Will X-ray damage photographic paper?

[CrazyCockatoo]

Hi guys,

I plan to buy some Kentmere VC select overseas, and take them back to Australia by myself. If i put them in a Check in luggage, will the x-ray leave marks or fogg it?
I hand check my film everytime, but i don't know what's the case with papers.

Thanks for your reply in advance!

 

[mshchem]

I wouldn't risk it in checked baggage, carry on bags get less X-ray intensity, or so I've been told

 

[CrazyCockatoo]

I wouldn't risk it in checked baggage, carry on bags get less X-ray intensity, or so I've been told

I know, but the papers are pretty heavy, two box of 8*10 medium weight paper.

 

[mshchem]

I know, but the papers are pretty heavy, two box of 8*10 medium weight paper.

How old? Might be a bit age fogged, IDK, in theory paper is very much slower than film, so that should help.

 

[CrazyCockatoo]

How old? Might be a bit age fogged, IDK, in theory paper is very much slower than film, so that should help.

newly manufactured, not old paper.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

Carry on, not checked baggage.
A worst-case outcome (not unheard of) would be if the Customs officer wants the package opened, irrespective of what the item is (light sensitive photographic paper). If the scanner image is unclear, that is a flag for escalating their checks.

 

[koraks]

If i put them in a Check in luggage, will the x-ray leave marks or fogg it?

That might be a little risky. It'll probably be OK, but I cannot guarantee there may be a slight effect on contrast especially in the toe of the curve. I imagine you'd want to avoid that risk. Carry-on would be OK.

two box of 8*10 medium weight paper.

That should fit within a carry-on rucksack just fine.

 

[Agulliver]

Paper is less sensitive than (most) film but can still be damaged by X-rays. I'd feel much safer transporting it via carry-on and having it hand inspected if possible - as long as the staff know not to open the box.

I'd agree that it will probably be OK in checked baggage, but do you want to take that risk? Those of us who frequently travel with film and have done so for decades, most of us have mistakenly packed film in checked bags more than once and got away with it....but equally some of us have been burned by it too.

 

[Nige]

That should fit within a carry-on rucksack just fine.

Size is probably not the problem... the weight will be. 7kgs carry on most likely which includes the bag and anything else you might want with you.

 

[jeffreyg]

The only time I had carryon weighed was randomly picked in Paris. I had to pay overweight. If you elect to carryon which would be the best way consider putting some items in pockets. Also just a thought: put the paper in a changing bag and request a hand check. You are at the mercy of the agents. Good luck.

 

[xkaes]

Good luck. Once, TSA had me open a single, plastic, Kodak, 35mm canister to prove that it was a roll of film inside. I was relieved when I didn't need to open the actual film cassette.

 

[GregY]

The only time I had carryon weighed was randomly picked in Paris. I had to pay overweight. If you elect to carryon which would be the best way consider putting some items in pockets. Also just a thought: put the paper in a changing bag and request a hand check. You are at the mercy of the agents. Good luck.

Personally i wouldn't take that risk..... & the agents may not go along with the timeconsuming production.

 

[pentaxuser]

I wonder how they check paper? Same way as film with swabs to check if the swabs detect explosive? However that would not work, would it, if you were suspected of being a drugs mule then they would have to open the packet it seems A daylight free room or one with a safelight might be the only way to not render the paper useless?

pentaxuser

 

[reddesert]

You should be able to put a sealed box of paper through the carry-on x-ray, with the old carry-on X-rays, without needing hand inspection. I don't know about the new CT scanners, but I think even the carry-on CT scanners are still less intense than the checked-bag X-ray.

They shouldn't have to open the boxes. It should be apparent to them from the X-ray that it's not suspicious material.

Regarding bulk, if you have two boxes of 100 sheets of 8x10" paper, it's not extremely heavy or bulky - it's about the size of 3-4 large books. If you need to make carry-on weight, put some of your other stuff in the checked bag. If you have two 250 sheet boxes of 8x10" paper, you're spending enough money on the paper that you can budget for devoting a carry on to it, or mailing it home, or paying a weight surcharge if you have to.

