New (as of 2019) airport CT scanners

[Ai Print]

Metal boxes and metal objects go through all the time on regular scanners. Most of the time they will only pick you out at random.

At worst it will only prompt you to engage in a conversation about what it is, and why it has to be hand inspected, without the risky first engagement that might, because you are nervous or uncomfortable, set off the “something is fishy” detector.

At best they will just let it pass through.

But that is based on past experiences and the assumptions that come of that. Your mileage may vary but I never stake my career or high risk decision making on anything but up to date facts.

I have been on the phone and email with the likes of Kodak, Freestyle and B&H a good part of the day. My take on it is I am good to go in having my film ordered and then shipped directly from the business I ordered from to the first accommodation care of me. It seems in using the same channel, I am good to go in sending back to my self at home.

I am making suggestions to Freestyle that they come up with a film courier service that sees the round trip take place under their supervision. I need known quantities and they could very well aide greatly in providing that.

 

[Helge]

But that is based on past experiences and the assumptions that come of that. Your mileage may vary but I never stake my career or high risk decision making on anything but up to date facts.

What would happen? They empty out a bag, that says “do not X-ray contents - sensitive film” or similar, on their own and scan away‽
Then there was no chance in the first place.
You always run a risk by bringing film through security.
If you are really really serious and want to be sure, then you have to buy and develop film in the country you go to.
Tough luck if it’s some backwater place.

Know when not to bring film to museums in big capital cities for example. Or only bring a single roll.
You’d think museum personal would be more relaxed and be more cultures. On the contrary.
In Washington DC and Rome for example (strangely not so much in Berlin and London), you and your bag are scanned to smithereens every effing time you enter a museum.
And you shouldn’t even dream of asking for a hand inspection!
It just gets tiring after a while.

 

[Ai Print]

What would happen? They empty out a bag, that says “do not X-ray contents - sensitive film” or similar, on their own and scan away‽
Then there was no chance in the first place.
You alway run a risk. If you are really really serious and want to be sure, then you have to buy and develop film in the country you go to.
Tough luck if it’s some backwater place.

It's my job, of course I am serious about it. I revised my other reply, please read it for pertinent info.

 

[dourbalistar]

Me too... I’ll be very very cautious and begging TSA for a hand check.

The Kodak methodology is very much what they, as part of the consortium, did many years ago. Except back then I think they did 25 and 50 exposure trials also. Oh, and way back when they tested b&w film also. Thanks for quoting all of that information... I thought I looked at all of your very informative links but missed one.

One thing that bothers me, though, is the description of the damage. Fogging and increased density was the effect of regular x-ray scanners and banding was CT damage. But not now. What may have changed... the power level of the CT less in carry-on scanners than in checked baggage scanners????

If I had to guess, traditional x-rays are a 2D scan, leading to general fogging. CT scans do axial slices, with the x-ray rotating around the object being scanned, perhaps leading to banding damage? But take that theory with a huge grain of salt - I'd be happily corrected by someone with more knowledge and expertise.

Even before the CT scanners, I asked for hand checks. So far I haven't been refused, but I'm not widely traveled and all it takes is one grouchy TSA agent to ruin your film. Security at other international airports may be even less accommodating. Mailing film ahead to yourself or buying it on location, and then having it developed on location before departing seems to be the safest option if you need absolute assurance.

 

[Helge]

Now we are at it: Does anyone know of good led lined film bags or boxes?

It seems most of the sellers has turned the thumbscrews onto the usual “film idiot” setting. Where the prices has been turned up to the absolute limit of what anyone will pay for such a limited use item.
At least in Fotoimpex and my local pusher.

Alternatively are there good DIY solutions? Led pipe? Metal box? Wrap in an old X-ray technicians apron? Etc.

 

[wiltw]

Question: has anyone reported actual damage from this new carry-on luggage scanning technology?

I certainly understand the concern and history, but can’t recall anyone yet reporting that they actually subjected film to the new scanner and either saw damage or didn’t see damage. Casual review of manufacturers data packages available online are silent on the topic of potential film damage. Real data would be useful.

read this experience, with illustrations
https://www.michaelstricklandimages...lm-my-experiences-amp-how-to-navigate-the-tsa

 

[BrianShaw]

read this experience, with illustrations
https://www.michaelstricklandimages...lm-my-experiences-amp-how-to-navigate-the-tsa

Thanks very much. That is the banding I expect from CT exposure.

 

[Sirius Glass]

read this experience, with illustrations
https://www.michaelstricklandimages...lm-my-experiences-amp-how-to-navigate-the-tsa

Thank you. I downloaded the X-Ray warning label from the article.

 

[koraks]

Why not?
It’s still X-ray based. Right?
A thick and dense enough bag or box should stop almost any kind of radiation.

Sure. But thick and dense is not what those film lead bags are. To be effective they'd have to weigh several kilograms and they wouldn't be bags anymore, but chests. Not something you're going to be allowed to carry on as cabin baggage.

