X-rays Ruined My Film...

[KidA]

I flew to Chicago for the new year and I really wanted to have some film on me to take pictures from the plane. I had purchased a little black 'x-Ray' pouch from Domke and put a few rolls in there; monochrome and c-41. I kept most of my film in the luggage, so that portion was not scanned. I really (stupidly) relied on this pouch... DON'T USE IT!!

Last night I developed three rolls of HP5 (pushed to 800). Two of which were only in the luggage, and my first roll that was scanned by the x-ray. I contact printed them, and the film base was significantly less clear compared to the others... Strange, I thought. I printed my first 8x10 work print and the grain was TERRIBLE... and forget about shadow detail... also, loss of contrast. I'm so very disappointed.

The first picture I tried printing had much shadow area and looked like absolute garbage. I tried a daylight picture and it was better, but still not what HP5 @800 in HC-110 'B' should look like.

I'm almost certain it's an x-ray issue. My question is now, how should I treat development of my other films that were passed thru the x-ray machine? Also, I have some that were left unexposed. Is there anything I can do for exposure? How about my c-41 rolls? Any insight?

If you'd like to see some scans, I can get some uploaded by tonight.

 

[crumpet8]

Sorry to hear and sorry I cant help but I would love to see some scans so that I can get an idea of the damage for future reference! Maybe you can put up a similiar undamaged photo as well for further reference?

 

[ToddB]

I was told the that X ray machine that scan checked luggage are more powerful than carry on scanners. Asa, anything more than 400 can be effect by either. So I guess in the future don't use anything more than 400 asa. That really sucks about that Domke Bag too.

ToddB

 

[MattKing]

The checked baggage/luggage goes through high power X-rays that will defeat any so-called X-ray bag when adjusted to do so.

The carry on baggage goes through a much lower power X-ray, that shouldn't affect film.

X-ray bags are a bad idea, because they just encourage X-ray machine operators to turn up the power (when they can).

No film should go into your checked baggage.

All film should be in your carry-on baggage.

 

[bdial]

[TABLE="width: 100%, align: center"]

[TABLE="width: 100%, align: center"]

[TABLE="width: 100%, align: center"]
[TR="bgcolor: #ffffff"]
[TABLE="align: left"]

[TD="align: left"]
Was this carry-on or checked luggage?Carry-on scanning generally is a non-issue even for ISO 800 films. Beyond that the x-ray pouches are beyond useless as Matt says. If anything, their use guaranteesthat your film will get extra scrutiny and possibly more x-ray exposure, not less.

[/TABLE]


[/TABLE]


[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]


[/TABLE]

 

[Alan W]

I got back from Europe in October.All my film-20 rolls or so of mainly Tri x 120 and 135- was scanned in carry on luggage on a total of Nine flights.No problem with any of the film,exposed or unexposed rolls were all good.As said above-always carry your film.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Film cannot go in the checked luggage ever. If the scanner sees and x-ray bag since it cannot see through it, the scanner will increase the radiation step-wise until it sees through the bag.

 

[paul_c5x4]

Assuming you flew from another US airport, I believe you have the right to request a manual hand check of any film that you carry (we don't generally have that option in Europe). From: https://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml

If you're going to be traveling through multiple X-ray examinations (more than 5 times), request a hand search of your carry-on baggage. FAA regulations in the U.S. allow for a hand search of photographic film and equipment if requested.

Travelers probably shouldn't worry about possible X-ray damage when hand-carrying their film onto the airplane unless they are carrying:

• Highly sensitive X-ray or scientific films.
• Film with an ISO speed or Exposure Index (EI) of 400 or higher.
• Any motion picture films.
• Film of any speed that is exposed to X-ray surveillance more than 5 times (the effect of X-ray screening is cumulative).
• Film that is or will be underexposed. (See Note 1 below.)
• Film that you intend to "push process." (See Note 2 below.)

In any of these cases, you should request visual inspection of your film and of any cameras containing film. Depending on the format(s) of film you have, carrying a light-tight changing bag may be advisable to help the inspection process. Remember that this is only a guaranteed option in U.S. air travel. Outside of the U.S. you are required to comply with the local standards and regulations.

NOTE 1: X-ray fog is most noticeable in the low exposure range of the film, and underexposed film has more of the image recorded in this range. Therefore, the effects of X-ray exposure may further reduce the quality of underexposed images.

NOTE 2: Push-processing involves over-development of film to increase the effective speed and density of underexposed images on color-negative and black-and-white films. On color-reversal films (slides), push-processing on underexposed images decreases the density range. X-ray exposure has the potential to degrade the quality of images that will be push processed.

 

[aoresteen]

The TSA used to warn travelers NOT to put any film in their checked baggage. I always carry it with me and ask for a hand inspection. In the USA they MUST hand inspect; in other countries it varies. Last Oct I flew out of Stuttgart to the USA and they were very pleasant and hand inspected my film.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Carry on x-ray machine is fine. Checked in x-ray, is a NO NO!