 

[pentaxuser]

You should be able to put a sealed box of paper through the carry-on x-ray, with the old carry-on X-rays, without needing hand inspection. I don't know about the new CT scanners, but I think even the carry-on CT scanners are still less intense than the checked-bag X-ray.

They shouldn't have to open the boxes. It should be apparent to them from the X-ray that it's not suspicious material.

Won't all the old XRay machines disappear shortly in the carry-on luggage section or are you say in that carry-on baggage will remain subject to only the sort of rays that will not harm paper i.e my worries are unfounded because even if you may be a drugs mule then the harmless-to-paper X Ray machines that will always be used will reveal the contents as sheets of harmless paper?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[reddesert]

Your question is confusing but I think it's two questions:

1. Is there a difference between carry-on-old-X-ray and carry-on-new-X-ray in the danger to paper?

2. Can the carry-on-X-ray tell that a box of paper is a box of paper and that it does not need to be opened?

Clearly, I'm not an airport-security or photographic-film-and-paper expert and so I can't answer with absolutely certainty. It's my belief that, for film/paper, the difference between old X-ray, new CT X-ray scanners, and checked baggage X-ray is mostly a difference of intensity. I think they use different luminosities, but not significantly different energies of X-rays. CT scanning allows them to get a computed 3D view of your bags contents rather than a 2D picture, see https://www.tsa.gov/computed-tomography

Next, does the X-ray give information about what the items in your bag are? This is clearly "yes it does" but to what degree of specificity? If you've looked at a X-ray scanner display, they are usually looking at a false-color picture with 3 (or more) colors, even on the older X-ray machines. The machine uses the different amounts of absorption of X-rays at different energies to measure some combination of the density and the atomic number of the materials. (Heavier elements absorb more and the amount depends on X-ray energy.) There are plenty of webpages that show how this works, although they're often from security companies trying to sell upgraded X-ray machines. For example: https://www.wg-plc.com/article/6-colour-imaging-x-ray and https://www.teledyneicm.com/security/how-to-decode-an-x-ray-image/

So they can tell the difference between organic matter and metal, and so on. It's my belief that they made you take laptops out of the bag (before CT scanners) because of the battery, which is a rather dense block of stuff surrounded by wiring, and they wanted to get as clear a view as possible.

The box of paper is going to look like a block of, well, paper. Like a large book. There are organic materials that they might be interested in that could look similar. The water content of food sometimes causes them to want to inspect it - I've had a screener open my bag and look inside to find my lunch (they haven't confiscated my lunch, yet). For obvious reasons, they don't tell members of the public how exactly they differentiate between threatening objects and your lunch, or your box of paper. So I can't guarantee that they will let the paper through, but they should have a good enough image of the insides to tell the difference between a stack of paper vs a wrapped bag of drugs or a bundle of plastic explosive with wires sticking out.

 

[koraks]

I don't know about the new CT scanners, but I think even the carry-on CT scanners are still less intense than the checked-bag X-ray.

Given the amount of fog I see on Vision3 50D from a CT scanner, I expect paper will go through virtually unaffected - at least for one scan. Multiple scans may become iffy.

Won't all the old XRay machines disappear shortly

I think quite a few will linger for decades to come. Capital isn't unlimited. Not all airports have the same priorities and means for replacing these machines.

I wonder how they check paper?

They don't check 'paper'. They check items. Baggage screening personnel overall don't give one hoot what the item is, represents, means or how it works. They don't have time to care about that or even notice it. If you carry paper along, they'll see a box with a bit of tape on it. They may take it out of the bag because it's an object they don't often see on the scans, although I doubt they'll go that far as it'll just look like a box with a rectangular object inside of fairly high density and there's no connecting interface to anything that may look like, let's say, a detonator.

It's my belief that, for film/paper, the difference between old X-ray, new CT X-ray scanners, and checked baggage X-ray is mostly a difference of intensity. I think they use different luminosities, but not significantly different energies of X-rays.

