Yes, and no liquids allowed, and basically just an old-fashioned scan line. Both times.
Again, there's no point arguing it. Don't believe it if you don't want to.
were passengers asked to take laptops or other electronics out of the carry-on bags?
Undoubtedly a helpful letter, but ‘are able to’ is very different from ‘are required to if asked’. My pessimistic expectation is that a difficult security supervisor would not feel at all bound by it. Nevertheless I will keep a copy to try, so thanks for sharing it.For UK airports, it might be useful to wave this at them. I received this in response to an online query a couple of years ago. Security at Stanstead jolly well should know, but these things aren't always brought up to every employee. And I've noted some younger airport security staff at various airports around the world are wholly unfamiliar with film.
We just came back from a week's stay in southern Italy. Just two flights, both within EU, and only two instances of baggage checks/scans. One airport has the newer CT scanners, the other has the older x-ray ones which are still far more common especially at smaller airports. I carried my film in a clear ziplock bag with the well-known Kodak label as well as a few sentences in Italian explaining x-ray may destroy the film. I asked for hand inspection on both airports and was granted one in both instances, without any fuss, delay or difficulties. Both airports were plenty busy with long queues at the scanners.
So far since the introduction of CT scanners I have consistently been asking and getting hand inspection of my film (knock on wood). I mostly do this to familiarize security personnel with the phenomenon of film and the care it requires (and deserves!) The first time I tried this at my "home base" airport, I had to explain what's up; on our flight last week there were no questions and my request was handled as a matter of routine. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been asking for manual inspection of sensitive materials.
If we all consistently ask for manual inspection, there's a chance this will trickle upwards to security management and scanner manufacturers and official instructions are put in place to exempt certain items from CT scanning.
To both my responders, koraks and reddesert.
1. The person in question went through the scanners 4 times( twice at Edinburgh and twice at Berlin)
2. I had understood Ilford to to be pretty unequivocal about damage to a noticeable extend will occur to films.
A question now for reddesert: Is the 10% risk of damage based on a hypothetical figure that you are using for the purposes of illustration of the principle of increasing risk or is this a figure that represents the real risk of damage on one pass?
In case it wasn't clear in my post its prime purpose was to seek confirmation or otherwise that Edinburgh and Berlin use the new CT scanners. That was its prime purpose. Why was I asking? Well I thought it was also clear,namely that on another forum a member of whom I have some knowledge in terms of his honesty and experience of examining negatives, was saying that his SFX wasn't fogged.
I can't recall seeing anyone reporting this experience at either airport so I thought it sensible to mention his experience as others such as VinceInMT did of his experience
I then in my last sentence had the misfortune to say that if either airport had CT scanners then his experience may have cast doubt on whether to use Ilford's words: "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"
Perhaps I need to learn a lesson here which is that even asking questions qualified by reasons and then saying it may( not does ) cast doubt on the inevitability of Ilford's statement invites a "Gunfight at OK Corral "
pentaxuser
In October at Charles De Gaul airport I got a very patient inspector who let me move the exposed and unexposed film to hand checking.
When you buy film for instance in Europe, you never know how many times it has already been scanned during transport from England, USA or Japan to your local photo store. If it is then sold and sent to a different country, as many people have to buy film these days, it could be scanned a few times more during transport. For the European suppliers, Foma s.r.o. in Czech Republic is the only one ever putting labels "do not x-ray" on parcels containing unexposed film. If a roll of film will be scanned 10 times in airports. chances are it will be ruined, as all exposure accumulates on films. Idea is basically the same as pre flashing paper in a darkroom.
This seems very relevant:
I’m still sorting the scans, but the preliminary conclusion is that 400ISO + is 100% gonna die from a CT scanner, and for lower ISO I will report once I have it all aligned
Carmencita lab also did a test and released reels of the process, they also recorded video thru Xray and CT scanners with the same effect of what seems the radiation on the recording: https://carmencitafilmlab.com/blog/airport-x-ray-will-they-ruin-your-film/BTW I don't know for sure, because I don't know exactly what she put through the scanners...but I've put my phone through airport X-ray scanners while having it record video before....and it's never given white dots like that in the recording...I wonder if those are added as special effects to show viewers a visual representation of the fact that there's stronger x-rays used in the CT system?
I had the same experience at CDG last year. The operator understood instantly, and simply passed camera and film around the body scanner and back into my hands. Same in the Paris art galleries.
Galleries AND museums?
Carmencita lab also did a test and released reels of the process, they also recorded video thru Xray and CT scanners with the same effect of what seems the radiation on the recording: https://carmencitafilmlab.com/blog/airport-x-ray-will-they-ruin-your-film/
Interestingly, different preliminar findings about the lead bags. In a IG comment Lina was not positive about them protecting.
I Will travel next year with a heap of 120 film and now see that even possible transiting airports have CT scanners during the layover. Aside of contacting airports for handcheck requests and so, it is interesting to know what might happen.
In general people are reporting positive, but not absolute, response to hand checks in places with CT scanners.
The lead part in those bags are not thick enough to completely stop Xray but it lowers down to a very small level, which your film can be protected. I would still ask for hand scan if it is a CT machine but if it is a traditional one, Domke is fine, better yet you can 3 different sizes and have a better protection if you are worried.
When I used a lead bag, they just kept running it through the machine several times and then pulled the film out of the bag. Followed by the film run through the machine anyway.
Exactly....
I will be traveling for Christmas so I was thinking that having some documentation to support the request of a handcheck would be positive to have.
Kodak has the labels, but no "tech pub" which I think might be more appropiate in making a case. From Fuji I found the PDF of a notice/release from 2020 that explains well (attached below, as the website release is non available). As Ilford are fantastic with datasheets, I thought of emailing them, if they had a tech pub more solid than the FAQ mentioning CT scanning and they got back to me forwarding a document of I&P Europe which is endorsed by the manufacturers, published 9/2023, link here.
PS: Out of circumstance, preliminarly I will not encounter CT scanners in my ARN-BCN route, as I will be taking "minor" terminals that at the moment won't be upgraded. My recent interest in this, is as I am planning a long trip with a lot of film and last summer they did retrofit a CT scanner in T5 (main terminal) of Stockholm.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?