Current airport X-rays & film

[-kk-]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i had about 10 rolls with me when i cam back recently from Malaysia. just had them developed and dont seem to be any problems whatsoever.

 

Interestingly, although i get them to hand check where ever possible, i had 2 rolls (XP2 and HP5) that i intentionally leave in the bag to go through the machine. these 2 rolls turned out fine as well. I went through 3 airports and probably about 6 or 7 sets of machines en route.

 

I had rolls of kodak tri-x and tmax (both 400) that were unused at the time and went through the machines, and i did subsequently developed them and they turned out fine as well.

 

the only one i was a little concerned was the fuji superior as it says clearly on the box to avoid x-rays. This one i got them to hand check all the way.

[Agent M10]

Thought I'd add a note about American x-rays and film.

 

Current Federal Regulations (I'm a lawyer) state that film must be hand-inspected upon request. TSA doesn't have any right to refuse such a request as the regulatory language is mandatory. I keep a copy of the regulation in my backpack just in case.

 

I recently took 100 rolls of film to Haiti and requested (demanded) that the film be hand-inspected at each airport. I didn't experience a problem at all as it appears that the TSA officials are now aware of the regulation.

 

In Santo Domingo, I advised airport officials that I needed the film to be hand-inspected. At first they resisted, but finally relented when I told them that their x-rays could damage the film (that is based upon Kodak's site information).

 

Just an FYI.

[stunsworth]

...I told them that their x-rays could damage the film (that is based upon Kodak's site information).

 

Can you provide a link?

[earleygallery]

Never had a problem myself, taking film through airports or buying or sending by post overseas.

[xjr]

LEAD lined bags will be opened and checked and also everything in the bag that contains the lead lined bag. Because of the number of times this will be x-rayed I suggest you keep the lead lined bag with the films separate otherwise all your cameras and lenses will examined as well. Remember that shot unprocessed film runs same risk as virgin film and the higher the asa the more susceptible to fogging.

[Agent M10]

Kodak link.

 

On my recent trip, I carried all my film in Ziploc bags so airport personnel could see that I wasn't hiding anything. I learned to take it with me to the x-ray scanner, hold it up, and then ask for the inspection. Learned in the courtroom that acting like you know what you're doing (even when you don't) makes for a good response.

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Peter, the link refers to there being a problem with checked in baggage, not carry on.

[rob_x2004]

... Learned in the courtroom ...

 

What did you get done for, or did you get off?

[antistatic]

What did you get done for, or did you get off?

 

Going by Peter's initials, impersonating a police officer? Acting like you know what you are doing also helps in prison (or so I have been told).

 

Before we all panic about x-rays ruining our holiday photos let's think about how many x-rays the film had been exposed to on its journey from the factory to your local camera shop.

[Agent M10]

Steve,

 

While the Kodak site speaks of checked bags, it also speaks of carried-on bags. It says that even one x-ray can affect film. For me, that's enough to tell airline officials that it needs to be hand-checked.

 

Also, just to be on the safe side, I include a couple of rolls of 3200 film in the bag and point to that whenever officials seem a little dubious.

 

Yes, acting like you know what you're doing works in prison, but I'm a lawyer, not an offender.

[rob_x2004]

Good to see that Kodak site is now updated to 2003. Hope you take a lead bag with you in carry on so that your film is protected from in flight exposure. Theres a nifty aluminium turban you can wear too.

[Agent M10]

Unless there has been a change in the physics of x-rays or there is some post-2003 anti-x-ray emulsion, I don't see the problem with relying on Kodak's webpage.

 

If you don't want to rely on it, then don't.

[bill]

Unless there has been a change in the physics of x-rays or there is some post-2003 anti-x-ray emulsion, I don't see the problem with relying on Kodak's webpage.

 

If you don't want to rely on it, then don't.

 

The change is in the x-ray machines, and in the political climate.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Dáithí]

Problem at Heathrow

 

Several years ago I went on a safari to Kenya and Tanzania with my wife and son. A totally wonderful trip BUT! I had no problems with a hand search at Boston and Heathrow on the way out or at Kenyatta International or Wilson airport in Kenya. On the way back the Heathrow screening staff absolutely refused to had screen 27 rolls of film (If I recall correctly it was Ektapress 400). The staff kept handing me an article from a British photo magazine claiming Heathrows machine would not damage film.

 

The result was about a third of my shots were damaged with greenish fog and in a few cases vertical green bars. We had had a stopover in London and if I had known I could have had the rolls developed in London. What was most disapointing was some picture of baby lion cubs with their mom were ruined and the cubs were so young their eyes were not open yet.

 

If Heathrow staff promise that the x-rays will not harm film they are lying. Don't trust them!! On long haul flights it is hard to avoid Heathrow.

 

(One good thing about Heathrow, nice medical care. On a flight to Italy via Heathrow I developed BAD chest pains. Heathrow clinic was good and they whisked me off to a nearby hospital that provided great care. It was not heart, but gallbladder but awesome pain. The Brits use Diamorph (i.e. heroin) for pain and it is much better than morphine)