Please, read my message again. It has nothing to do with film damage. I only stated that some checked bags do get scanned.
Since Kodak and others have always warned photographers to NEVER put film in checked bags, the fact that some have experienced no CT damage, and others like you know it went thru CT, simply reflects the RANDOM SELECTION for CT inspection. One post from UK resident with no CT damage a few posts ago in this thread...while it was also known and proven about a UK baggage theft ring decades ago who had a CT operator flag the rest of the team about goodies inside...both sides of same coin.
Your bag may have been manually inspected even if they didn't scan it.
Some customs officer probably picked it up and said something like "This thing feels like someone packed a food processor in it?!!"
Please, read my message again. It has nothing to do with film damage. I only stated that some checked bags do get scanned.
BTW, what ever happened to using those x-ray bags, lead lined I think, that we could buy back in the 1980s?
It is my understanding that TSA only puts a note in baggage that they have physically opened to inspect.Well… my wife and I checked two bags each. That’s the only one that came with the “informative” label.
But yes, everything could have happened.
In my reply to your post, I stated, "others like you know it went thru CT"
Please, read my message again. It has nothing to do with film damage. I only stated that some checked bags do get scanned.
In my recent research, in 2017 TSA announced a new CT inspaction system for checked luggage at Anchorage airport. "At peak operation, TSA can screen more than 500 bags an hour. In contrast, the old checked baggage system at FAI could process about 350 bags an hour." I think it fair to say that volume could just keep up with one jumbojet per hour, at best. In contrast, a paper I read on the topic mentions that everthing goes thru Explosives Detection Systems, and suspicious items are diverted for hand inspection, as if everything goes thru EDS.
"By law, TSA is required to screen all baggage that travels on a commercial aircraft. At many airports across the country including FAI, inline checked baggage systems utilize conveyor belts to route checked luggage through an Explosive Detection System (EDS) machine. EDS technology quickly captures an image of the checked bag to determine if the bag contains any type of threat item including explosives.EDS uses CT data in combination with software to flag suspected explosive content.
If the EDS machine indicates a bag needs additional security screening, the bag is automatically diverted for an on-screen, visual inspection by a transportation security officer. In a small number of instances, a transportation security officer will need to conduct a physical screening of a checked bag to ensure there is no security threat before reintroducing the bag to the inline system where it continues to the aircraft."
" EDS to be superior to screening with ETD because EDS machines process more bags per hour and automatically detectexplosives without direct human involvement."
"EDS is the primary component of checked baggage screening and provides imaging, screening, and detection capabilities through CT X-ray technology to identify possible threats and create images of the bag contents."So why apparently some film gets thru without harm is puzzling...this is perhaps a clue why.
"TSA has 1,689 EDSs deployed." (Jan 2020 report, Advanced Integrated Passenger and Baggage Screening Technologies )Rapiscan press release:
"TORRANCE, California, Dec. 20, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Rapiscan Systems RTT®110 is the first high-speed Computed Tomography Explosive Detection System (EDS) to be approved on TSA's Air Cargo Screening Technology List (ACSTL). This was achieved last month after a thorough testing process with the TSA and means that the RTT®110 will now undergo further field test activities which it must pass before it can be formally qualified.June 2015 https://www.latimes.com/opinion/top...-airport-security-charade-20150608-story.html
The RTT®110 has revolutionized the EDS market by providing exceptional performance at significantly lower cost of ownership. With its unique stationary gantry design and belt speed of 0.5m/s the RTT®110 produces industry leading high-resolution full volumetric 3D images at high speed giving excellent security.
"We are very excited to be included on the ACSTL and the only approved CT EDS on the list," said Mal Maginnis, President, Rapiscan Systems. "Our teams have worked extremely hard to create an exceptional product which we are all proud of. The technology has been designed to the highest quality to provide reliable and effective high-speed screening with many features ideally suited for the fast parcel industry and we are really pleased that our hard work is now being recognised."
