Kodak and llford info on film and new Airport CT scanners January 2020

Messages
1,661
Edit My Images
No
#1
View: https://www.facebook.com/203851912966490/posts/3171302796221372/?substory_index=0

Contains the below from US TSA but contradicts it saying new CT scanners on carry on baggage can damage any unprocessed film even 100 ISO on one pass! SO ALWAYS ASK FOR HAND CHECK.

Most x-ray machines used to screen carry-on bags should not damage undeveloped film under ASA\ISO 800. There are a limited number of screening checkpoints that use x-ray equipment that may damage undeveloped film. These airports will have signage in front of the x-ray stating that the x-ray may damage undeveloped film.

If you are traveling with the following types of film, please pack it in a clear plastic bag, remove it from your carry-on bag at the checkpoint, and ask for a hand inspection:

• Film with an ASA\ISO 800 or higher
• Highly sensitive x-ray or scientific films
• Film that is or will be underexposed
• Film that you intend to “push process”
• Sheet film
• Large format film
• Medical film
• Scientific film
• Motion picture film
• Professional grade film
• Film of any speed that is subjected to x-ray screening more than five times

In most cases, the x-ray equipment used for screening checked baggage will damage undeveloped film; therefore, please place undeveloped film in carry-on bags.

Edit - also see Ilford info https://www.ilfordphoto.com/faqs/
 
Last edited:

Asha

Blithering Idiot
Messages
9,420
Name
Asha
Edit My Images
Yes
#3
Why is sheet film / large format film listed when roll film is not ( directly) mentioned.?

I am also curious as to why there is a concern towards the potential fogging of film when passing through security scanners yet we don't bat an eyelid when purchasing film that we receive through postal / courrier services, often from other countries…...I find it hard to believe that packages are not scanned before being loaded onto transport ( planes etc)
 
OP
OP
dmb
Messages
1,661
Edit My Images
No
#4
They are also producing labels to put on film for shipping.
Why is sheet film / large format film listed when roll film is not ( directly) mentioned.?

I am also curious as to why there is a concern towards the potential fogging of film when passing through security scanners yet we don't bat an eyelid when purchasing film that we receive through postal / courrier services, often from other countries…...I find it hard to believe that packages are not scanned before being loaded onto transport ( planes etc)
 

Asha

Blithering Idiot
Messages
9,420
Name
Asha
Edit My Images
Yes
#5
They are also producing labels to put on film for shipping.
I do wonder at what point does a label or a request for a physical check of hand luggage become sufficient as a security check for the authorities.

I've had camera gear checked over in airports and upon seeing film canisters or LF film boxes, that has sufficed in the curiousity of the authorities.

As checks become tighter however, how can confirmation be made of the box contents?.....The roll film can be removed from canisters without issue, however sheet film is a little more complicated.
If the light tight bag is securely taped closed then I would reluctantly remove it from the box if really necessary but then what?.....Like the film canisters, the interns of the bag cannot be physically seen.

I appreciate that atm it hasn't ( or at least doesn't seem ) to have got to that stage but for how long?
 
Messages
3,038
Name
RJ
Edit My Images
No
#6
Unfortunately, I learned the hard way about the damage from the new CT scanners a little over a year ago. This is potentially a very big issue for anyone who wants to shoot film while travelling.
 

Asha

Blithering Idiot
Messages
9,420
Name
Asha
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
Unfortunately, I learned the hard way about the damage from the new CT scanners a little over a year ago. This is potentially a very big issue for anyone who wants to shoot film while travelling.
:( As if travelling and related security issues isn't stressful enough without trying to get film safely through the system
 
Messages
2,489
Edit My Images
No
#8
View: https://www.facebook.com/203851912966490/posts/3171302796221372/?substory_index=0

Contains the below from US TSA but contradicts it saying new CT scanners on carry on baggage can damage any unprocessed film even 100 ISO on one pass! SO ALWAYS ASK FOR HAND CHECK.

Most x-ray machines used to screen carry-on bags should not damage undeveloped film under ASA\ISO 800. There are a limited number of screening checkpoints that use x-ray equipment that may damage undeveloped film. These airports will have signage in front of the x-ray stating that the x-ray may damage undeveloped film.
'Most' carry-on x-ray machines still aren't CT scanners, so I guess they are correct, but that will be little comfort if your film happens to be fried at an airport that does have one of the new machines!
 
