USA Air Travel With Film...What is your recent (early 2022 ->) experience?

[guangong]

you can ask for a hand inspection and in the US airports they are required to give it to you. outside the US, every airport is different. just put all your film in a clear ziplock and have it out in your hand and say you want this hand inspected. the rest of you stuff on the belt ready to go thru the scanner

john

That says it all. TSA very polite., although sometime an inspector will be a little puzzled about inspecting a camera loaded with film. Just curiosity, and never a problem.
However, nowadays foreign travel is when I resort to digital.

 

[Bob_Brooks]

You film will not fog from x-ray till you get into the higher ISO range, meaning ISOs higher than 800.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The first time I went through one of the body scanners, I was instructed clearly to remove *everything, even the smallest item* from my pockets. This would be almost 20 years ago when they were being tested rather than in regular use. It was already my habit to remove my wallet, keys, any change, phone etc.....so I forgot that I had a handkerchief in my pocket (I have exercise induced rhinitis, which scares people in these times of plague). The scanner operator instantly picked up on it and asked me to show him what was in my pocket by turning both pockets inside out.

Nobody should be surprised that you cannot take *anything* on your person other than literally your clothes though one of those body scanners. That's the whole point of them.

The airport security authorities aren't out to get us film users, but we are a small voice. Clearly the British Department for Transport has had contact from Kodak and Ilford, and have already made changes to policy. I have few doubts that the vast majority of the world will do the same. They're not out to deliberately spoil anyone's fun.

I just wish other countries security were more sensitive to film users and work on accommodations.

 

[GregY]

You film will not fog from x-ray till you get into the higher ISO range, meaning ISOs higher than 800.

Bob, Are you referring to the new scanners....because this is the info we have:

"While not at many airports yet, Kodak Alaris warns that the new TSA CT scanners WILL damage unprocessed film. Currently being rolled out in the US and other countries, just one scan from the CT Scanner could destroy your unprocessed film.Feb 1, 2021"

 

[Sirius Glass]

You film will not fog from x-ray till you get into the higher ISO range, meaning ISOs higher than 800.

Old news. Those x-ray scanners are being replaced by CT scanners that will ruin unprocessed film of any speed.

 

[MattKing]

Old news. Those x-ray scanners are being replaced by CT scanners that will ruin unprocessed film of any speed.

It actually appears that your special purpose, ~ 1 ISO duplicating (or motion picture internegative) stock may be resistant to damage.

 

[wiltw]

Old news. Those x-ray scanners are being replaced by CT scanners that will ruin unprocessed film of any speed.

Yet some folks claim to have had their film run thru CT scanner at gate Security, and seen no apparent damage! ...which explains why I would like to deliberately subject film to a CT scanner at gate Security, a test to assess the damage done!
So far, two trips thru 4 different US airports (3 of them with 'International' status) and I have not even seen a CT scanner at gate Security

 

[Bob_Brooks]

https://petapixel.com/2021/07/06/what-happens-if-your-film-goes-through-the-tsas-ct-scanners/

 

[GregY]

Bob, from the article:
"In his testing, Nuri says that one scan through the new CT scanners before you take any exposure will not noticeably damage film, assuming the photos are properly exposed later. However, sending a roll that already has photos on it through the TSA CT scanner will damage them with a noticeable loss of detail in the shadows."

The pro photographers i know who are working in Europe have taken to buying their film in EU and having it processed before returning. That's my plan too....

 

[Bob_Brooks]

@GregY If doing that give you "Peace of Mind", who am I to argue that point.

 

[GregY]

@GregY If doing that give you "Peace of Mind", who am I to argue that point.

Bob it's not a question of peace of mind....having an entire job ruined costs a lot of time & money.....& "noticeable loss of detail in the shadows" is not an option.....

 

[Bob_Brooks]

Bob it's not a question of peace of mind....having an entire job ruined costs a lot of time & money.....& "noticeable loss of detail in the shadows" is not an option.....

Again, to quote from the article, "Nuri found that while only the darkest shadows may have lost a negligible amount of detail, the film was relatively unharmed."

 

[GregY]

Be my guest Bob, I prefer to make my film decisions based on something other than a random 'petapixel' article. You're of course free to do as you please too.

 

[ic-racer]

Post trip experience:

FILM: HP5 35mm 36 exp
PRESENTATION: cassettes removed from boxes and cannisters and placed in clear zip-loc bags.
At the checkpoint, the bag was handed to a representative who hand inspected it and had it available on the other side of the x-ray (non-CAT SCAN) machine to pick up. No issue leaving or returning.
No film in the camera and the camera was sent through the x-ray machine.

 

[Agulliver]

I am *very* sceptical of that article on Petapixel, because the damage claimed is not what I would at all expect from CT scanners. They would *not* produce a small amount of uniform fog through the roll of film. You get lines, squiggles, waveforms....areas of fogging and areas with no fog. The results in that article are not in any way suggestive of CT scanner damage.

 

[pentaxuser]

Again, to quote from the article, "Nuri found that while only the darkest shadows may have lost a negligible amount of detail, the film was relatively unharmed."

Well if Nuri's experience is based on say more than say one pass and Agulliver's is right to be sceptical of the petapixel article then maybe those of us prepared to accept negligible loss of darkest shadow detail have little to worry about.

I relayed the experience of a member from another forum who had 4 scanner passes at Edinburgh, Scotland and Berlin airports in the last few weeks. He had only developed one of his films, namely, his Ilford SFX but had no issues on the negatives that he could see

It was suggested to me that (a) I only had his word for it (b) it was a one off and just sheer luck

So, yes, the evidence is currently sparse and would fly in the face of both Kodak's and Ilford's statements, although as far as I can see Ilford does not say damage is absolutely certain nor does it quantify in specific terms, the extent of the damage or not as far as I can see.

Just a pity that when such experiences are relayed the tendency is to "shoot first and ask questions later " as they used to say in the Old West

The next time he flies from Edinburgh to whatever destination in Europe he has said he will try to ascertain which type of scanner each airport currently uses


pentaxuser

 

[Agulliver]

It is always possibly to be lucky. We don't know for sure that CT scanning is implemented every time a bag is sent through those scanners. They may also be capable of conventional X-ray scanning or of performing low power CT scans. For security reasons there is a lot that the airports and manufacturers don't tell us.

But what I am aware of is that CT scanning, by nature, does not result in uniform fog over a roll of film. You get lines, patterns, squiggles. So I am, shall we say, sceptical of the helpfulness of the Petapixel article. I am sure that's the experience the guy had, but I believe he is misinterpreting his results.

We do need more data. We need more Photrio members to risk "taking one for the team" and send rolls through the CT scanners.

 

[Wallendo]

Since the title of the thread is recent USA Air Travel experiences, I will add my own.
I flew from Charlotte NC to the Dominican Republic with a layover in Miami. When going through the line in Charlotte I asked if the scanner was "film safe". The TSA rep told me it was not and offered a hand inspection. Santiago DR had a scanner for incoming flights (agricultural scanner) and I waved my bag of film and they waved me through. Flying back from Santiago, I hand carried my bag of film through the walk-through scanner and they did a hand inspection afterwards. This is a very small airport with a strange security setup and there was no-one to ask if the scanner was film safe (it looked old). We flew through Newark NJ on the way back and there was an older scanner with a sign saying it was safe for film, but they still were agreeable to hand inspection.