Current experience with X-ray scanners - May 2022

[BrianShaw]

Interesting. That’s the first time I’ve ever seen a distinct pattern attributed to legacy x-ray devices. Damage patterns, as opposed to overall increased density, historically have been demonstrated with CT.

Nonetheless, the concern about film and any x-ray device is warranted.

 

[koraks]

I go through Pisa a lot

Yes, I've gone through Pisa before, with film, including 400 speed, without issue back then. This roll also went through Catania, so it's possible that the damage happened there. That's one thing I won't be able to find out.

That’s the first time I’ve ever seen a distinct pattern attributed to legacy x-ray devices. Damage patterns, as opposed to overall increased density, historically have been demonstrated with CT.

Hence my surprise! Granted, it's one roll out of 10 I carried on this particular trip, and one roll out of hundreds I carried on my combined travels. That's one more mystery I can't explain at this point - why it's just this one roll, while it got the exact same treatment as the others.

 

[lamerko]

Well, I ran into a rare case of visible x-ray fogging despite the roll not having gone through a CT scanner - just two (2) old-fashioned x-ray scanners:

More details here: https://tinker.koraks.nl/photography/dont-look-down-getting-your-film-x-rayed-when-flying/

The TL;DR is that the defect isn't so far visible on scans. I haven't optically printed anything from this roll, yet, but I doubt it'll show up on prints. But I do hesitate to bring film on our next trip if it involves any airports or x-ray scanners (e.g. some international trains, and major museums). I think I'm going to stick to digital in those instances.

I haven't had any problems, but the 250D seems to be the one I've seen the most complaints about online. Either it has a wider sensitivity wavelength range than the others in the series, including the 500T, or it is simply the most used film and therefore the most commented on.
In your case - what cassettes did you wind it on - metal or plastic? Any chance that particular film was loaded in the camera when you went through one of the scanners?

 

[koraks]

Either it has a wider sensitivity wavelength range

Any silver halide material will be inherently sensitive to x-rays. Emulsion sensitization won't play any role here.

In your case - what cassettes did you wind it on - metal or plastic?

Metal; recycled FujiFilm cassettes. I've been using them for years without problems, including on similar travels.

Any chance that particular film was loaded in the camera when you went through one of the scanners?

Certainly not; I always make sure that my cameras go through security unloaded. This particular roll was only inserted into a camera about 2-3 months after we returned from this trip.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Film X-Raying at LAX International - Fall 2023

Posted sign: X-ray machines are film safe up to ISO 800. Hand screening available on request. Bradley Terminal

 

[BrianShaw]

What kind of machines? The hand screening offer must have been very nice to see overtly on the signage.

 

[Agulliver]

I saw similar signs at three US airports that I visited last year (DFW, XNA, ORD). All had the older regular X-ray hand baggage scanners.

 

[Fatih Ayoglu]

I have had hand screening offer in Dallah and Sacramento both ways. In fact while returning back to UK, they have hand screened my camera only because there was a film inside.

 

[mrosenlof]

september 2023, Dulles airport security from customs back onto C concourse. All scanners were CAT type. Film rolls hand checked, no problem. I intentionally let my hasselblad, loaded with panF+ go through the scanner. The scanner flagged the camera, TSA guy looked at image layers on his monitor and could see everything, cleared without opening the bag. That Film shows no X-ray effects after developing. It's only one pass, but encouraging to me.

 

[skinnylatte]

Sept / Oct 2023

Did a trip from San Francisco to Singapore, then Surabaya (Indonesia) and back to Singapore and San Francisco.

Had no trouble having hand check the entire way. SFO and SIN airports had the powerful scanners. For Singapore, interesting thing to note is that for most flights, scans are often deferred till the gate itself, so they have the smaller scanners with the 'film safe' sticker. Surabaya also had those. I let officers in Singapore and Surabaya know I wanted hand check even and they were happy to oblige. San Francisco TSA was reasonably helpful (it was crowded as usual), and took it aside for swabs.

I had no problem the entire trip. I even brought a 100ft Ilford FP4 roll, and I had around 30 Portra 120 films. All was good.

For Singapore airport you're more likely to have the super powerful scanners at Terminals 3 and 4.

 

[abruzzi]

Had no trouble having hand check the entire way. SFO and SIN airports had the powerful scanners.

Interesting--I just got back from a work trip to San Francisco and Terminal 1 (the Harvey Milk Terminal) had old school scanners (El Paso had CT scanners). I'm guessing you were in a different terminal?

 

[ntenny]

Interesting--I just got back from a work trip to San Francisco and Terminal 1 (the Harvey Milk Terminal) had old school scanners (El Paso had CT scanners). I'm guessing you were in a different terminal?

