35mm or 645 for travel to Spain

[BradS]

oh, also ... Fotocasión, a camera store in Madrid, may still process film?

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

never had an issue with airport xrays.
I once took 30 rolls of colour negative film to Mexico with no issues .
That said I kept the film in a lead lined bag .
What camera to take?
The one you are most comfortable with!

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Museums are often architecture in and of themselves. And some of them have great views of the city.
If you go into a lot museums you are not going home to put your camera away first.

I understand what you're saying. I wasn't generalizing, just mentioning my own feeling about it. I never take my camera to a museum, and if I have it with me, I don't take it out. It's personal, but a museum is perhaps the only place in which I just don't take photos.

Main reason is that photography is there to help me pay attention. To help me (or incite me to) stop and look. I do that naturally in a museum.

Evening photos are not possible without a tripod on 400 film. You have to push. Once you do that, it’s likely toast if you are forced into scanning.

I'm not going to prevent myself shooting at night at 1600 in a foreign city just in case the airport scanner might do some damage to the film. Moreover, I have yet to see one example of high ISO film being ruined by airport scanners.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Too many choices? i once bought a Fuji GW680lll for a photo i had in mind on a trip to the Dolomites.I couldn't see it as a square for my Rolleiflex...and wanted a bigger print than i felt a cropped to 645 neg. could do. I sold it after the trip View attachment 326526

That's planning.
That's a good photo; did you print it yourself, if so a wet print or a scan and inkjet?

 

[GregY]

That's planning.
That's a good photo; did you print it yourself, if so a wet print or a scan and inkjet?

Thank you Melvin. It's a print i made in my darkroom, likely on Foma Variant lll or the last of my Forte Polygrade.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Thank you Melvin. It's a print i made in my darkroom, likely on Foma Variant lll or the last of my Forte Polygrade.

I once hiked 12 kilometres, a hard hike at my age, out, on a mountain range with digital camera plus tripod to capture a scene I wished to produce in a stitched panorama.
When I arrived at the pre destined spot the sun was in my face and a fast wind was blowing.
A disaster that brought a few choice words to my head !
Making and planning a good exposure rather than digital captures by volume , sets the 'art' of photography !!

 

[Sirius Glass]

It has been a while since I've been to Madrid but the last time I was there, I made the egregious error of asking the agent at the security check point for a physical check of my film. I had it all out of the boxes in a clear plastic ziplock bag, asked very politely in proper Spanish (but maybe the wrong dialect) and I got an angry and threatening ten minute ass-chewing from an uniformed officer - who acted as as if I had suggested that I was carrying explosives in my carry-on bag... and after all of that, the film went through the machine anyway (without any damage, even the Delta 3200). Never again will I ask for a physical inspection of my film at the airport in Madrid !!!... but things may have changed.

My standard travel kit is: Nikon F3 and Nikon F2 (or two Nikon F2) and 24/28mm and 50mm lenses. Sometimes, rarely, I'll also bring along some longer options like the 105mm, 180mm, 200mm. When traveling, it is important to me to have two bodies that can share lenses.

In the EU I have never been able to get film inspected by had. In Paris the uniformed officer was outright rude.

 

[MattKing]

That said I kept the film in a lead lined bag .

Won't do anything with the new scanners.

 

[GregY]

In the EU I have never been able to get film inspected by had. In Paris the uniformed officer was outright rude.

I flew back from Paris Sept 16 this year.... it was the day of the air traffic controllers' strike. Hundred of flights cancelled. Charles Degaulle Airport was chaos. It was hours and the crush of a crowd getting through security..... not many officers in sight and absolutely no chance to get anything hand checked. All the employees did a fantastic job. I'm glad i had had my films processed @ Atelier Publimod. Next trip i'm going to ship film home. We were lucky, as the only Westjet flight to Calgary to depart after a several hour delay. ...

I understand what you're saying. I wasn't generalizing, just mentioning my own feeling about it. I never take my camera to a museum, and if I have it with me, I don't take it out. It's personal, but a museum is perhaps the only place in which I just don't take photos.

