspection. This has worked very well for me in Asia, and in the US. 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[M9reno]

I travelled from London to Frankfurt and Dresden this summer with four Domke lead bags (2 large, 2 small).  Each small bag holds at least 9 x 35mm rolls.  The two small bags go together into one large bag, which is then folded and inserted into the second large bag.  That means altogether each film is protected by at least three separate layers of lead coating in any direction.  Possibly overkill (and heavy!), but it works.

Airports like Heathrow or Dresden refuse hand-checks but allow the film through the scanners lead-bagged as described.  The lead is obviously effective and contents therefore remain invisible to the operators, so the bags are subjected to a hand check and explosive swabbing after emerging from the scanner.  Never have I been requested to run the film and the bags through a scanner separately.  I have traveled with film up to 3000 ISO like this without seeing X-ray damage.

Yes, all of this is a pain in the ass, but in my opinion, buying film while on vacation and mailing it back internationally adds too many extra variables, like heat damage. Why risk it?

[Smudgerer]

8 hours ago, Surge said:

Sorry, this sounds like a nightmare. And it’s not consistent - we will not get the same response wherever we go. 

We need a consistent solution that can be relied on with any machine. 

I have written to the author of the test asking them to elaborate on their conclusions.

I will be traveling to Tokyo next month (from Canada) and will have the film in a Domke bag as a carry-on. I am not going to ask for a hand inspection. I have no additional time, nor any desire to get into a discussion with an overworked, low IQ, airport security agent.

So, you are going to Tokyo, then instead of putting yourself through all this airport scanning angst why not do as I and others have suggested / done? Tokyo isn't in the wilds of nowhere and there's a very strong film using community in Japan, you'll have no trouble at all in buying and processing a wide stock of film. Traveling with it you are not going to have any guarantees that your film will be hand-checked, or if it's scanned no damage will occur. Just sidestep all those possibilities, I don't understand your reluctance to adopt these simple options and just go with no worries that any films could be harmed in your travels through various airport securities...........

Edited August 3, 2023 by Smudgerer

[Vlad Soare]

What makes some of you think that buying film locally, or having it shipped there in advance, will help? Cargo gets x-ray scanned just like your luggage does. The film will have already passed through at least one scan, likely several, by the time you pick it up in the local store.
Thinking that UPS/Fedex/DHL/whatever will take your word for it that it's indeed film inside, and won't scan the parcel, is naive. They don't care two hoots about your film and won't make exceptions for you. To them cargo is cargo. They can't afford to have one of their planes blown up by some madman who ships an explosive device labeled as 'film - please don't scan'.

Come to think of it, I'd wager that cargo is most likely subjected to the kind of x-ray scan that checked-in luggage goes through, which is a bit stronger than the one they use for hand luggage.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Vlad Soare

[stray cat]

44 minutes ago, Vlad Soare said:

What makes some of you think that buying film locally, or having it shipped there in advance, will help? Cargo gets x-ray scanned just like your luggage does. The film will have already passed through at least one scan, likely several, by the time you pick it up in the local store.
Thinking that UPS/Fedex/DHL/whatever will take your word for it that it's indeed film inside, and won't scan the parcel, is naive. They don't care two hoots about your film and won't make exceptions for you. To them cargo is cargo. They can't afford to have one of their planes blown up by some madman who ships an explosive device labeled as 'film - please don't scan'.

Come to think of it, I'd wager that cargo is most likely subjected to the kind of x-ray scan that checked-in luggage goes through, which is a bit stronger than the one they use for hand luggage.

Some of us just don't "think" it, we know it because we've tried it and it has worked for us.

If it ceases to work, then I'm sure we'll seek other solutions. Until then, it's what I intend to do.

[Vlad Soare]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 minutes ago, stray cat said:

Some of us just don't "think" it, we know it because we've tried it and it has worked for us.

If it ceases to work, then I'm sure we'll seek other solutions. Until then, it's what I intend to do.

How do you know it has worked? Are you absolutely certain that going through the hand luggage scanner would have ruined the film?
Do you have proof that the amount of fog your film had was definitely lower than it would have been if you had travelled with it?

Many of us have had our film scanned at airports with no visible issues at all. Apart from a direct comparison under laboratory conditions I don't think there's a way of ascertaining what works and what doesn't.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Vlad Soare

[frame-it]

10 hours ago, Surge said:

Sorry, this sounds like a nightmare. And it’s not consistent - we will not get the same response wherever we go. 

We need a consistent solution that can be relied on with any machine. 

I have written to the author of the test asking them to elaborate on their conclusions.

I will be traveling to Tokyo next month (from Canada) and will have the film in a Domke bag as a carry-on. I am not going to ask for a hand inspection. I have no additional time, nor any desire to get into a discussion with an overworked, low IQ, airport security agent.

