Airplane Scanners and Film

[Vilk]

The effect of damage to film is cumulative, rather than immediate. This is what they do not tell you!

M. Le Poisson a raison. This is really important. As I can go through 20+ gates per trip, I ended up developing on the go, in hotels, b&b, etc... And eventually all but abandoned film for travel.

 

[obviouslygene]

I brought 120 films(400ISO) & Instax films to Korea from Japan. Japan's airport security allowed me through without scanning, just manual hand checking. Korea's airport security said I absolutely had to scan them, my 120s were fine, the instax however, has some strange fogging at the sides.

 

[removed account4]

I was recently in Heathrow and Reykjavik airport where i asked staff about my camera film being scanned and it seems there is a uniform answer either side - anything under ISO1600 will not be affected. All my film was a maximum of 400.

I refer to hand luggage scans, not hold luggage which will cause considerable damage to exposed and unexposed film, so I am told. I thought I would pass this information onwards.

if you are traveling outside the usa they don't like to hand check, the machines they use can have high speed film travel through them
without problems. even post 9/11 / post london subway bombing when i travelled through heathrow and every like 50 feet there was another checkpoint
and scan my film was fine. 15 years ago the scanners were less sophisticated as well ... nowadays i dont' think there is much to worry about with film and scanners
and the peeepshowe scanners i have never seen in action but i think the only people who would have a problem would be like the guys in spinal tap ...

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

M. Le Poisson a raison. This is really important. As I can go through 20+ gates per trip, I ended up developing on the go, in hotels, b&b, etc... And eventually all but abandoned film for travel.

I would not take any film through 20 scans. Just remember that we are all living in a very, very different world to pre-9/11. Scanners are now more powerful (and have been for years) and the attention paid to travellers is greater than ever. Also, have a look at what inbound mail at JFK airport is subject to (high-powered 3-pass scanners). That ought to make your palms sweat...

 

[RattyMouse]

I would not take any film through 20 scans. Just remember that we are all living in a very, very different world to pre-9/11. Scanners are now more powerful (and have been for years) and the attention paid to travellers is greater than ever. Also, have a look at what inbound mail at JFK airport is subject to (high-powered 3-pass scanners). That ought to make your palms sweat...

200,000 plus post 9/11 air miles worldwide and I've never seen one instance of my film having any problems being X-rayed.

It's simply not an issue to me.

 

[MartinP]

Airplane? Aeroplane? Airport? What are these strange things? I heard it said they are like metal birds? Crazy talk! Next thing you know, someone will say their carriage moves around without a horse.

Which is another way of saying, how has someone only just discovered security x-ray machines exist?

 

[Agulliver]

Inbound mail, if x-rayed at all, is scanned with vastly different machines to hand baggage at airports and sea ports.

Many travellers can attest that if you keep your undeveloped film in your hand baggage, you're highly unlikely to encounter any problems with the x-ray machines.

Body scanners do not use x-rays or any ionising radiation and do not damage films at all.

There might be more security since 9/11, but I see nothing to indicate that x-ray machines used to scan hand baggage at travel ports and tourist attractions are in any way more intense than in the past....if anything it is the opposite otherwise the operatives would need to wear dosimeters and work strict rotation shifts. The scanners which are used for checked bags on planes have the capacity to deliver more intense scans and are more or less automated...and have been in use in Europe for over 20 years (a load of used ones were shipped from the UK and Germany after 9/11 as nothing in America was good enough to meet the post 9/11 required standards).

There are several of us who are quite seasoned travellers, and barring daft mistakes such as putting film in the hold, none of us has had issues.

 

[lantau]

If I remember I will report back in this thread once I see if everything was OK work the highspeed films.

I almost forgot...

Portra 400, 800 and Provia 400X (all 120) had no problem. Fujicolor 400 (the Japanese 'commercial' 135 version in the white boxes) came out fine as well. Been through the scanner 5x. In Taipeh there was actually a sign on the scanner that one should say so to the operator if there is film with ISO1600 or faster.

I also had a roll of Vision3 500T and 50D, each, with me. An older Kodak publication mentioned that Motion Picture Films of any kind must not go through any X-Ray scanners while the Still Picture Films were tested with modern scanners for many scans (20 or so?). For that reason I brought only those two for testing.

There was no problem with the Vision3. I wonder if Kodak assumed MP film to be transported only in rolls of 400ft or longer. Such a massive block of material might cause the X-Ray machine to increase intensity because a bulk roll could be difficult to be penetrated by those scanners. Just a thought of mine.

 

[dmr]

An older Kodak publication mentioned that Motion Picture Films of any kind must not go through any X-Ray scanners

My latest experience was with Cinestill 800 and two passes through the scanners in the Pre-Check lanes, one pass in OMA prior to exposure and one in LAS after exposure. I scanned the negatives myself and I checked carefully and there was no visible darkening, either in terms of base fog or streaks, on the negative edges at all.

 

[BrianShaw]

Airplane? Aeroplane? Airport? What are these strange things? I heard it said they are like metal birds? Crazy talk! Next thing you know, someone will say their carriage moves around without a horse.

Which is another way of saying, how has someone only just discovered security x-ray machines exist?

New people are born every day. Every new person has their first experience, at some point, with travel and the security processes.

 

[Agulliver]

I've put super 8mm motion picture film through airport hand baggage scans...including colour reversal (Kodachrome, E6 and VNF), colour negative (200T, 500T) and B&W....never had an issue.

Come to think of it in the late 90s Seattle Filmworks were selling motion picture film as their house brand of 35mm still neg film and it never had any issues travelling with it.

There definitely was a report that an entire day's shooting on the TV series Lost was ruined by someone putting films through the wrong x-ray...ie hold baggage x-ray. I would imagine most people using MP film are professionals and Kodak's advice will be such as to avoid any chance of the slightest damage. Commercial film studios also probably have some arrangement for scanning or otherwise inspecting their equipment and film if it has to fly.

 

[Wallendo]

The "Lost details"
http://old.seattletimes.com/html/television/2003564825_weblostfilm09.html