Main reason is that photography is there to help me pay attention. To help me (or incite me to) stop and look. I do that naturally in a museum.



I'm not going to prevent myself shooting at night at 1600 in a foreign city just in case the airport scanner might do some damage to the film. Moreover, I have yet to see one example of high ISO film being ruined by airport scanners.

Alex, the new CT scanners do ruin film... it's 2023 & then new airport security technology does not favour film photographers.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Alex, the new CT scanners do ruin film...

I know it's supposed to damage film. I've just never seen any examples of it, of how damaged it is (slightly fogged, or actually ruined?), of how different that damage is with a ISO 100 vs a ISO 400 vs a ISO 400 that's been pushed to 1600 film.

Someone should start a "Show me you airport-scanner-damaged film". I can't, all my films have come back OK so far.

 

[GregY]

I know it's supposed to damage film. I've just never seen any examples of it, of how damaged it is (slightly fogged, or actually ruined?), of how different that damage is with a ISO 100 vs a ISO 400 vs a ISO 400 that's been pushed to 1600 film.

Someone should start a "Show me you airport-scanner-damaged film". I can't, all my films have come back OK so far.

Alex there's already a big thread on airport scanners. In the one place where there were two types of scanners (Seattle) the staff alerted everyone to not put film through the scanner. This year (sept 22) i had my film processed in Paris before flying home. I'm not risking my entire photo journey costs....
Take the gamble... it's your choice. I have photojournalist friends who will now only buy film on their arrival in Europe & have the film processed before leaving.... guaranteeing their work.
If you haven't seen it (it's old news) here's the announcement from Kodak Alaris....

New CT scanners at airports will ruin your film — FotoArgenta

CT Scanning X-Ray Technology and Film As many of you know, the United States Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has recently been installing Computed Tomography (CT) scanners for carry-on luggage in US airports. In the coming months these scanners will be operationalised in 145 airports i

www.fotoargenta.nl

 

[abruzzi]

Ilford: "Based on our initial testing it is almost certain the new CT type x-ray scanners for cabin baggage will be deemed unsafe for any of our ILFORD and KENTMERE film products irrespective of ISO speed rating."

Kodak: "Just 1 scan shows significant film fogging, leading to smoky blacks and loss of shadow detail. This will be more significant for higher speed films. Although it’s possible that a roll of 100 speed film would show less degradation, we strongly recommend against putting any unexposed or exposed but unprocessed film through a CT Scanner."

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Alex there's already a big thread on airport scanners. In the one place where there were two types of scanners (Seattle) the staff alerted everyone to not put film through the scanner. This year (sept 22) i had my film processed in Paris before flying home. I'm not risking my entire photo journey costs....
Take the gamble... it's your choice. I have photojournalist friends who will now only buy film on their arrival in Europe & have the film processed before leaving.... guaranteeing their work.
If you haven't seen it (it's old news) here's the announcement from Kodak Alaris....

New CT scanners at airports will ruin your film — FotoArgenta

CT Scanning X-Ray Technology and Film As many of you know, the United States Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has recently been installing Computed Tomography (CT) scanners for carry-on luggage in US airports. In the coming months these scanners will be operationalised in 145 airports i

www.fotoargenta.nl

Greg, you misunderstood me. I'm not doubting this. It's been discussed at length. I just wish I could see examples of what the scanner actually does to the film.

 

[GregY]

Greg, you misunderstood me. I'm not doubting this. It's been discussed at length. I just wish I could see examples of what the scanner actually does to the film.

Like i said.... go somewhere & risk your own film. Both Kodak & Fuji have issued warnings.... that's good enough for me.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Like i said.... go somewhere & risk your own film. Both Kodak & Fuji have issued warnings.... that's good enough for me.

Did not say I wanted to risk my film. Did not say I didn't believe Kodak and Fuji's warning. Jeez. Just wondered if anybody, anywhere, has posted examples of the actual damage, and how different the damage is between different ISO film. Clear now?

