How do you carry film through airports today?

[thrid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Flying with film has turned into such a pain in the neck...

According to Kodak the latest generation of scanners will fry your film, regardless of asa. They are not install everywhere, but that's only a matter of time.

Places like Heathrow will not hand check your film. It's not even up for debate. A few years back they cheerfully tossed my brick of Delta3200 into the scanner and fried it. 

Getting a hand inspection becomes more difficult if you don't speak the local language, although most airport security do speak some amount of English. But still, you're at the mercy of how their day is going. Or they may just decide they don't like the way you comb your hair. Bzzzzzzzz!

Traveling domestic here in the USA I have no problem getting a hand inspection. I usually show up an hour earlier, than I normally would, but that's the price you pay.

Flying out of the US internationally is no problem. You'll get a hand inspection.

Once you land in let's say Europe, you're probably fine, unless you plan on flying around the continent. Then you're back to step 1.

I have considered developing film in the hotel bathroom. I've done it in the past and it's a simple process for black and white and not really a big deal. Countless press photographers did in the past "Two flushes for AP and one flush for the Post."

So, that means packing a stainless steel developing tank with reels, a measuring beaker, possibly a scale to measure raw chemicals and or bags of D76 etc
That's a lot of stuff if you are flying. And of course you run the risk of being mistaken for a drug dealer or terrorist. Not a great idea in a lot of countries like Singapore etc

I guess you could have your developing kit mailed to your hotel or wherever you are staying. Not cheap, especially if you are shipping internationally, but it can be done, as long as it gets through customs.

If you need raw chemicals the best approach from the US is to probably to order everything from a company like The Photographers Formulary or Freestyle, so it's coming from a legitimate business. Or just buy everything local and donate it when you're done. Although buying raw chemicals in some countries is not as simple as it sounds, especially if you are not a national.

I thought about mailing exposed film back home, but I'm not sure if companies like FedEx x-ray their shipments. Container x-ray machines are very powerful and I can't imagine that would do your film any good...

 

So, yeah. It's a total mess, with no good answers. There's a reason why guys like Salgado went digital.

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Surge]

Hmmm, disappointing— unless some of us just choose not to trust what Cinecita (and others) are saying — that the Domke bag is safe for all ISO and with all machines. 

And I still don’t think we know for sure if purchased film has not been X-rayed before it got to the retail store. Every air shipment is X-rayed these days.

[thrid]

The problem with the x-ray bags is that in the past we were told that security will simply crank up the intensity on the machine and that may fry what's inside the bag. I'm not sure how thick the lead lining is or what its limitations are. Therefore there is a certain level of risk in relying on them.

Edited August 4, 2023 by thrid

[Aryel]

5 hours ago, thrid said:

So, yeah. It's a total mess, with no good answers. There's a reason why guys like Salgado went digital.

I do not really find it problematic anymore these days. The issue is highly inflated in my opinion. 

[Dzongkha]

This year I will travel from Germany to California with around 100 films for a longer road trip. At the end of the trip I don't have a longer stay in L.A. (only 2 days at the beginning) which means I can't have the films developed there. So I can only hope that here in Germany and at LAX (on the way back) they don't refuse when I ask for a hand check. And a Domke bag doesn't help by the number of films. Because it's so much and the value is so high, I'm really a bit nervous.

What about developed film: if i let them developed in the destination country, can it no longer be damaged by the scanners? I haven't found a final statement on this yet.

[Aryel]

17 minutes ago, Dzongkha said:

What about developed film: if i let them developed in the destination country, can it no longer be damaged by the scanners? I haven't found a final statement on this yet.

Developed film won’t be damaged. It is not sensitive to light anymore. I went through SFO and LAS and both agreed to  do a manual inspection. Hope LAX will be the same for you. 

[davidmknoble]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So this is what I am hearing so far from everyone here:

1. Some scanners are still older and some newer, it depends on the scanner you get.

2. The Domke lead bags (which I use) certainly work with older scanners, not really sure with newer ones

3. Evidence of some level of uneven fog from the ciné film experiment

4. Sometimes we can buy film locally depending on where you are going - consider researching

5. Tough, but could consider brining some BnW development 

6. (My thoughts) no matter what, lower ASA requires more ‘light’ to fog then more sensitive higher ASA, consider low speed film

7. Don’t rely on hand check everywhere

8. US seems more friendly to hand checking, but some countries will, again research

[davidmknoble]

Throwing another thought out there - I have heard some sheet film landscape photographers bring unopened boxes of negatives, still sealed by the factory and have gotten better results hand checking.