SFO to SIN would be the international terminal, presumably. But I went through that terminal last Friday (SFO-TPE) and had the old scanners. It sounds like they must have both kinds and use them in varying combinations. (PDX is the same way; sometimes you get the new scanners, sometimes the old.)

The easiest way to know (at least in the US) is whether laptops are required to come out of the bags. If they let you leave your laptop in, it’s a CT scanner.

-NT

 

[snusmumriken]

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.

At what stage do you ask for the hand inspection? Do you join the usual queue and ask as you get to the scanner? Or do you have to ask at a much earlier stage?

I’m expecting lots of fun anyway as I’ve acquired 30cm of titanium rod in my tibia this year!

 

[koraks]

Do you join the usual queue and ask as you get to the scanner?

Yes, that's what I do.

 

[snusmumriken]

Yes, that's what I do.

Thanks.

 

[snusmumriken]

Just travelled London Stansted to Budapest. Very different experiences at the two ends, though similar result that film went through the machines despite asking for hand inspection.

At Stansted, the atmosphere was crowded, pressured and frantic. The guy overseeing the smooth dispatch of trays through the machines knew nothing about film, and called his supervisor, who was manning the machine scanning actual humans. The supervisor would not leave his post, so we had a shouted dialogue. He said that the rule was that films went through the machine unless they were more than 800. I said "800 what? Do you mean ISO?", and he said "I dunno, whatever it says on the box". This was a problem, because I home-load my film, and furthermore - following the advice of @koraks - I had taken the (35mm) cassettes out of their tubs and put them together in a well-labelled ziplock bag. But I have a system of colour-coding cassettes, so I pretended the red dots meant >800 ISO (actually Double-X or HP5+) and the blue dots <800 ISO (actually FP4+). So then the red-dot cassettes were taken in the ziplock bag to the other end of the process, where I had to ask several ladies who knew nothing about their existence, or what to do with them when they eventually found them. But they swabbed the outside of the bag meaninglessly, and I passed on. The blue-dot cassettes went through the x-ray machine (as it turned out to be).

At Budapest, security was busy but much calmer. The duty supervisor was called again, but he couldn't have been more polite. He assured me that the machines were older x-ray machines, and that they would have negligible effect on films <1,000 ISO. So all my film went through x-ray machines at least once.

I've just developed two Double-X films that had one trip through the Budapest x-ray machine, and they look absolutely fine.

 

[lamerko]

Oh, Stansted airport is really awful. I had the dubious pleasure of going through it to Belfast and back - it was before the pandemic and the chaos there just didn't allow manual checks... But there was no problem with the films - they were 200 ASA.

 

[Agulliver]

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.

 

[Fatih Ayoglu]

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.

The issue use not with CT machines, it is with the old style XRay machines. In Heathrow, I passed through a CT machine, and they have hand scanned. The following I have passed through a Xray machine, they said no

 

[Agulliver]

The issue use not with CT machines, it is with the old style XRay machines. In Heathrow, I passed through a CT machine, and they have hand scanned. The following I have passed through a Xray machine, they said no

There is no need for hand inspection with the older X-ray machines. It's only recommended for the CT machines.

 

[koraks]

There is no need for hand inspection with the older X-ray machines.

That's what I always thought, and then this happened: https://tinker.koraks.nl/photography/dont-look-down-getting-your-film-x-rayed-when-flying/
I can't explain this other than that a regular X-ray machine damaged my film after a hand inspection was refused.

 

[Agulliver]

That wavy line is emphatically not from a regular X-ray scan. It is also known that Kodak Vision 2 and 3 film is somehow more susceptible to X-ray damage than print or slide or B&W film. That's why, in the days when TV shows were routinely made on film, it was an absolute "no" to have the rushes x-rayed by anything before processing.

 

[koraks]

That wavy line is emphatically not from a regular X-ray scan.

It's virtually identical to the examples that have been on the Kodak website since before CT scanners arrived.

Anyway, I don't really see much value in arguing about this. I know which scanners this roll went through and they weren't CT.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Xrayed or something[?] at Charles DeGaul Airport in Paris. No ill effects.

 

[Agulliver]

It's virtually identical to the examples that have been on the Kodak website since before CT scanners arrived.

Anyway, I don't really see much value in arguing about this. I know which scanners this roll went through and they weren't CT.

The Kodak web page specifically refers to CT scanners used to scan hold baggage, and states that the hand baggage X-ray scanners will not damage film. The examples given were passed through a Examiner 3DX 6000 which is a "whole bag" CT scanner for hold baggage.

When your film went through the scanner that you believe caused the damage, were passengers asked to take laptops or other electronics out of the carry-on bags?