 

[GregY]

Did not say I wanted to risk my film. Did not say I didn't believe Kodak and Fuji's warning. Jeez. Just wondered if anybody, anywhere, has posted examples of the actual damage, and how different the damage is between different ISO film. Clear now?

Clear? Not really.
Not every warning comes with pictures.....

 

[koraks]

Just wondered if anybody, anywhere, has posted examples of the actual damage, and how different the damage is between different ISO film.

Verifiable examples are few and far between. The few times I've seen them posted, there were either doubts about other aspects of processing or possible causes for the defects, people didn't know for sure CT scanners were involved, etc. So I hear you. I also agree with @GregY that I personally don't need examples to decide if I want to risk it, but that doesn't answer your question.

But I propose that we drop the subject since there is at least one other monster thread on this exact issue, and I think this thread should focus mostly on OP's travel questions & opportunities.

 

[abruzzi]

Did not say I wanted to risk my film. Did not say I didn't believe Kodak and Fuji's warning. Jeez. Just wondered if anybody, anywhere, has posted examples of the actual damage, and how different the damage is between different ISO film. Clear now?

if you google it, you will find some people claiming and showing no damage, and also some with some clear examples of fogging. Mild fogging is manageable, but some of the examples I've seen have a vairiable fogging that increases and degreases based on the position on the roll.

 

[Helge]

if you google it, you will find some people claiming and showing no damage, and also some with some clear examples of fogging. Mild fogging is manageable, but some of the examples I've seen have a vairiable fogging that increases and degreases based on the position on the roll.

And you will always wonder, “could this have been better?”, “is this artifact due to…?” etc.

 

[MattKing]

Eastman Kodak had a whole shipment of movie film that they sent to a motion picture location shoot damaged beyond usability as a result of the new scanners.

 

[GregY]

Thank you Matt.... seems there will always be sceptics....
When the pros are buying film on location and processing before travel that's certainly good enough for me.... At least there is a viable workaround.

 

[abruzzi]

And you will always wonder, “could this have been better?”, “is this artifact due to…?” etc.

absolutely, but limited data is better than no data. or do you think we'd be better off dicussing it in a purely theoretical realm?

 

[Helge]

absolutely, but limited data is better than no data. or do you think we'd be better off dicussing it in a purely theoretical realm?

Of course not. This is very practical and immediately applicable advice from everyone. As it should be.
This is after all an aesthetic medium.
Not just about registering data.
We are trying to help you (and others) hone in on what could be best practice(s).

To condense my own advice:

- Shoot slow film. It will be useable between day and night no problem. No need for ND filters during noonday sun.
And it’s less problematic with airport scanners (and heat and small light leaks).
The hankering for 645 quality will become much less with fine grained film.
Lenses are also faster with greater DoF, so you might end up with overall sharper photos.

- Bring a small pocketable/bagable tripod for low light shots. And learn to brace you camera in your hand on solid objects (not scratching it by touching directly to concrete and stone). And maybe a small direct flash for certain outdoor situations.

- I’d use 135 simply for the fact that you get more frames and the cameras are overall easier to use.
16 frames can become irritating because you need to change rolls and/or carry film backs.

- Use a close to normal lens.
Wide is often too wide and forces a certain look, especially with architecture.
85mm and up is too limiting with the shutter speeds and the distance needed.
No one is going to be impressed with your arsenal of lenses lugged for miles and miles all over southern Spain. And your photos won’t be any better.
Changing lenses is for a controlled, short range,
mollycoddled environment.
Like home or a car trip.
I’ve been there. Twice is enough to learn that it’s just not worth it.

- I’d choose a leaf shutter camera because you can go a stop lower in shutter speed and still keep steady enough and still have good DoF. And because you can do fill flash in contrasty situations. YMMW of course.

 

[halfaman]

oh, also ... Fotocasión, a camera store in Madrid, may still process film?

Nope. Interphoto would be my choice in Madrid for film processing.

 

[BradS]

Nope. Interphoto would be my choice in Madrid for film processing.

Good to know. Thanks!