Airport X-ray

htmlguru4242 · Jun 29, 2007

Airport X-Ray: Stupid Question / Idea

I've read a few threads on here recently-ish, and read some documentation on Kodak's website about the check-baggage scanning machines being damaging to film.

I got to wondering if it would be possible to use this to one's advantage. If one were to place a small object (e.g. a circuit board) on top of film in a holder or container, would it be possible to use the X-Ray energy from the airport machine to image it?

Once again, kind of silly idea; does anybody have any thoughts?

David A. Goldfarb · Jun 29, 2007

How would you know how the bag would be oriented with respect to the X-ray tube? I guess you could take a chance and set up three filmholders in different orientations.

htmlguru4242 · Jun 29, 2007

They generally tend to put the bags in the correct way (especially if it's a duffel bag or such with a clearly defined bottom).

I'm not even sure what kind of beam shape the machines have, or if it would even cover the entire film.

MartinB · Jun 29, 2007

xray may not be even

From the little I have read on fogging by scanning equipment, I suspect that the radiation is a scanning beam that sweeps across the target in a number of passes. I don't think it is evenly spread out. Samples I've seen of fogged film have a bright path that is much less bright on either side. It looks like the center of the beam is a lot "hotter" than the edges.

Might make for some interesting effects though! Let us know when you try.

Just found this tech bulletin on Kodak's website:
Kodak examples of xray damage to film

AgX · Jun 29, 2007

Airportography,

a new way of band imaging.

Htmlguru, get your suitcases packed.

BrianShaw · Jun 29, 2007

One possible risk to this scheme might be when (if) TSA notices the circuit board and tears into the luggage to investigate. They might inadvertantly expose your film to more than X-ray.

htmlguru4242 · Jun 29, 2007

Good point, Brian. Though I think that they'd see the film holder and not open it.

I'll try this next time I fly, which will be July 4th.

glbeas · Jun 29, 2007

You might try a readyload, the paper cover would probably block less of the Xrays than the film holder, plus taping it shut at the bottom like it was already exposed. As well it could be wrapped around an object in a cylindrical fashion if desired.

htmlguru4242 · Jun 29, 2007

The readyload is an interesting idea, Gary. I'd give it a try, however, I don't have any on hand.

What about a peel-apart polaroid?

geauxpez · Jun 30, 2007

BrianShaw said:
One possible risk to this scheme might be when (if) TSA notices the circuit board and tears into the luggage to investigate. They might inadvertantly expose your film to more than X-ray.

I would have to agree with Brian here. They'll pop those canisters open looking for c-4. Prepare for cavity search.

Adam

htmlguru4242 · Jun 30, 2007

I've been thinking about the TSA part. I think I'll just use some spare SD cards; they see those all the time and recognize them.

Even if they do pop them open, oh well. Its just a sheet of film or two.

glbeas · Jun 30, 2007

htmlguru4242 said:
The readyload is an interesting idea, Gary. I'd give it a try, however, I don't have any on hand.

What about a peel-apart polaroid?

Hmm, sounds like a great idea, just carry a polaroid back and you can develop and look at the print when you get out of the airport. Plus theres some really high speed polaroid B&W out there.

htmlguru4242 · Jun 30, 2007

Actually, that's a great idea; I could carry-on the Polaroid back, and keep the film separately in the check luggage.

I don't have a Polaroid back or the film on hand, though I was considering picking up a 405 back and a box of that Fuji ISO 3000 stuff. Maybe next time I go through.

On second thought, I do have a regular Polaroid camera with the integral film.

Maybe I could rig up something with that.

copake_ham · Jun 30, 2007

Since you're relying on the TSA's x-ray machines - wouldn't it make sense to use x-ray film?

Oh, given the latest news from Glasgow, Scotland - perhaps you may want to postpone this experiment for a future (hopefully, calmer) time?

Dave Miller · Jul 1, 2007

copake_ham said:
Since you're relying on the TSA's x-ray machines - wouldn't it make sense to use x-ray film?

Oh, given the latest news from Glasgow, Scotland - perhaps you may want to postpone this experiment for a future (hopefully, calmer) time?

Theres nothing wrong at Glasgow; just a couple of guys got confused, they thought they could take a 4x4 as hand luggage.

Murray Kelly · Jul 1, 2007

Baggage scanning ruined the last picture I ever took of my fateher when he was still alive, on my last visit.
I had the camera in my bag - never again.
Always put it in your carry-on bag. Ask for (but don't always expect) hand inspection.
Murray

htmlguru4242 · Jul 1, 2007

Good point about the events in Glasgow. Perhaps it would be wise to wait.

As far as X-Ray film goes, I could use it, but its slower than regular film is, and isn't designed to be any more sensitive to X-Rays than regular film. It relies on the fluorescence from an intensifying screen to expose the image.

fschifano · Jul 1, 2007

copake_ham said:
Since you're relying on the TSA's x-ray machines - wouldn't it make sense to use x-ray film?

Not really. A friend of mine is an x-ray tech, and he showed me how this works. X-ray films are not exposed so much by the x-rays. The major part of the exposure is done by florescent screens incorporated into the film holders. X-rays strike the screens which causes them to glow. It's the glowing florescent material which is responsible for most of the exposure.

AgX · Jul 2, 2007

If this would be so, then one would use some kind of ortho material and not doublesided coated X-ray films.
To a certain degree films can be sensitized to X-ray radiation. The exposure of X-ray films with the aid of booster foils will thus result in a combination of X-ray and visible radiation.

Akki14 · Jul 2, 2007

Fair point, they use higher x-rays on hold luggage than handluggage so if you really wanted to play with x-rays and fogging, ignore the given airport advice of not packing film in your hold luggage.

As far as "waiting for things to settle down" that's just letting the terrorists win. They want to make people full of fear and not do things because of them. Just do what you want.

Sirius Glass · Jul 2, 2007

May be it me, but this thread looks and smells like a WOMBAT.

Steve

WOMBAT = Waste Of Money, Brains, And Time

AgX · Jul 2, 2007

Life is short; why spill it for important things?

copake_ham · Jul 2, 2007

Dave Miller said:
Theres nothing wrong at Glasgow; just a couple of guys got confused, they thought they could take a 4x4 as hand luggage.

Given some of the stuff I've seen (and heard of) people trying to take on board - this may not be too far off the mark!

htmlguru4242 · Jul 2, 2007

WOMBAT LOL!

I guess it sort of is, but it's an interesting experiment nonetheless.

And to AgX, the X-Ray films are regular ortho materials. They're double-sided to increase the density on the processed film; an intensifier screen is placed on both sides of the film and both are exposed simultaneously by the X-Rays.

I'm not saying that the X-Rays have no effect, I'm just saying that any effect that they have is very very small.

AgX · Jul 2, 2007

htmlguru,

I spent the last hour trying to find proof that modern X-ray films intended for use with booster foils are more than just doublecoated ortho films. In vain.

In the mean time let's just use industrial X-ray film. I guess it's still the old type film...

Airport X-ray

htmlguru4242

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

htmlguru4242

MartinB

AgX

BrianShaw

htmlguru4242

glbeas

htmlguru4242

geauxpez

htmlguru4242

glbeas

htmlguru4242

copake_ham

Dave Miller

Murray Kelly

Attachments

htmlguru4242

fschifano

AgX

Akki14

Sirius Glass

AgX

copake_ham

htmlguru4242

AgX

Airport X-ray

Moderator

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency