Gerald Koch said:I have some Ilford Pan F+ that is 10 years old and was kept refrigerated. It shows noticeable fog and has lost half of its speed. My personal experience has been that Ilford films do not age gracefully.
In an effort to better quantify an answer to the question posed by the OP which comes up so often, I am trying to measure and predict the (long term) fogging effects of gamma radiation on film and paper. To do this I need to measure the amount of background gamma radiation in my freezer. The energies of most gamma ray photons are sufficiently high so thatPhoto Engineer said:Radiation will also cause the same effect, but cannot be stopped by cooling the film. PE
poutnik said:PE: gamma rays definitely are photons, only with much higher energy, therefore much shorter wavelength (inverse proportional relationship). You're right alpha and beta radiation is totaly different, those being helium nuclei (alpha) and electrons (beta minus). All of them can alter photographic emulsion. That is the way X-rays were discovered...
Jiri
Ole said:I'm a "certified radiation worker", and measuring gamma rays is part of what I do for a living.The only way to know what the radiation level is in your freezer is - to measure the radiation in the freezer. Sorry. In my job i measure the variations in natural gamma rays over centimeter scales!
And BTW: Gamma rays are photons. Beta and Alpha are not.
poutnik said:But on the physics side, you're (at least partly) wrong. Energy when transmited through the world behaves sometimes as particles and sometimes as waves. The particles are called photons. Photons of a certain energy have a wavelength on the order of 100 to 1000nm, where we call them photons of light (OK, from around 400 to around 700nm), if you move to shorter wavelengths, the energy goes higher and at one point we stop talking about the wavelength (what is a picometer to you anyway?) and start speaking about electronvolts (eV) because at this point the energy is really what matters. So, PE and Satinsnow, I'm pretty strong in the statement, that gamma rays are photons. And btw. if you look at the wikipedia description, the wavelength is described there too...
Jiri
I agree, unfortunately though it appears that you are the one lacking understanding. Did you take the time to read the reference from Kodak that I gave ? The very sentence implied that the high energy (photons) are gamma rays. More specifically, another sentence in that publication says (on p. 196) that "The agent that actually exposes a grain is a highspeed electron arising from the absorption of an x- or gamma-ray photon."Photo Engineer said:Peter;
Gamma rays are not photons.
To get a handle on this problem you must first distinguish between gamma, beta and etc types of radiation and between radiation (gamma and beta etc) vs light.
I think that there is some lack of understanding here.
PE
PeterB said:... So my question still stands, what tool would you use to do this?.
Thanks Ole. Are the portable ones 'easy' to come by? I guess I'd have to have to know the right people in a similar industry (in Australia), or maybe I could rent one for a day !Ole said:I'd use a Thallium activated Sodium Iodide detector - because that's what I use at work. I'd have to borrow a portable one though - the ones I use are firmly mounted in 2-ton MWD tools to survive being used 4000m down in the ground...
Ole said:I'd use a Thallium activated Sodium Iodide detector - because that's what I use at work. I'd have to borrow a portable one though - the ones I use are firmly mounted in 2-ton MWD tools to survive being used 4000m down in the ground...
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?