Messages
10,355
Name
Suz
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
Do people get scanned via film damaging machines? If not I'd be tempted to just wear a barbour jacket as they have massive pockets and I'd think you could probably carry dozens of rolls of film...

I've never actually flown anywhere so I have no idea how much trouble having a pocket full of film could cause either!
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,489
Edit My Images
No
#12
:( As if travelling and related security issues isn't stressful enough without trying to get film safely through the system
Supposedly this technology could make things a bit easier for the majority of travellers, as the best CT scanners may make it unnecessary to remove electronics and/or liquids from your luggage, improving security and reducing queueing times:
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/baggage-scan-airport-security
I imagine the proportion of travellers flying with film must be pretty small these days.

Good to see that Heathrow is working with Ilford, at least now there may be a chance of getting a hand check when flying out of there!
Yes, Heathrow has a reputation for not allowing requests for hand checks. I haven't flown with film for ages, to I don't know how they've been handling things recently.

Do people get scanned via film damaging machines? If not I'd be tempted to just wear a barbour jacket as they have massive pockets and I'd think you could probably carry dozens of rolls of film...

I've never actually flown anywhere so I have no idea how much trouble having a pocket full of film could cause either!
You'd probably be asked to remove the jacket, and the cassette might also set off the metal detector you probably have to walk through, or be discovered in a pat-down search, or picked up by the millimetre wave body scanners some airports use.
 
Messages
3,038
Name
RJ
Edit My Images
No
#13
Do people get scanned via film damaging machines? If not I'd be tempted to just wear a barbour jacket as they have massive pockets and I'd think you could probably carry dozens of rolls of film...

I've never actually flown anywhere so I have no idea how much trouble having a pocket full of film could cause either!
I have kept some film in my pockets when going through the metal detectors so that they're not scanned, but it's not unusual that I might have 25–50 rolls of film on longer trips, so this wouldn't be feasible in such cases.
 

ChrisR

I'm a well known grump...
Messages
9,501
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
Unfortunately, I learned the hard way about the damage from the new CT scanners a little over a year ago. This is potentially a very big issue for anyone who wants to shoot film while travelling.
Hi RJ, what sort of damage did you experience? General base fog or artefacts (elliptical?) from the CT? Or something else?
 

ChrisR

I'm a well known grump...
Messages
9,501
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#15
I have one 3200 and one 800 ISO film, so I plan to take them with me, with other films in the sort of small bag that's used for small liquids (though I haven't yet checked if that is large enough... not for @skysh4rk 's 50 rolls, though). That should bolster the case for a hand inspection... I hope.
 
Messages
2,065
Name
nik
Edit My Images
No
#17
id love to know what they meant by " subtle x-ray waveform " i am a radiographer and i cant see how anything in the process could show that. fogging yes.
 

ChrisR

I'm a well known grump...
Messages
9,501
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#18
id love to know what they meant by " subtle x-ray waveform " i am a radiographer and i cant see how anything in the process could show that. fogging yes.
Paraphrasing something read quit a while ago, there's supposed to be an issue when the X-rays go through a rolled-up film at an angle. My mind says a "slice" of X-rays, as might be used in a CT scan, but I have no idea whether this is hogwash or not!
 

excalibur2

My F4's Broken...
Messages
10,239
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
Yes
#20
Oh well at worst don't use airports and travel by car if using a film camera.....folks if a film user, dig out your digi cameras for flying :D
 
Messages
2,065
Name
nik
Edit My Images
No
#23
Paraphrasing something read quit a while ago, there's supposed to be an issue when the X-rays go through a rolled-up film at an angle. My mind says a "slice" of X-rays, as might be used in a CT scan, but I have no idea whether this is hogwash or not!
That makes more sense, i was thinking about the physics with X-rays and where on the wave length spectrum they are. looking at the pictures posted after just after your post it does look like the X-ray beam of the ct scanner has just selectively fogged the film were it has gone though it. most CT scans use a narrow beam of X-rays that rotates around the object in a helical manner, although some are volumetric scans (unlikely to be used in airports).
 
Last edited:
Messages
543
Edit My Images
No
#24
Unfortunately, I learned the hard way about the damage from the new CT scanners a little over a year ago. This is potentially a very big issue for anyone who wants to shoot film while travelling.
Buy your film at your destination and get it developed +/- scan before flying back. Get the lab to post the negs back to you.
Obviously not always practicable depending on destination.