AFAIK CT scans use shorter wavelengths. There's a relationship between wavelength and energy, but there's of course another parameter of interest, which is basically the intensity of the flux. Both particle energy and flux contribute to fogging, although for higher energies the odds of capture (effective cross-section) seem lower, so the relationship is kind of complex. The main difference for our purposes is that CT just takes a lot more radiation to get the desired images than old-style xray.

The water content of food sometimes causes them to want to inspect it

I can see how a ball of dough may look a lot like, let's say, semtex, from a viewpoint of xray cross-section.

For obvious reasons, they don't tell members of the public how exactly they differentiate between threatening objects and your lunch, or your box of paper.

The underlying research is published and easily accessible if you're familiar with navigating academic research.

 

[Agulliver]

I lost count of how many flights I've been on when the number hit the 120s and that was over a decade ago. I have never once had a carry on bag weighed. Whether 7Kg is too much paper will, however, depend somewhat on how strong your arms are, and how much other stuff you need/want for the flight.

My MO is to fly with a carry-on bag full of cameras plus a pair of wired earbuds and a power bank. Sometimes a book or a Walkman (yes, really). For long haul flights I load my phone up with TV shows/movies/podcasts in case the seat back entertainment isn't working. I really don't need much. But some people like lip balm, shaving equipment to freshen up before landing, moisturisers, change of undies etc. Lots of people take medication and prefer to have it in the cabin bag in case the hold bag gets lost. YMMV on what you need to take on board. But I would not be too concerned about weight. As long as you're not straining with 20Kg they don't seem to notice. And that goes for multiple airlines and airports. Though most of my experience is Europe and the USA.

Try to avoid getting the paper CT scanned, but as @koraks says...one scan probably won't do any perceivable harm. That's the main rule, just try to avoid getting it CT scanned. Older X-ray scanners are safe.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks all for a range of answers. It looks as if there may be room for a degree of uncertainty if darkroom paper is taken through the carry-on baggage section.

I wonder if Ilford attempted to test paper when it presumably tested film a couple of years ago and arrived at it's conclusions on the new CT scanners adverse affect on film?

Time I asked I can hear you say so I will

pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

I wonder if Ilford attempted to test paper when it presumably tested film a couple of years ago and arrived at it's conclusions on the new CT scanners adverse affect on film?

I really doubt it. People bring rolls of film on their travels to get that unique shot of the Eiffel tower. They rarely if ever carry around boxes of paper. I don't think they bothered to specifically test it.

 

[MattKing]

Harman may very well have tested any screening systems that might be used with shipments to the various distributors around the world. But more likely there would be arrangements in place to have shipments security checked in other ways.

 

[pentaxuser]

Well I did ask and did get a reply from Ilford this morning Basically it said that it had tried paper and said it seemed fine in either type of scanner but recommended that paper should be taken through the carry-on luggage system and not put into main luggage that is placed in the hold

Incidentally it took the opportunity to say that it does have a team still working with the Department for Transport to ensure that hand inspection training for film is built into airport training for airport staff responsible for security

pentaxuser

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hi guys,

I plan to buy some Kentmere VC select overseas, and take them back to Australia by myself. If i put them in a Check in luggage, will the x-ray leave marks or fogg it?
I hand check my film everytime, but i don't know what's the case with papers.

Thanks for your reply in advance!

x-rays areelectromagnetic radiation just as light is. photographic paper is sensitive to this kind of 'light'. Therefore, it will potentially damge the paper depending on exact wavelength, strength andexposure time. However, having it shipped isn't risk free either.

 

[CrazyCockatoo]

thanks for all the resopnse, i carried some by myself in carry-on and got the paper back safely

I also wonders how ilford and kodak managed to ship their film globally without getting them damaged by xrays

 

[pentaxuser]

thanks for all the resopnse, i carried some by myself in carry-on and got the paper back safely

I also wonders how ilford and kodak managed to ship their film globally without getting them damaged by xrays

So it sounds as if Ilford was right about its safety through carry-on luggage? If so, greatI have no idea about how its inspected for ship travel in large quantities, save to say it's obviously 100% safe

pentaxuser