By February 2021, all cargo shipments leaving, entering or travelling within the USA must be screened by a product included on the latest TSA's Air Cargo Screening Technology List (ACSTL). The RTT®110 is the only EDS to be approved by the TSA and to be included on the ACSTL."
"A report leaked out of the Transportation Security Administration reveals that a team of investigators from the Department of Homeland Security managed to sneak weapons and fake bombs past airport screeners in 95% of their attempts to beat the system."
I can't remember when Kodak first made known about Security X-ray film safety but CT film damage for checked luggage, but I did find a posting of mind on POTN about that in 2010. That is not 'news'....the use of CT at Security before going to the gates is the news (2019)Caught this at Ontario airport last month:
The seminal report that quantified x-ray damage to film by I3A was dated 2008, as was the CTX study by the same consortium.I can't remember when Kodak first made known about Security X-ray film safety but CT film damage for checked luggage, but I did find a posting of mind on POTN about that in 2010. That is not 'news'....the use of CT at Security before going to the gates is the news (2019)
I just found that I posted in 2006 on another forum on the topic of CT damage to film warning from Kodak!The seminal report that quantified x-ray damage to film by I3A was dated 2008, as was the CTX study by the same consortium.
The first Kodak TIB that I was aware of on this topic is dated April 8 2003.
Caught this at Ontario airport last month:
There was one earlier. I just recalled. I have no idea when the first draft was issued, though.I just found that I posted in 2006 on another forum on the topic of CT damage to film warning from Kodak!
And I found the Kodak TIB from April 2003, too. Thx
I just ran acrossed this 2003 article written by a TSA employee, about machines in use...For checked baggage and cargo... at one time there was a "two-phase x-ray system" that used regular x-ray (for the processing speed) and a secondary CT for cargo that didn't pass the initial muster. Not sure how widespread that system was or if it is still a valid process.
Washington Dulles, when I was last there a couple of years ago, displayed a film warning (and other warnings) on their new electronic display board.interesting that film has enough presence that they actually prominently mention it on a sign. It may actually bode well since in my experience I’ve never seen that info in an airport, prominently displayed in the last ~15 years. If we’re numerous enough to rate mention there, it may mean that film related training may be given to TSA agents, and film related policies.
...although at that time (2002) Kodak still thought X-ray machines damaged film! Methings the April 2003 was the first time X-ray machines at Security were considered safe (except for high ISO) and CT was the pariah of film.There was one earlier. I just recalled. I have no idea when the first draft was issued, though.
https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/Film/Storage-and-Handling-of-Unprocessed-Film.pdf
Yes they did. That is why Kodak and a bunch of others participated in the I3A consortium quantitative study of x-ray damage a few years later. That study was the basis for the TSA warning on what film is safe and what film isn't, in the carry-on x-ray machines. The CTX study was more clear-cut... none is safe. As I posted earlier, the I3A studies were published in 2008. For the Rapiscan report they provide no background - data, conclusions, and recommendations only. For the CTX study they note in the background that concern about XTX damage to film started in March 1997. Unfortunately a lot of the history on this topic is lost since the disbandment of I3A (2013, I think... although a single person still seems to claim to be representing I3A on an ISO committee. Not sure who that is, though, but if I were to guess it's an old geezer who was part of I3A and has no other affiliation under which to participate in ISO except a historical affiliation....although at that time (2002) Kodak still thought X-ray machines damaged film! Methings the April 2003 was the first time X-ray machines at Security were considered safe (except for high ISO) and CT was the pariah of film.
There is no metal in a bare unwrapped 120 roll!
What suspicion would there be?
You can have a rolled up sock in you hoodie pocket too and walk through fine.
It’s worth testing with a few rolls of developed film next time, making sure you removed all the metal on your body.
Last month I was flying out of Colorado Springs (a very small airport) and was surprised to see that of their three or four scanners, one was a new CT model, despite not having found any announcement of the device's use online or in the paper. Only somewhat surprising, I guess, but a good reminder that the lists out there of participating US airports are quickly becoming out-of-date, and that if it is a strong concern you should try and get in contact w/ airport TSA firsthand.
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?