X ray question with shipping film

[Huss]

Say one bought film in Canada by mail order, to be shipped to the US.
Would it get xrayed by customs etc? The kind that wrecks film i.e. like at the airport when they tell u not to put film in checked in luggage? (only carry on)

Thanks!

 

[Kevin Harding]

I think the only answer here is "maybe."

I've ordered the other way around (US->CA) and haven't encountered any film damaged by x-rays. But I know that Canada Border Services Agency x-rays parcels into Canada to see if they match their customs declarations - although CBSA only samples a tiny amount of the mail.

Maybe I have just been lucky?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I had a box of IR film ruined from x-ray coming in from the States. I've had X-ray film that was okay. Must be a gamble.

 

[MattKing]

It may also depend on factors like how it is packaged, how it is labelled and the knowledge of the border security people.

As I understand it, the high energy Xrays are only used when the item attracts suspicion.

 

[Huss]

I had a box of IR film ruined from x-ray coming in from the States. I've had X-ray film that was okay. Must be a gamble.

IR film is more sensitive than regular stock, no?

 

[ericdan]

I regularly order film and paper from the US to Japan.
So far I've been lucky nothing has ever arrived damaged.
I do try to keep my orders small to limit my loss should the shipment get damaged by scanning.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

IR film is more sensitive than regular stock, no?

I never had any issues with Efke IR being x-rayed at the airport. I never let them x-ray HIE, though. I concluded that the Efke IR I had sent over the line got a high level of zapping.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I regularly order film and paper from the US to Japan.
So far I've been lucky nothing has ever arrived damaged.
I do try to keep my orders small to limit my loss should the shipment get damaged by scanning.

I ordered all my 8x10 film from B&H when I lived in Japan. Never had any issues.

 

[mooseontheloose]

IR film is more sensitive than regular stock, no?

No - it's on the opposite end of the light spectrum from x-rays (not that it isn't susceptible to fogging...). I would love to do as Andrew does and not have my HIE go through x-rays, but then that means they have to open up the film canisters, and it's just not worth it. I haven't had a single issue with x-ray fogging yet...although age fogging is definitely present.

 

[AgX]

IR film is more sensitive than regular stock, no?

No.

No - it's on the opposite end of the light spectrum from x-rays

No, spectral sensitisation is not involved in X-ray sensitivity.

 

[Huss]

thanks for all the replies

 

[thuggins]

I just came back from the UK and had my film in my carry on luggage, so it was Xrayed twice - once unexposed and once exposed (I wasn't up for the hassle of the "It's film, please hand check it" conversation). About a dozen of those rolls were Provia 400, with two of them pushed to 1600. Another roll was Provia 100 pushed to 400. All of it came out perfectly.

So I'm pretty confident that at least the carry-on xray scan will not damage 1600 speed film.

 

[Halford]

I recently shipped my household of stuff in a container from South Africa to The Netherlands. I know that the container was X-rayed with a big-industrial freight scanner, because I had to pay the shipper a pile of cash to move the container to the scanning station and back at Customs in Rotterdam. As a precaution, I did not ship most of my film, and brought it along in my hand luggage, and I assumed that the leftover few bits of film I'd left in film holders in the container would be a dead loss.

However, I found there was a half-shot roll of Tri-X still sitting in my F4. What did I have to lose? I shot the rest of the roll and processed it. The film is pristine and beautiful. There is no indication of any effect whatsoever on the images.

If a big, industrial container scanner in one of the world's busiest ports didn't damage my film, it's very, very unlikely to have any worse a problem moving film between the US and Canada. (Oh yes -- and I also used to pretty frequently order film from the US or Germany when I was in South Africa -- never an issue)

 

[sepiareverb]

...I know that the container was X-rayed with a big-industrial freight scanner...I found there was a half-shot roll of Tri-X still sitting in my F4....The film is pristine and beautiful. There is no indication of any effect whatsoever on the images...

This begs the question of whether it was x-rayed at all does it not? Simply playing Devil's Advocate here. I've seen many films that many of my students left in their checked baggage that were x-rayed by airports leaving Europe and entering the US that were completely black.

 

[BrianShaw]

This begs the question of whether it was x-rayed at all does it not? Simply playing Devil's Advocate here. I've seen many films that many of my students left in their checked baggage that were x-rayed by airports leaving Europe and entering the US that were completely black.

Really? I was unaware that X-ray turned film completely black.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I just came back from the UK and had my film in my carry on luggage, so it was Xrayed twice - once unexposed and once exposed (I wasn't up for the hassle of the "It's film, please hand check it" conversation). About a dozen of those rolls were Provia 400, with two of them pushed to 1600. Another roll was Provia 100 pushed to 400. All of it came out perfectly.

So I'm pretty confident that at least the carry-on xray scan will not damage 1600 speed film.

ISO1600 film, marked as such and exposed at that ISO (not pushed) is not safe from x-rays. So too, film of ISO3200 and above. For these films you carry them separately and can legitimately ask for a hand-inspection/swabbing in lieu of x-ray. How/why is this a problem? Hand inspection of such high-speed films has never presented a problem for me at Customs (Australia, New Zealand, Tokyo) who recognise the film for what it is. For all other films, x-ray damage is cumulative. That no damage can be seen on the film from 2 or several passes does not mean the film is not damaged! This is the important distinction that must be kept in mind, the cumulative effect.

 

[AgX]

If a big, industrial container scanner in one of the world's busiest ports didn't damage my film, it's very, very unlikely to have any worse a problem moving film between the US and Canada.

-) scanning rate varies between borders

-) used technology, including max. power emission varies between locations and application

 

[Halford]

This begs the question of whether it was x-rayed at all does it not?

Indeed it does. Though obviously I don't like the idea of having had to cough up for a scan that didn't happen

 

[AgX]

With an early ride-through scanning installation at Rotterdam harbour there indeed was an explicit warning concerning photographic materials.
There also was a lot of radiation shielding.

With current models the manufacturer are quite reluctant with informations. That likely is connected to an expert debate if part of the newest models are really safe for humans.


This matter also by nature contains sensitive information aside of the health issue.