Airport scanning danger

[Dr David Hall]

On Sunday I passed through airport security with 3 exposed rolls of film. One 200ASA Scala slide, One 400 ASA Ilford XP-2 and one Agfa 160 120 roll film. the airports that scanned the film which was in my carry on camera bag were Boston and Washington (DCA) ALL film was left with NO images on the film. I haven't checked the other film in the bag that was not exposed but these were all lost. I have no other explanation as these were taken with three different cameras and not exposed to heat ro extreme cold and were removed from the cameras within 30 hours of passing through the airports. thought this was not something to worry about but guess I was wrong.

 

[Dave Parker]

I can't imagine the x-rays completely wiping out the film, the only thing I have ever seen from x-rays is fogging, and I have only seen that a couple of times in ISO 800 speed film, but to completely wipe out film, that would really be weird.

Dave

 

[David Brown]

... ALL film was left with NO images on the film.../QUOTE]

Just to be sure, is the film clear or solid black?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

X-ray damage has always been fogging in an irregular pattern in the few examples I've seen.

Did you take all this film to the same lab? Did they process the Scala and perhaps the other rolls as something else?

 

[livemoa]

I have had this happen with B&W when the lab processed it as C41......

 

[Dave Parker]

I would also be interested to hear if the film was totaly clear or totaly black?

Dave

 

[kwmullet]

Also, is the edge printing visible?

 

[Eric Rose]

I travel all over the world on a regular basis with my cameras (mainly LF and MF), and the usual tons of film. I have never had any film that went thru as carry-on fogged. This includes everything from FP4 to Delta 3200. I also do not use lead bags to shield my films.

I suspect your problem originates with your camera.

 

[colrehogan]

Where did you send the film to be processed? There are only three labs in the US who develop Scala.

 

[removed account4]

sorry to hear of your troubles

from the kodak site:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml#SEC47

there are examples of x-ray fogging.


i have traveled back and forth from boston to europe ( heathrow, paris, frankfurt, basel / bal ) post and pre 9-11 --- with everything from asa 50 to 3200 ( color and black and white ) and luckily it showed no effects from the xrays. like eric, my film was not in lead bags - some was carry-on, some was in the luggage ...

 

[gr82bart]

I fly somewhere at least 3 to 4 times a month. I have always carried my Hassey and film with me, including Scala, and have never experienced anything like what was posted. The worst thing was some heavy fogging.

Art.

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

I fly about twice a month and have had films go through 8 or 10 or more X-ray passes with no damage.

 

[Dr David Hall]

Okay, my experience with scanners has always been as all who have replied. Imprinting is clear and good, Film was not fogged but clear. Three different cameras, two 35's One Nikon F3, One Minox GL35, and Mamiya f330 TLR. All were working and had produced clear pictures in film processed the day before I left Boston. Three different labs processed and all was C-41 film. If it wasn't the scanners, then I am really confused. Thanks for all the comments

 

[Monophoto]

Coincidence does not establish correlation - - -

Let's approach this scientifically.

A key symptom of scanning damage is fogging. Exposed and processed film will have images, but the contrast will be low and there may be areas in the images that look like flare.

The symptoms you describe (clear edge imprinting, but otherwise blank film after processing) indicate that the film was never exposed.

Therefore, it seems to me that you have an exposure problem rather than an airport scanning problem. Since two film sizes, and three cameras were involved, we can rule out camera failure. The only remaining explanation is that film that was submitted for processing was never exposed.

I can easily understand how this can happen with 35mm - I've done it more than a few times myself. Exposed 35mm film is returned to its original cassette, and its easy to interchange exposed rolls with unexposed rolls, especially if the film is not rolled all the way into the cassette.

Roll film is a bit harder to understand since the act of passing it through a camera transfers it totally to a different spool. Most roll films have a distinctive "exposed" warning at the tail end, and an alert processing operator should have questioned a request to process film that didn't have this flag. However, if the operator who processed that film had not done a lot of it, it is possible that he/she wasn't aware that the roll should have had an "exposed" notation.

 

[jjstafford]

My two-bits: the film was incorrectly processed, and the edges did not have exposure. Something else happened there. Our processor does both 135mm and 120 (220) and screwing up the process can happen.

 

[Dave Parker]

Normally in print film, clear strip indicates the film was never exposured to light, in slide films the film would be black if there had been no exposure, when I was working in the lab, even a roll of traditional B&W that went through the c41 process by mistake had images on the film, and of course we all know about cross processing both c41 and e6 films, but again, the only time I have seen c41 come out clear with the edge writing still on it, is when it had not been exposed and then processed, I have done that with mine more than once over the years, I have never worked with scala, so I can't say about that roll.

Dave

 

[Dimitri]

Could it be that our old friend Murphy paid you a visit?

He did pay me a few visits and I mixed up the films sendind the unexposed rolls for developing, instead of the exposed ones.

X-ray damage seems so out of the question, since such high levels that completely fog the film would also do quite some damage to humans. In addition you would also not see the edge imprints, which in your case are visible.

BTW, if you did send the unexposed ones, be on the lookout for some rolls with double-exposures

 

[AndrewH]

I travel all over the world on a regular basis with my cameras (mainly LF and MF), and the usual tons of film. I have never had any film that went thru as carry-on fogged. This includes everything from FP4 to Delta 3200. I also do not use lead bags to shield my films.

I suspect your problem originates with your camera.

My experience exactly. I think that people will blame the x-ray when the problem lays elsewhere.

 

[gr82bart]

Imprinting is clear and good, Film was not fogged but clear.

The frames appear to be over exposed. I suspect then this is not a scanner problem but an exposure problem. When I had my one incident of fogging due to a scanner, the fog went outside the frame area and into the imprint area. You are saying the imprinting area is fine, but the just the frames are clear - as in 'see through' and not black?

Art.

 

[k_jupiter]

Okay, my experience with scanners has always been as all who have replied. Imprinting is clear and good, Film was not fogged but clear. Three different cameras, two 35's One Nikon F3, One Minox GL35, and Mamiya f330 TLR. All were working and had produced clear pictures in film processed the day before I left Boston. Three different labs processed and all was C-41 film. If it wasn't the scanners, then I am really confused. Thanks for all the comments

Can't help you with the 35mm... but did you change the lens on the C330 recently? Ask me how I know ths could be the problem with the roll film. Look for a red bar in the viewfinder of your Mamiya.

tim in san jose

 

[jd callow]

Also, is the edge printing visible?

Good question. I had film scanned 7 times 3 over and 4 back when I went to Minsk. The film was all colour and had an irregular greenish fogging. In some areas it was rather harsh others (and for the most part) it was nonexistent or hardly noticeable. The edge imprint was there as were the shots I took.