Tokyo>>

LOADS of film available

film imported by dealers in bulk is NOT going through an xray [according to a few shops that i asked when there]

fujifilm is made in Japan, and a lot of interesting variants available in some shops

lots of places for processing, my favorite is kitamura, superfast, neat, clean and free contact sheet per roll

Kitamura also stocks plenty of film types.

buy the film there and then shoot and develop there, no headaches.

 

[Vlad Soare]

18 minutes ago, frame-it said:

film imported by dealers in bulk is NOT going through an xray [according to a few shops that i asked when there]

Sure it isn't, if it goes from Japan to Japan.
But Japan to US or to Europe is a different story.

Also, working in a photo store doesn't necessarily make them experts on freight matters. Of course they aren't going to tell customers that their film is getting x-ray scanned, are they? 🙃

Edited August 3, 2023 by Vlad Soare

[Jewl]

I travelled to Bali in June (from Frankfurt, Germany) with a stop over in Dubai! So had to go through a couple of security check-ins and xray scanners! But, my film didn't went through any of them! Worked quite well to let it hand check by the airport staff! In some cases the staff actually did not really understand why but they didn't refuse to check it 😉

Edited August 3, 2023 by Jewl

[Smudgerer]

12 minutes ago, Vlad Soare said:

How do you know it has worked? Are you absolutely certain that going through the hand luggage scanner would have ruined the film?
Do you have proof that the amount of fog your film had was definitely lower than it would have been if you had travelled with it?

Many of us have had our film scanned at airports with no visible issues at all. Apart from a direct comparison under laboratory conditions I don't think there's a way of ascertaining what works and what doesn't.

Actually there is a way of ascertaining if passing through airport scanners do effect film. A couple of years ago we had a film production/shoot in a number of countries in Europe and checked whether we could take the 10,000' of 500asa 16mm filmstock from the US safely as cabin baggage or buy it in Europe, ( it was quite a bit cheaper for the quantity we were going to use to source it from Kodak in the US rather than buying it out of the EU distributor ), so we ran a test by asking Dulles Airport to run a 50' short-end of film once through their screening scanners, we then processed at a DC lab' and checked it against a processed unexposed clip from the same roll that did not go through the scanners. The scanned film showed slight base fog unevenly throughout the reel consistent with Xray exposure, the un-scanned clip did not. So we bought our film in the EU and after it the job it was processed there and the negative shipped back to the US for digital film transfer.

Base fogging may not be noticeable in images when the film is developed, it may show more on the edges of  the film where the sprocket holes are or in the areas without an image, the leader and so on, but depending on the airport, the country, the security operator et al it is a crap-shoot.

Whatever one chooses to do in regards to traveling with a film camera and buying film before you leave or at your destination is entirely up to the individual, but I always try to find a good way around that.

[frame-it]

27 minutes ago, Vlad Soare said:

working in a photo store doesn't necessarily make them experts on freight matters. Of course they aren't going to tell customers that their film is getting x-ray scanned, are they? 🙃

well, please feel free to keep arguing without facts.

[Vlad Soare]

3 minutes ago, frame-it said:

well, please feel free to keep arguing without facts.

That depends on what you mean by 'facts'. Stories told by photo shop clerks don't count as facts in my book,
But sure, feel free to believe what makes you feel better. I've no dog in this fight.

 

[Aryel]

3 hours ago, Vlad Soare said:

That depends on what you mean by 'facts'. Stories told by photo shop clerks don't count as facts in my book,
But sure, feel free to believe what makes you feel better. I've no dog in this fight.

 

Some of us just look at our final images… If I cannot notice any negative effect then I’ll continue doing it.

I shoot lot of delta 3200. I get it shipped from Germany to France before traveling. I shoot and mail it to a lab in Spain (they use dd-x) then back to Singapore. Some of my best prints are from these trips home!

Works for me 😊

Edited August 3, 2023 by Aryel

[Surge]

I heard from Carmencita Film Lab:

Domke bags will protect the film at any ISO form CT Scanners and other X-Rays. 

I also spoke to B&K - the quote I posted above is not old and applies to CT scanners.

So, again, there is no issue with any type of film when using a Domke bag, even with CT scanners! 

If the airport security staff ask to see what's inside the bag, then the only choice is to ask for a manual inspection. 

[jakontil]

13 hours ago, stray cat said:

I recently did a return trip to Europe and here is what I found:

1. I bought online the bulk of the film I'd be using in Europe (Portra 400) and had it sent to an address in Italy.

2. Melbourne Airport refused hand inspection. I was only carrying three rolls of Portra 160 which they unloaded from my Domke bag and put through their CT scanners.

3. The airport in Doha refused hand inspection and the film went through their CT scanners.

4. I used all the film on the trip and sent them to a lab in Europe (Carmencita, as it happens) for developing and sending back to me in Australia.

5. All the returned films, including the initial three rolls of Portra 160, seemed fine to my reasonably but arguably not overly critical eye. The Portra 400s seemed slightly less grainy and a tad contrastier than the Portra 160s.

