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.
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‽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 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.
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.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????
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.
Thanks very much. That is the banding I expect from CT exposure.read this experience, with illustrations
https://www.michaelstricklandimages...lm-my-experiences-amp-how-to-navigate-the-tsa
read this experience, with illustrations
https://www.michaelstricklandimages...lm-my-experiences-amp-how-to-navigate-the-tsa
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.Why not?
It’s still X-ray based. Right?
A thick and dense enough bag or box should stop almost any kind of radiation.
This statement by Kodak: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.
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.The inspection process may be triggered by a lead bag on the scanner screen.
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.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.
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.Lead isn’t that heavy in small sheets.
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.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.
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 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.
The simple question is when is the led thick enough?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.
Simple question, difficult answer. Depends on the exact radiation flux and how strongly the film responds to it.The simple question is when is the led thick enough?
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.
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.carrying a Stradivarius
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...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.
You may run into trouble with customs. The package will likely arrive with a bill for VAT and possibly customs tariff.
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?