I wonder if bringing a 25’ bulk roll sealed, along with a dark bag and film spools would help with the first leg and then either develop, ship home or try to get through 1 scan on the way back.

Ultimately, I feel like I might get away with 1 scan, but 2 seems like a sure problem.  I have had good luck coming back from France, but from Italy had problems with the negs.  Seems like I get lucky going from the US, but the way home, after exposing the film, is the worry.

[Aryel]

1 hour ago, davidmknoble said:

I wonder if bringing a 25’ bulk roll sealed, along with a dark bag and film spools would help with the first leg and then either develop, ship home or try to get through 1 scan on the way back.

 

I don’t mean it in an offending way but I don’t really get the logic here… 

If you cannot get the negatives shipped to your destination then the transparent zip lock, and a nice smile is your best bet in my opinion (when I do this I also make sure that I am a ‘model’ passenger, laptop already out etc). You can spot ct scanners and these are the ones that will cause issues whereas the older ones are a problem for multiple passes (not just 1-2) or high iso film. 

Good luck whichever method you decide on. 

[grahamc]

I had a long haul itinerary recently (got back gone this week) passing through 12-15 airports I can’t remember exactly the number. As well as a similar number on a trip last year.
 

I didnt have any experience of being refused a hand check of the film when a CT scanner was in use.   Although I do acknowledge this has happened to some  people and perhaps (according to Kodak at least) it only takes one pass to ruin film, meaning the previous 15 or so successful hand checks on a trip are made useless. 
 

But certainly my experience was good and this trip particularly hand check was granted very seamlessly and hassle-free.  
 

There is more info on these topics in the film thread area of the forum (Airport White List and Airport Black List threads).  
 

To be back on topic and answer the question of this thread , I carried all my films in a Domke bag - films were unboxed but remained in the plastic tubes.  Actually this trip was 2 Domke bags ... 800 ASA film in a medium size bag, which sat inside the Large size Domke bag. The large size Domke bag has 400 and below film in it (as well as the medium bag containing 800 ASA film). This means that if the whole bag is taken and passed through, the 800 has a double layer of Domke. 
 

Anyway, as mentioned hand checks were granted very easily. Just one exception - Heathrow - who’s policy is for old/standard scanners that 400 ASA and below must pass through the scanner.  800 was granted hand check.  For the scanner my film passed through , It was a standard scanner not CT (old info from Kodak states these older, non-CT are fine for film up to 400 ASA anyway and film won’t show any degradation unless passed through maybe 10 times).  They allowed me to keep the film in Domke bag as it passed through.  In the course of this conversation they also told me that for the newer CT scanners their policy is to hand check all film .... nothing needs to pass through CT regardless of ASA.   Anyone familiar with Heathrow will know the customer service aspect of this interaction wasn’t the most pleasant of the trip, but who cares - they followed their procedure and it is consistent with Kodak’s recommendation for our films.  It is the only time any of my film passed through an XRay and the only instance where any debate occurred whatsoever.  But still the end result was only 400 and below film going through a non-CT scanner.  So not an issue in the slightest. 
 

Again perhaps it only takes “one time” to ruin all this good work , but I definitely wouldn’t consider developing in hotel bathrooms etc necessary after this experience. 
 

My biggest problem as that I greatly enjoyed shooting my M10-D and barely shot any of the film.  

Edited August 4, 2023 by grahamc

[Surge]

11 hours ago, thrid said:

The problem with the x-ray bags is that in the past we were told that security will simply crank up the intensity on the machine and that may fry what's inside the bag. I'm not sure how thick the lead lining is or what its limitations are. Therefore there is a certain level of risk in relying on them.

I doubt they can increase the intensity. These machines are fully automated and they scan so many bags in sequence. 
 

Personally, I’m going to trust the people who have tested it and say there’s nothing to worry about. 
We can’t rely on hand scanning anyway. 

