New (as of 2019) airport CT scanners

[brbo]

I've had good experience requesting hand check. I don't fly that offten, but have been denied the hand check only twice so far. Both times at small airports and since machines didn't look like the new CT scanners I didn't worry too much.

At Klagenfurt, Austria (KLU) I was told that there will be no problem with my film (even when I told them I was carrying T-Max 3200P) and that they've scanned thousands of rolls without a problem on their machine. The second time was just yesterday at Pisa, Italy (PSA). I asked for hand check and a friendly young employee took me to their machine and pointed out the sticker on the machine that said "Film safe". Then she went on explaining to me that if I had film with ISO higher than 1250 I should hand over only that film for hand inspection. I still tried to have the film hand inspected and she took that as a sign that I wasn't quite sure what she was telling me and went on explaining what ISO number is and how I can identify ISO number on my film cassettes...

 

[koraks]

The second time was just yesterday at Pisa, Italy (PSA). I asked for hand check and a friendly young employee took me to their machine and pointed out the sticker on the machine that said "Film safe". Then she went on explaining to me that if I had film with ISO higher than 1250 I should hand over only that film for hand inspection. I still tried to have the film hand inspected and she took that as a sign that I wasn't quite sure what she was telling me and went on explaining what ISO number is and how I can identify ISO number on my film cassettes...

Sounds like we ran into the same woman...your anecdote is nearly identical to mine, although I didn't wait around for her to start explaining what ISO means and just got the stuff through the xray already.
This was on the trip that yielded me a handful of visibly irradiated films: https://tinker.koraks.nl/photography/dont-look-down-getting-your-film-x-rayed-when-flying/
I don't know if the damage was done at Pisa or at Catania. It must have been either of these airports.

 

[brbo]

Sounds like we ran into the same woman...your anecdote is nearly identical to mine, although I didn't wait around for her to start explaining what ISO means and just got the stuff through the xray already.
This was on the trip that yielded me a handful of visibly irradiated films: https://tinker.koraks.nl/photography/dont-look-down-getting-your-film-x-rayed-when-flying/
I don't know if the damage was done at Pisa or at Catania. It must have been either of these airports.

F**k! I had two ISO800 films amongst the lot. I'll report back when I develop the film...

 

[koraks]

Mine were all Vision3 250D, so a little slower. Hey, don't sweat it - none of those marks have actually shown up on my prints, so you might be OK. If it was Pisa where it happened, to begin with. As said, might just as well have been Catania.

 

[ChrisGalway]

Reminder that this reasonably rigorous test was made:

Videos — Lina Bessonova

www.linabessonova.photography

I think the bottom line is that a single pass of a slow (e.g. ISO 100) film through a CT scanner is nothing to freak out about (but get a hand inspection if possible). But multiple passes of faster films through a CT scanner gives noticeable fogging.

 

[Fatih Ayoglu]

It's enough to make me buy a digital camera. Besides airports, I've found that some institutions, particularly in France, insist on scanning all film and film cameras, no mater what.

Because they are lazy like a sloth. Either they will refuse for a hand check or will decide going for a strike.

As my French colleague said once, sometimes they even decide to go on a strike and then find a reason for it.

Instead of buying a digital, let’s don’t go to that evil side, maybe you’d like to buy your films in France?

 

[CMoore]

I guess this remains a big concern for anybody that travels.

 

[Arthurwg]

Instead of buying a digital, let’s don’t go to that evil side, maybe you’d like to buy your films in France?

Yes, I've thought of that, and having it processed there as well. But how do I shoot interiors in Versailles, for example?

 

[Fatih Ayoglu]

Yes, I've thought of that, and having it processed there as well. But how do I shoot interiors in Versailles, for example?

With a dim light etc, I guess you need to get a ISO3200 film or push ISO400 film. I’d choose ISO3200 so you can avoid scanning at the airport

 

[brbo]

Mine were all Vision3 250D, so a little slower. Hey, don't sweat it - none of those marks have actually shown up on my prints, so you might be OK. If it was Pisa where it happened, to begin with. As said, might just as well have been Catania.