I don't have a lot of faith in airports always allowing a hand check. I hope the film companies can work with airports to make a hand check a certainty for film
 
Messages
3,038
Name
RJ
Edit My Images
No
#25
Buy your film at your destination and get it developed +/- scan before flying back. Get the lab to post the negs back to you.
Obviously not always practicable depending on destination.

I don't have a lot of faith in airports always allowing a hand check. I hope the film companies can work with airports to make a hand check a certainty for film
I have done all of this. I have also shipped my film to the lab from a variety of places (e.g., Japan, South Korea, Spain, USA, etc.) before going home. But I can't always do these things. Sometimes you have film left over. Sometimes you can't buy it ahead of time. Sometimes you've paid and arranged to ship it and the courier doesn't show. Sometimes you end up buying extra film to bring home because it's cheaper where you're travelling (e.g., Japan, USA) than in the UK.
 

ChrisR

I'm a well known grump...
Messages
9,501
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#26
Buy your film at your destination and get it developed +/- scan before flying back.
Finding a film lab you trust is hard enough here. I have wondered about posting exposed film back home before leaving, though. Clearly there's a risk, but so far we haven't heard stories of those using Canadian Film Lab getting damaged film. Sticking those labels that Kodak produced on the parcel might help... although not if they're X-raying the whole mailbag.

Maybe we just shouldn't be flying. Which would be a shame, although a responsible thing to do for other reasons. :(
 

Andysnap

<span class="poty">POTY (Film) 2015</span>
Messages
15,725
Name
Andy Grant
Edit My Images
Yes
#27
We haven't been abroad for years, don't see any point when we live on a beautiful island where they do food I like. We briefly considered it this year but in the end decided to leave it, this news about the scanning has definitely made the decision easier.:)
 
Messages
3,908
Name
Nige
Edit My Images
No
#28
When I went to New York last year, some of my rolls of film got scanned several times (albeit not with the new high-intensity scanners) because a lot of tourist attractions have scanners too. One roll of Portra 400 had six separate scans as a result.

None of the rolls showed any signs of being x-rayed.

Obviously the new scanners are a whole different matter, but in general I’d not be concerned by the current usual scanners.
 

Asha

Blithering Idiot
Messages
9,420
Name
Asha
Edit My Images
Yes
#29
When I went to New York last year, some of my rolls of film got scanned several times (albeit not with the new high-intensity scanners) because a lot of tourist attractions have scanners too. One roll of Portra 400 had six separate scans as a result.

None of the rolls showed any signs of being x-rayed.

Obviously the new scanners are a whole different matter, but in general I’d not be concerned by the current usual scanners.
I’m not concerned over the present ones....like you I’ve had film pass through several scanners with no signs of fogging etc.
This has always been based on taking film through as hand luggage and not placed in the hold where the baggage is scanned with a deeper more powerful apparatus, which it seems is what is going to be used for all baggage. That being the case along with the comments made by the film manufacturers gives me and clearly some other film users a serious concern.
As for the earlier post commenting on buying film at the destination. Yes for me that would generally be possible but as for developing LF, then that is a non starter due to costs and indeed finding labs that support the format.
Besides the home processing is a large part of the pleasure of my photography!
 
Messages
44
Name
Karl
Edit My Images
Yes
#30
On a similar note, a lot of us have and still carry film with us when we go away. Most 1st world destinations in the world have kept their scanners up to date however I have heard of film users who have travelled to places that are using older x-ray equipment that will affect even slow speed films.
 
Messages
790
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
Yes
#31
We haven't done a holiday involving flying for over 10 years now, for various reasons, but the overriding one is that the whole experience of airports and flying has detracted from the enjoyment of the holiday too much (I would now only consider it if I could travel Business/First and get fast track through security, and that isn't affordable). Whereas I have belatedly come to the realisation that slower is better. So, ferry to the continent (or maybe Chunnel - never done that yet) and either driving or trains. Eurostar uses luggage scanners so I'd probably avoid that unless I could get hand-check of film if I'm carrying it. I'd rather travel relatively slowly and see the places I'm passing through. And I say this as an ex-private pilot, who used to love travelling to Europe in my little aeroplane, but over-regulation has killed that for me, though I still think driving and train are better for flexible travel and seeing places and especially meeting people.
 
Top