[grahamc]

Domke themselves don’t claim any protection with regards to CT scanner and even mention it in their product information.   But the result from the test you posted are encouraging and the first I’ve seen of that nature. Certainly Kodak state damage can occur after one pass through CT (without bag of course)

Personally my position is to minimise the number of passes through a non-CT scanner (but not lose any sleep if it goes through) but still avoid CT at all costs.   One day maybe it will happen but it’s encouraging that even Heathrow (with their reputation for being very unhelpful) acknowledge that all film can be hand-checked when a CT scanner is in use.    

Edited August 4, 2023 by grahamc

[Surge]

1 hour ago, grahamc said:

Domke themselves don’t claim any protection with regards to CT scanner and even mention it in their product information.  

Can you share the source? I’m not seeing that at all. Actually, Domke claim the opposite, that the film is safe at all speeds, when used with CT scanners (this is posted on the B&H website). I have asked the parent co of Domke to confirm.

[nitroplait]

14 hours ago, thrid said:

The problem with the x-ray bags is that in the past we were told that security will simply crank up the intensity on the machine and that may fry what's inside the bag. I'm not sure how thick the lead lining is or what its limitations are. Therefore there is a certain level of risk in relying on them.

No! That is an internet myth.

The operator cannot change the radiation in the conventional X-ray machines.

They can change the filtration (colors) of the densities on their screens which may reveal outlines of objects, but the X-ray exposure does not change.

On my most recent trip to Japan, with several stop overs, security personel (at conventional X-ray lines) confirmed that they could not see through my Domke bags - the reason why they wanted to check the content post X-ray.

All CT lines I encountered offered hand inspection without discussion.

Edited August 4, 2023 by nitroplait

[BradS]

8 hours ago, Dzongkha said:

This year I will travel from Germany to California with around 100 films for a longer road trip. At the end of the trip I don't have a longer stay in L.A. (only 2 days at the beginning) which means I can't have the films developed there. So I can only hope that here in Germany and at LAX (on the way back) they don't refuse when I ask for a hand check.

 

4 hours ago, davidmknoble said:

....Seems like I get lucky going from the US, but the way home, after exposing the film, is the worry.

 

There is no question about whether or not you can have film checked by hand in the US.  The TSA required to do it, they all have training,  and all airports have the necessary "swab sniffer" machine right there at the security check point. There is absolutely no issue in the US in this regard - just carry your rolls of film in a clear zip lock bag, hand the bag to the agent and politely ask (say please) to have your film check by hand. Be polite!  Being a rude, uptight, condescending asshole is a guaranteed way to get hassled by the TSA, they have plenty of practice at dealing with assholes. Don't be an asshole and you won't have a problem. It really is that simple.

The story in Europe is totally different. 

Edited August 4, 2023 by BradS

[Smudgerer]

10 hours ago, Dzongkha said:

This year I will travel from Germany to California with around 100 films for a longer road trip. At the end of the trip I don't have a longer stay in L.A. (only 2 days at the beginning) which means I can't have the films developed there. So I can only hope that here in Germany and at LAX (on the way back) they don't refuse when I ask for a hand check. And a Domke bag doesn't help by the number of films. Because it's so much and the value is so high, I'm really a bit nervous.

What about developed film: if i let them developed in the destination country, can it no longer be damaged by the scanners? I haven't found a final statement on this yet.

100 films! What filmstock?

I'd arrange to buy them there if you can.

Find a lab with good reputation, ( you can ask US members here on the Forum for their recommendations ), and arrange development before you leave or leave and have the negatives / positives mailed back to you...........and no, X-rays will not effect negatives at all. I've shipped many tens of thousands of feet of processed films, ( cinema film, Kodak 35mm and 16mm stocks as well as still negative/positive processed films ), back to the USA from shoots in Europe and elsewhere, no damages at all. A good lab could also do low res' scans for you and email them so you get to see your images before the originals arrive.

[thrid]

3 hours ago, nitroplait said:

No! That is an internet myth.

The operator cannot change the radiation in the conventional X-ray machines.

They can change the filtration (colors) of the densities on their screens which may reveal outlines of objects, but the X-ray exposure does not change.

On my most recent trip to Japan, with several stop overs, security personel (at conventional X-ray lines) confirmed that they could not see through my Domke bags - the reason why they wanted to check the content post X-ray.