My films are still drying, but they all seem to be unaffected (well, at least without any apparent x-ray waves).

 

[koraks]

Good to hear!

 

[Arthurwg]

With a dim light etc, I guess you need to get a ISO3200 film or push ISO400 film. I’d choose ISO3200 so you can avoid scanning at the airport

My point was, officials at many French institutions and tourist sites insist on scanning film and cameras before entry, which would preclude fast film.

 

[Agulliver]

My point was, officials at many French institutions and tourist sites insist on scanning film and cameras before entry, which would preclude fast film.

It depends what they scan them with. Are we talking CT scanners or older style X-ray scanners? Because, while the older regular X-ray scanners are only officially safe up to 800 or 1000ISO.....real world experience shows plenty of us have taken Fuji Superia 1600 and Ilford Delta 3200 through multiple X-ray scans with no discernible effect.

The big problem at present is knowing in advance what kind of security measures one will face.

One other option is a fast lens and learning to hand hold at slow shutter speeds.

 

[koraks]

Are we talking CT scanners or older style X-ray scanners?

Normal x-ray in places like the major museums (Louvre, Musée d'Orsay, Fondation Louis Vuitton), probably attractions like the Eiffel tower too. I've not yet seen CT equipment in such places yet. It's generally operated by security staff with no awareness of photographic materials; even if you bring 3200 film and point out it can't go through the scanner, they will likely insist on putting it through and otherwise simply deny entry. It's not like airports, where you can usually reason to an extent with security staff. These people are different.

 

[GregY]

Yes, I've thought of that, and having it processed there as well. But how do I shoot interiors in Versailles, for example?

...with film bought in France. I had mine processed by Atelier Pulbimod in Paris.... a really great pro lab!

 

[multivoiced]

Interesting to see an endorsement. Makes me wonder if it's worth mailing it in from elsewhere in Europe.

...with film bought in France. I had mine processed by Atelier Pulbimod in Paris.... a really great pro lab!

 

[koraks]

Makes me wonder if it's worth mailing it in from elsewhere in Europe

Plenty of good labs all over Europe, really. Not to discredit the one mentioned, of course. But they're not exactly unique in that they do a good job at processing some film. Fortunately that's still something that can be found in every major city.

 

[multivoiced]

Judging from North America, the problem is relying on Yelp, etc to find those good labs. The best labs might fly under the internet radar.

Fortunately that's still something that can be found in every major city.

 

[koraks]

Judging from North America, the problem is relying on Yelp, etc to find those good labs. The best labs might fly under the internet radar.

Certainly. Although asking around on a forum like this one generally works quite well. Local forums - even more so.

 

[GregY]

Plenty of good labs all over Europe, really. Not to discredit the one mentioned, of course. But they're not exactly unique in that they do a good job at processing some film. Fortunately that's still something that can be found in every major city.

Absolutely... I went there because i was flying from Paris. I have a list somewhere of pro labs in major European cities from a pro friend who works in Europe a lot.

 

[multivoiced]

Maybe it would be useful to publish that here in a different thread!

I have a list somewhere of pro labs in major European cities

 

[Prest_400]

Interesting Regulatory change!

Airports Council International Europe | ACI EUROPE - Media

Airports Council International Europe | ACI EUROPE

www.aci-europe.org

TLDR, the EU is not satisfied with liquid explosion detection capabilities and is maintaining the 100ml liquid policy. Some airports allowed larger amounts of liquid with CT scanners and this was a factor in not needing to remove these items off luggage. The other, not mention, is electronics which can still remain in the luggage going through scanners.
It's interesting that they give a cost perspective, and there is an unknown impact on the airports that haven't yet implemented CT scanners but have planned to in the near future.

New restriction delivers a setback for the passenger experience and a blow to major investments made by airports.