6. In future, where possible, I will buy film and have it processed at the destination. This is generally slightly more expensive but saves stress. Where not possible/practicable, I'll take a Domke bag and be more insistent on its use.

7. Being polite and courteous is the way we should always act as human beings, airport staff are just doing their job no matter what we think of the policies of their management.

This all then just becomes a process and still enables us to enjoy shooting film.

 

Yeah almost the same experience, however when im familiar with the airport which always refuse to handcheck, i would put in domke straight away and put in the xray, when they found out bout it, they will ask me to open up snd i’d show them what’s in inside that black thing as shown on the display, usually they would let go 

[Surge]

7 hours ago, Smudgerer said:

So, you are going to Tokyo, then instead of putting yourself through all this airport scanning angst why not do as I and others have suggested / done? Tokyo isn't in the wilds of nowhere and there's a very strong film using community in Japan, you'll have no trouble at all in buying and processing a wide stock of film. Traveling with it you are not going to have any guarantees that your film will be hand-checked, or if it's scanned no damage will occur. Just sidestep all those possibilities, I don't understand your reluctance to adopt these simple options and just go with no worries that any films could be harmed in your travels through various airport securities...........

Because scanning poses no risk when in a Domke bag! 

And I have better things to do, with limited time, when on a trip, then search for a film shop and then get the film developed. It would be nice if I was there for weeks with no set agenda, but that's sadly not the case. 

And, again, running the film in a Domke bag is totally fine and will not damage film. 

[Smudgerer]

17 minutes ago, Surge said:

Because scanning poses no risk when in a Domke bag! 

And I have better things to do, with limited time, when on a trip, then search for a film shop and then get the film developed. It would be nice if I was there for weeks with no set agenda, but that's sadly not the case. 

And, again, running the film in a Domke bag is totally fine and will not damage film. 

We are all just saying what works for us based on our own experience, it doesn’t matter to me which or what you choose to do.

Good luck with the Domke bag, the last time I used mine at National Airport in DC they made me open it and then ran it and the films through the scanner separately thinking I guess that I was trying to hide something in there, I was, eight 135/TX……they hit the trash before I got to the gate. It is as I said a bit of a crap shoot nowadays.

[SunnySixteen]

FWIW, I always hand check regardless of the scanning technology, better safe than sorry. In the last 2 years with the rise of CT scanners Ive become more diligent, I keep all rolls in a ziplock ready to hand over in the security line.. The only time I have had problems was at Heathrow last year when an agent gave me a hard time saying they won't hand check films under 800 ISO. I simply lied and told him all my film is 800 and above, he got tired of arguing with me and allowed one of the other agents to conduct the hand check. The dozen or so other times I've traveled in the last 2 years every other agent I have asked has been accommodating, understanding and seemingly aware that hand checking film is a normal request.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Anbaric]

4 hours ago, Surge said:

I heard from Carmencita Film Lab:

Domke bags will protect the film at any ISO form CT Scanners and other X-Rays. 

I also spoke to B&K - the quote I posted above is not old and applies to CT scanners.

So, again, there is no issue with any type of film when using a Domke bag, even with CT scanners! 

If the airport security staff ask to see what's inside the bag, then the only choice is to ask for a manual inspection. 

It is an old quote, which originally comes from the manufacturer (Tiffen/Domke). You can tell because the company they used for testing ceased to exist back in the noughties. These bags have been around for decades, and they would have been tested using the technology of the time, before CT scanners were used for carry-on (they explictly say that the bags don't protect film from higher-dosage scanners, which back then would have been the checked baggage CT scanners). Here is the same claim from the Tiffen/Domke site back in 2006:

https://web.archive.org/web/20060328130627/http://www.tiffen.com/displayproduct.html?tablename=domke&itemnum=711-12B

'FilmGuard bags were tested for effectiveness by InVision Technologies, Inc., manufacturers of the only Federal Aviation Administration-approved checked-luggage scanning system. Films with up to ISO 800 speeds were tested. The extensive tests showed that the FilmGuard design will protect film and disks from the low-dosage x-ray units used to check carry-on luggage. (The tests also showed that the amount of lead needed to protect film from high-dosage x-ray units would make the bags too heavy to be practical.)'

Unless Carmencita have done much more extensive testing than they talk about in the link posted above, we have no idea whether the shielding is adequate to protect film from carry-on CT scanners in general (and the note about high-dosage units suggests it may not be). There have been quite a few tests of unshielded film passed through these scanners by various people. In some cases, the film has been trashed. In others, the damage was only evident when the scanned film was carefully compared with unscanned film of the same type. It probably depends on the machine used, its settings, the length of exposure, whether the photographs are taken before or after scanning, and whether the beam intersects directly with the film. Would these bags have protected the film in the situations where an unshielded film was ruined? We simply don't know. The unshielded films examined by Carmencita  weren't completely trashed, so the exposure probably wasn't as severe as some people have experienced in other tests.