 

[wiltw]

Sure. But thick and dense is not what those film lead bags are. To be effective they'd have to weigh several kilograms and they wouldn't be bags anymore, but chests. Not something you're going to be allowed to carry on as cabin baggage.

This statement by Kodak:
"Lead-lined bags, available from photo retailers, will weaken the X-radiation on film and reduce potential harm. However, the effectiveness of any particular lead bag depends on the intensity and electric potential of the X-ray generator, the lead's thickness, and the film speed. If you use a lead bag, check with the manufacturer for the effectiveness of their products with airport X-ray devices. The inspection process may be triggered by a lead bag on the scanner screen. In a typical airport surveillance situation, the baggage may be pulled aside for additional inspection."

Notice that Kodak does not say "block X-ray"!

 

[koraks]

The inspection process may be triggered by a lead bag on the scanner screen.

Indeed. A likely outcome of an effective lead bag (provided it would exist) would be the security officers demanding that you unpack it and run the contents through the machine without protection so they can check what's inside.

My experiences so far are that social engineering works best at least on European airports. Kindly explain the situation and why you want to have a transparent bag with film boxes not run through xray but checked separately and manually. In a few instances I've been successful with this approach, encountering fairly patient and understanding security officers. But that's something you have very little control over of course.

 

[Helge]

Sure. But thick and dense is not what those film lead bags are. To be effective they'd have to weigh several kilograms and they wouldn't be bags anymore, but chests. Not something you're going to be allowed to carry on as cabin baggage.

Lead isn’t that heavy in small sheets. A lead pipe or a bent piece of lead to form a box is not that heavy.
Of course it depends on the amount of film you want to carry.

I’d imagine the usual couple of millimeters of lead sheet would be a enough.

Again, there are lots of small objects that are dense to shoot through. They can’t pull everyone aside when they can’t see everything.

You can ramp up what feels like a lot of scans even on a regular vacation, getting rid of even half of those per default would be welcome.

In fact, on my last trip to Berlin before Corona, I was actually adviced by the one of the security persons in Copenhagen airport to get a led bag to avoid hassle next time.

 

[Agulliver]

The problem with the lead lined bags is that they show up on the operator's screen as a big lump of "I don't know what this is". Which leads the operator to increase the intensity of the x-rays and sometimes to begin to be concerned.....what is that passenger trying to hide from me?

Rather than hide, I would suggest that the better option is to be completely open as suggested....have the film ready in transparent plastic bags. Try to contact the airports you're visiting in advance to ask about their scanners and film, and what the best procedure is. Engage with them rather than try and hide your film. They're all on the look out for that one passenger who is hiding something illicit and it understandably engages their interest and suspicion.

Also remember that outside the USA, in the big wide world, there is generally no right to hand inspection. I guess we're all going to learn in the coming couple of years what effects this has on film. The one posted example is genuinely concerning.

Regarding radiation and lead....I look after radioactive sources at work and have sources of alpha, beta and gamma radiation. The gamma in particular is highly active (off the scale on my rate counter at close range) but all are kept in a small lead lined box no bigger than a 500ml drink carton. It weighs perhaps 1.5kg. Radiation leakage from this box is almost undetectable. So one does not need a chest weighing several kilos to ward off a few seconds of X-rays from a CT scanner. But nevertheless I don't advise using lead lined bags or boxes. That's been advised against for at least 25 years now, precisely due to them arousing suspicion. The last thing you want is a suspicious security bod. They can pull you from the line for a grilling, even prevent you boarding.

 

[koraks]

Lead isn’t that heavy in small sheets.

That'als exactly the point though. I know very well that thin lead sheets aren't heavy, but that also means they're not very effective. Keep in mind that blocking xrays is not a binary thing, like e.g. paper blocking alpha particles perfectly or tinfoil blocking light. With xrays it's more of an attenuation thing, like light filtering through semi-opaque glass. It needs to be thick, and therefore heavy to block the kind of xray intensity used by contemporary CT machines.

Plus, what @Agulliver also says. It won't really help to have a good xray blocking bag/chest. It'll just raise suspicion and lead to a deeper search.

 

[ITD]

My experiences so far are that social engineering works best at least on European airports. Kindly explain the situation and why you want to have a transparent bag with film boxes not run through xray but checked separately and manually. In a few instances I've been successful with this approach, encountering fairly patient and understanding security officers. But that's something you have very little control over of course.

This lack of control is the problem. The cost of film is such that relying on the kindness of staff is a real gamble. No way would I risk that plus all the time and care I’ve taken over the pictures to two sets of security staff who have not been instructed to provide hand searches on request.

 

[Ai Print]

This lack of control is the problem. The cost of film is such that relying on the kindness of staff is a real gamble. No way would I risk that plus all the time and care I’ve taken over the pictures to two sets of security staff who have not been instructed to provide hand searches on request.

I feel the same way. I have not heard from my second email to CPH yet so based on my conversations with Freestyle and the like, I am now shipping 400 rolls of film to the Faroe's and will ship it back when I leave some 6 weeks later.