Brussels, 31 July 2024: ACI EUROPE today took stock of changes to the EU Aviation Security Regulation1 which introduces severe restrictions to the use of next generation cabin baggage scanners at airports in the EU, as well as Iceland, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Norway (EEA).

The amendments are specifically targeting C3 scanners, the cutting edge technology upholding best in class detection standards – which until now allowed passengers to carry liquids without any restriction and to keep them along with their large electronic devices inside their cabin bags at security checkpoints.

The new restriction introduces as of 1 September 2024 a 100ml limitation for individual containers of liquids, thus erasing the main benefit accruing to passengers from C3 scanners. This will also reduce the passenger throughput of security checkpoints at airports that have deployed C3 scanners. It will result in significant operational strain, the mitigation of which will require the deployment of additional staff and the reconfiguration of security checkpoints, where feasible.

Finally, the new restriction means that those airports that have already invested in C3 scanners to improve the passenger experience and their operational efficiency are heavily penalised – as little of the benefits associated with the use of this cutting edge technology will materialise. Purchasing C3 scanners2 is on average 8 times more expensive than the conventional X-ray screening machines they are replacing, while operating maintenance costs are 4 times higher.

Olivier Jankovec, ACI EUROPE Director General said: “Security is non-negotiable, it is at the very top of priorities for Europe’s airports. As such all airports will comply in full with the new restriction. However, the fact remains that those airports which have been early adopters of this new technology are being heavily penalised both operationally and financially. They had taken the decision to invest and deploy C3 scanners in good faith, based on the EU having greenlighted this equipment without any restriction attached. The decision to now impose significant restrictions to their use questions the trust and confidence the industry can place in the current EU certification system for aviation security equipment. We need to draw the lessons from this situation and make sure the EU certification system provides the necessary legal certainty and operational stability moving forward.”

Although this restriction is intended to be temporary, ACI EUROPE regrets the fact that no timeline and no process have been put in place to lift it. We, therefore, call on the European Commission and Member States to urgently develop a roadmap with set milestones to waive the current restrictions and restore the trust in the EU certification system for aviation security equipment. In the meantime, in order to limit operational impacts, it will be essential to ensure that liquids limited to 100ml can remain inside cabin bags when screened by C3 scanners.

 

[Angarian]

It depends what they scan them with. Are we talking CT scanners or older style X-ray scanners? Because, while the older regular X-ray scanners are only officially safe up to 800 or 1000ISO.....real world experience shows plenty of us have taken Fuji Superia 1600 and Ilford Delta 3200 through multiple X-ray scans with no discernible effect.

The reason for that is - at least in the case of Ilford Delta 3200 and Kodak T-Max 3200 - that Delta has a real, measured ISO sensitivity of about 1000/31°, and T-Max 3200 of about 800/30°.
If you measure it with a densitometer, and go for density above base fog of 0.1 logD for Zone I.
I've done that.
For both films Exposure Indices of 3200 are push values. It works well with both films because they were designed for that. So that you don't get a too steep CC-curve with blocked highlights.

 

[Daniela]

Will do, but I've never had an issue, so I don't expect to have one now. However....I just found an exposed roll in the checked luggage. I can't understand how that happened...it's a first. I guess I can look forward to some special effects

So, here are the results. APX 400 - bulk loaded into plastic cartridge - went once through old x-ray machine and then through who-knows-what in checked luggage (Argentina to France).
I don't see anything beyond the usual light leaks at the beginning of the roll...do you informed eyes catch anything else? Is there a chance that I'll notice something once I get into the darkroom and enlarge?

 

[Fatih Ayoglu]

Couple of updates from me, Turin Airport in Italy has XRay and CT scanners, I think the latter one is more for Fast Track customers but if it is empty regulars can use as well. They are happy to hand check films.

Gatwick South has XRay scanners, the managers suggested (last week Tuesday and yesterday) that if I am not happy that my films goes through the scanner, they provide hand inspection. But this was early 6am and not quite sure if they will be willing to help at 3pm when there are hundreds of people. (They have suggested that when they saw my 3 layer lead bag )