All CT lines I encountered offered hand inspection without discussion.

Ok, I'll take you're word for it, but that was the story for the last 20 plus years.

But what do you do when security makes you take the film out of the x-ray proof bag and send it though the machine, again?

The problem is all of the 'what if's?"

Because once you're in line at security you're not backing out and are stuck with whatever cards you're dealt.

 

Edited August 4, 2023 by thrid

[grahamc]

6 hours ago, Surge said:

Can you share the source? I’m not seeing that at all. Actually, Domke claim the opposite, that the film is safe at all speeds, when used with CT scanners (this is posted on the B&H website). I have asked the parent co of Domke to confirm.

From Domke product information on their website (tiffen.com) about their “film safe” bags:

”Available in small, medium and large sizes, FilmGuard protects unprocessed sheet film and cassette film against the low-dosage x-ray machines that are used to check carry-on luggage at airports around the world. With their full-length hook and loop closures, FilmGuard bags also protect your film and disks from dust and weather. FilmGuard is not intended for use in checked luggage, which is exposed to much higher doses of x-rays. So it's always a good idea to first store film in FilmGuard bags and then pack them in your carry-on luggage, rather than checked luggage.FilmGuard has a rugged, three-layer construction, starting with an outer shell of water-resistant ballistic nylon. In the middle, a lead-impregnated vinyl sheet provides x-ray protection. The interior is lined with smooth, 420 Denier nylon packcloth. When not in use, FilmGuard bags can be stored flat or used as a protective wrap around equipment.Tested by the expertsFilmGuard 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.)”

The important thing here is that the new CT scanners being rolled out for hand luggage are high-dosage X-ray (as with those used for checked baggage). So seems pretty conclusive to me:

Low-dosage X-Ray machines (old/standard carry on machines): Domke bags tested effective by manufacturer, up to ASA800

High-dosage X-Ray machines (previously used for checked baggage only, but now being rolled out for carry-on bag screening in form of CT technology): “the amount of lead required to protect film would make the bags too heavy to be practical”

 

 

 

Edited August 4, 2023 by grahamc

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[grahamc]

2 hours ago, thrid said:

Ok, I'll take you're word for it, but that was the story for the last 20 plus years.

But what do you do when security makes you take the film out of the x-ray proof bag and send it though the machine, again?

The problem is all of the 'what if's?"

Because once you're in line at security you're not backing out and are stuck with whatever cards you're dealt.

 

Agree that the problem is “what if” (so I’m not saying the scenario is not possible) but I’ve not yet experienced that, have you ? In my experience if they can’t see through the bag they inspect via hand.  So the inability to see through the bag kinda forces a hand check in this sense.   
 

In my last 2 trips of maybe 20 + airports total the only outcomes I faced were :

Older scanners :

i) hand check granted (by far the most common).  involving visual inspection and/or swab  

ii) bag asked to pass through but no further inspection whatsoever 

iii) bag asked to pass through, bag pulled to one side and films hand inspected and/or swabbed.  Never asked to pass through X-ray again with or without bag. 
 

CT scanners:

i) hand check granted. 
 

My stress levels about travelling with film have vastly decreased as a result of these experiences, almost to nil by the time I was halfway through the most recent trip.  Most attendants were very happy to help and often grabbing film for hand check before I’d finished my sentence asking. 
 

Edited August 4, 2023 by grahamc

[Anbaric]

2 hours ago, grahamc said:

From Domke product information on their website (tiffen.com) about their “film safe” bags:

Most of that text (including all the stuff about testing by a now long-defunct company) hasn't changed in at least 17 years - see my post above and compare:

https://tiffen.com/products/domke-filmguard-xray-guard-bag

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

I suppose modern carry-on CT scanners might expose the film to a lower dose than the old checked baggage CT scanners, because they have to be used in passenger areas and are newer designs, but that's really just a guess. They certainly expose the film to a much higher dose than the 'film safe' carry-on scanners that were the standard when these tests were conducted, and since there are at least half a dozen different models and settings may vary, I don't think we can generalise from testing a single roll without a control roll of the same type at one airport, as Carmencita seem to have done (maybe they've done more extensive testing since that report).