Current experience with X-ray scanners - May 2022

[koraks]

were passengers asked to take laptops or other electronics out of the carry-on bags?

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.

 

[markjwyatt]

I just got back from a trip to central Europe. Leaving the Vienna airport they refused to hand scan any film less than ISO 1600. Said it was policy, and there would be absolutely no problems. I had mainly HP5, FP4, plus a few other rolls I did not shoot (ADOX CHS 100II, Fomapan 400). I have inadvertently had film scanned with no problem, so probably ok, but I prefer getting hand checks.

 

[snusmumriken]

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.

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.

 

[Samu]

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.

In EU, asking for hand inspection is easy in some airports. Unfortunately there are also those, such as Helsinki, Finland, where they just laugh at you, if you try. I have never managed to get a hand inspection there - officials will just claim their equipment is film safe, and no arguing is accepted on that matter. Mostly, no problem, but I have had some rolls ruined. Because I have relatives in Helsinki, this is an Airport I travel to quite often. What is weird is that the multiple 400 ISO black & white film (HP5+) or Portra 400 were not affected, but a single roll of Ektar 100 was almost destroyed last time with all these films in the same batch.

 

[Samu]

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

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.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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. One of my film rolls went through the machine but developed without a problem.

 

[snusmumriken]

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.

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.

 

[VinceInMT]

I just flew from Montana to Pittsburgh and back. Billings has some kind of new, fancy scanners, but don't ask me what kind. Before leaving I loaded a short roll of HP4+ into a metal 35mm canister and put it in my backpack. It went through scanner in Billings and in Pittsburgh On the way back. On my return I developed it the same way I'd done another roll the week before, same film stock, same process: Xtol stock, 8 minutes, etc. I placed then on my light table and took this photo with the traveled roll shown in the bottom. Yes, quite unscientific but I only note a slight increase in density. I'm flying to Arizona in a couple weeks and will do the same but will expose some frames on the travel roll first.

 

[Agulliver]

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.

Freight and mail are not subject to the kind of X-ray scanning that passenger aircraft baggage is.

I don't think there is a single instance anywhere in the world of someone purchasing film that has been shipped from a manufacturer to a warehouse and a dealer in different countries and which was damaged by X-rays.

 

[abruzzi]

I shipped film home from Madrid to New Mexico, and put “Do Not X-Ray” stickers on the box. When I got home the box had clearly been opened and the contents examined, which actually reassured me that they didn’t X-ray it. Turns out I didn’t to, since Madrid terminal 4 only had old X-Ray machines.

 

[snusmumriken]

This seems very relevant:

 

[Daniela]

This seems very relevant:

I look forward to seeing the results. For now, one of her comments reads:

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

Will we have to play her video for the security people from now on?

 

[lamerko]

Has anyone run photo film through such a technical monster?

 

[Agulliver]

Lina's tests are going to be useful. I really hope she shares some scans or light table photos of negatives with us as I am very curious as to what the damage will look like.

There are still unknowns, because people have got away with having film CT-scanned in the past. But it is very much best avoided.

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?

 

[Prest_400]

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?

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.

 

[Arthurwg]

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.

On my way to Paris. Galleries AND museums?

 

[koraks]

Galleries AND museums?

Can't vouch for galleries, but major museums, yes. It's been that way for years, too. Places like the Louvre and Musee d'Orsay will x-ray your kit.

 

[koraks]

PS: here's one more example from the batch of film I traveled to Italy with back in May (see this post: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-scanners-may-2022.192059/page-2#post-2715866)

It's essentially the same defect as before, just oriented differently because this roll of film was apparently rotated approx. 90 degrees compared to the other one. Shown above are the leader and trailer sections of the same roll of film. In the top strip, ignore the fog emanating in two places from the bottom edge of the film; that's a bulk-loading artefact that's unrelated to the x-ray effect.

 

[Fatih Ayoglu]

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.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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.

 

[GregY]

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....

 

[BrianShaw]

Exactly....

My experience with the lead bag was similar but slightly different. After 1 pass through I was informed that the film had to come out and go through, or be forfeited to the TSA collection bin. I stopped using a lead bag very quickly…

 

[wiltw]

In medicine, CT is very commonly known for its multiplicative imaging dose compared to a simple X-ray. A CT is simply many X-ray images 'stacked' to form a 3D image
This article shows the comparative dose...https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/medical-x-ray-imaging/what-are-radiation-risks-ct
A table from this article is shown here...

Note the difference... CT is about 100-400x the radiation dose as a single x-ray! In data compiled in a NIH report over thousands of patients, the comparative dose per case averaged 25X.

That is why CT fogs film worse than X-ray...the TOTAL DOSE to generate a CT image vs. a simple X-ray.

Of course, there are technical differences between medical and security baggage imaging systems. The energy of the x-ray/CT beam and the accumulated doses are different (less) for security systems (than medical). So one should not directly compare the two. And checked baggage CT is different from security carry-on CT.
But the conceptual difference -- one CT image= many x-ray images -- is the same.
Where Kodak, Fuji, and Agfa used to say multiple passes of <ISO 1600 film was OK thru security X-fay, a single pass thru carry-on CT might easily be equivalent to a whole year of travel exposed to security X-ray inspection!

What we do not know (for security reasons) is if the carry-on CT has two modes of exposure, with different exposure doses for expediency of checking...a preliminary one to discover possible risk items vs. a 'throrough' one to examine and analyze contents more comprehensively...which might explain why some apparent exposures of film to security CT are unharmed yet others have very visible evidence of exposure to ionizing radiation.

 

[Prest_400]

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.

 

[wiltw]

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.

Interesting that Kodak mentions 'high intensity X-ray' machines along with several examples of film damage due to them, in this website

Transporting & Storing Film

A leading global manufacturer focused on commercial print and advanced materials & chemicals. We believe in the power of technology and science to enhance…

www.kodak.com

but unfortunately, while warning about security CT, if provides no examples of damage like it did for 'high intensity X-ray'

Kodak did post in Facebook in January 2020, stating ifs findings in an experiment,
"Just 1 scan shows significant film fogging..."
and while the Facebook posting is no longer available, it is preserved by this independent website's posting

​

And here are some tests with ruined film, performed in 2020 by Emulsive.org

Testing CT Scanners: Here's how badly they can damage your photographic film

Recently, a number of film companies have issued warnings about new and enhanced scanning technology (CT scanners). As I was travelling through Amsterdam's Schiphol airport recently, I thought I would sacrifice a roll of film to see what the damage looks like.

emulsive.org

And a test of the CT for carry-on at Schipol, Amsterdam, done by a film processing lab...

Airport X-Rays: Will They Ruin Your Film? – Carmencita Film Lab

carmencitafilmlab.com

But, the results are not necessarily CONSISTENT, as one person says, based upon experience in 2023, they had ruined film on ONE roll, but 3 rolls of Fujicolor and 8 rolls of T-max 100 turned out to be fine!

Are airport CT scanners as bad for your film as everyone fears? - Down the Road

Firsthand experience (accidentally) letting my film go through an airport CT scanner. The verdict: I was lucky.

blog.jimgrey.net