I sure hope we can see some form of basis for broad acceptance of hand checking though, otherwise it is just far too risky to assume and negotiate on the spot.

 

[BrianShaw]

I sure hope we can see some form of basis for broad acceptance of hand checking though, otherwise it is just far too risky to assume and negotiate on the spot.

I've been hoping for that ever since baggage inspections started! 30 years or more. In the US hand inspecting is generally provided; it depends upon which TSA agent is asked, when asked, etc. Outside the US (UK and GER)... nope.

I sure hope so too, but not holding my breath.

 

[ITD]

I didn’t really bother asking for hand checks with the old machines - at Heathrow it’s not worth asking, everything is scanned. I usually only carried up to 400 speed film so never saw a problem. With these new machines coming in it’ll have to be digital only for travel. I can only hope they don’t get introduced for Eurostar trains too.

 

[Helge]

That'als exactly the point though. I know very well that thin lead sheets aren't heavy, but that also means they're not very effective. Keep in mind that blocking xrays is not a binary thing, like e.g. paper blocking alpha particles perfectly or tinfoil blocking light. With xrays it's more of an attenuation thing, like light filtering through semi-opaque glass. It needs to be thick, and therefore heavy to block the kind of xray intensity used by contemporary CT machines.

Plus, what @Agulliver also says. It won't really help to have a good xray blocking bag/chest. It'll just raise suspicion and lead to a deeper search.

The simple question is when is the led thick enough?

Again, I got the reply/advice from the agent at the CPH Airport to just bring a led bag next time.
I explained that I heard that they would just turn up the strength, and he told me they didn’t have the ability to do that.

Whether you get taken aside with the led bag or hand it in yourself is of little consequence.
When they take you aside, they are the ones taking the initiative and being a nuisance. So you have the upper hand.
If you have a nice bag with the sticker on, you obviously thought about it, and have your bases covered.

The operators of the new big tubular scanners, will obviously encounter the problem far more often, and will be prepared for the job.

There the old motto of “under 800 and it will go through” doesn’t under any circumstance hold true.

 

[koraks]

The simple question is when is the led thick enough?

Simple question, difficult answer. Depends on the exact radiation flux and how strongly the film responds to it.
The advice of the official to being a lead bag as a solution sounds fishy to me. But give it a try, I'd say.

 

[lantau]

I feel the same way. I have not heard from my second email to CPH yet so based on my conversations with Freestyle and the like, I am now shipping 400 rolls of film to the Faroe's and will ship it back when I leave some 6 weeks later.

You may run into trouble with customs. The package will likely arrive with a bill for VAT and possibly customs tariff. Also, given the huge quantity. You should check how this is going to work, especially if it arrives before you. The hotel may not be willing to pay cash on your behalf. It will likely be held at the postal or the customs office for pickup, but only for a certain time.

Any allowance, which you have as a traveller, will not apply for goods sent by mail.

 

[Helge]

Have you tried to writing Copenhagen Airport to ask for special shipping luggage (don’t know what it’s called). You can’t be the only one who has needs similar to this.

Shipping precious goods that won’t take X-raying and rough handling like suitcases and hand luggage will, can’t be that uncommon?
There has to be a special procedure.
They have to be able to issue a guarantee that you will get through without being forced to scan if you are carrying a Stradivarius, Ming vase, or photo sensitive materials.
Thankfully Denmark and Faroe islands are pretty civilized places where you’ll be able to communicate and negotiate, preferably before you’re about to take off.

 

[koraks]

carrying a Stradivarius

Typically musical instruments travel as carry-on luggage or of they're big (cello, double bass) as a regular passenger (albeit a very static one). And of course they can be xrayed entirely safely. The same likely goes for the Ming vase, but for the musical instruments I'm actually sure.
Honestly I don't think the requirement of non-xrayable products traveling by air in small volumes as part of a single passenger's luggage isn't all that common. There may or may not be a protocol for it, but I've never heard of it in any case.

 

[grain elevator]

You may run into trouble with customs. The package will likely arrive with a bill for VAT and possibly customs tariff. Also, given the huge quantity. You should check how this is going to work, especially if it arrives before you. The hotel may not be willing to pay cash on your behalf. It will likely be held at the postal or the customs office for pickup, but only for a certain time.

Any allowance, which you have as a traveller, will not apply for goods sent by mail.

All this might be easiest to navigate if the OP ordered the film from a Norwegian retailer - with enough lead time, as there might not be that much film in stock in the whole country. Less chances of the package getting x-rayed too. Might be more expensive though...

 

[AgX]

You may run into trouble with customs. The package will likely arrive with a bill for VAT and possibly customs tariff.

The films themselves should be exempted from any custums fee as they were bought in the USA, exported and reimported, which should and could be proven. (The same as with the camera gear taken with you., or with a camera sent abroad for repair.) But following this argumentation custom fees would apply nonetheless on a commercial processing done abroad on these films.