 

[philosli]

At least in US, TSA puts up signs that you can ask for hank-check of your films. I always do, and they always oblige. It usually takes a few more min. waiting for the agent coming back with my films. I saw the signs in 2014 and 2015, and I consider this very remarkable at this, er...cough...digital, age.

Outside US, it depends. I was successful at some airports but denied a few times. Usually they'll ask your film speed and will tell you below ISO 1600 it's safe. If you are persistent but polite, the success rate will be higher.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Just tell them the film is ISO 400 but you are shooting it at 1600 and they hand check it.

 

[KidA]

I don't believe checked baggage is always scanned. But this sucks to hear since I put all of my film, excluding the rolls already loaded in my two bodies with me in my carry on - which got hand-checked in the US as I was coming back to Canada, by the way, because I my little Domke bag wouldn't fit the cameras.

One thing to note: the roll of film in which was in my checked luggage both ways, came out significantly better than the problem roll, which was a part of the checked baggage batch on the way home only. I actually only printed one neg from this better roll to see what it looked like enlarged. Huge difference. I also made comparisons from other HP5 negs pushed N+1 in the same developers and same paper; the good roll seems to me untouched. I will print some more negs from the better roll. Perhaps There's something I've missed.

A question regarding film speed: although I've heard different opinions on which speeds are suitable for x-rays, as for guidelines of which speed is 'ok' to get scanned, is it box speed or actual developed speed they're referring to? Would by negs have come out less affected if I had developed for 400?

 

[Sirius Glass]

All checked baggage is x-rayed. The TSA personnel are not closely checked which is a problem.

 

[Athiril]

Carry on scans are generally fine, carry scanners need to be safe for people to work next to all day every day, so the intensity is low.

 

[AgX]

I don't believe checked baggage is always scanned.

Checked baggage is even more crucial! As such baggage could be sent unattended. Meanwhile I guess unattented bagage is even taken off the plane.

 

[jeffreyg]

I always take my film (120 Delta 400) carry on and have never had a problem with the scans or with requests for hand checking except for once a refusal to hand check in Paris. I would think that rating a 400 speed film at a higher ISO would not have a difference since it would just being under exposing and I haven't noticed frames that were purposely (or not ) under exposed were fogged. I may be wrong but I think the 1600 and 3200 ISO film emulsions are different. Since the 120 film is paper wrapped I keep it in a vertical orientation in my bag but don't know if that really makes a difference. X-rays travel in a straight line.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[removed account4]

If you'd like to see some scans, I can get some uploaded by tonight.

usually xray damage persents itself as weird wavy lines

sorry to read of your troubles, its no fun after making so many laten images that they don't turn out the way you had hoped.
the only time my film ( all of it ( 200 sheets, 150 rolls ) exposed and unexposed ) went through the baggage hold / not carry on it came up OK
no fog, no wavy lines no issues, that was IDK in 2008 or 9 and the exposed ones were probably 60 rolls of assorted c41/e6 b/w assorted formats 35mm-4x5
and assorted iso's 100 - 800 ... i'm still shooting some of the stuff that was unexposed - sheets and rolls - and they have gone through carry on probably 10-20 times since then too..

 

[BrianShaw]

usually xray damage persents itself as weird wavy lines

sorry to read of your troubles, its no fun after making so many laten images that they don't turn out the way you had hoped.
the only time my film ( all of it ( 200 sheets, 150 rolls ) exposed and unexposed ) went through the baggage hold / not carry on it came up OK
no fog, no wavy lines no issues, that was IDK in 2008 or 9 and the exposed ones were probably 60 rolls of assorted c41/e6 b/w assorted formats 35mm-4x5
and assorted iso's 100 - 800 ... i'm still shooting some of the stuff that was unexposed - sheets and rolls - and they have gone through carry on probably 10-20 times since then too..

To be more specific... banding is the damage that results from Computed Tomography (X-ray CT). CT is the most damaging screening technology for film... and damage is almost a guarantee when CT screening is employed. CT screening is not necessarily employed on all checked bags... but it is a high probability event. Some checked baggage is screened with conventional x-ray and other detection techniques. That's why sometimes folks can check film in bags and get lucky, but other times they don't get so lucky. One never knows until after the fact so the advise has always been to not tempt fate by putting film in checked bags. Film damage from carry-on baggage equipment does not necessarily exhibit banding like that. Kodak has for many years posted pictures of both kinds of x-ray effects on film. But it takes an awful lot of exposure from conventional x-ray to get film damage at 800ASA and below!

 

[KidA]

My apologies for not uploading the scans! I got held up, and I likely won't have them up tonight either as I won't be home. I really wanna show you guys!

 

[wiltw]

Checked baggage is very often sent thru a CT scanner, which by design is about 10-100X (depending upon the type of medical CT) the X-ray dose of a even a simple medical chest X-ray. Kodak has ALWAYS stated to NEVER send unprocessed film thru in checked baggage for that reason.

The carry-on backscatter X-ray is a very low dose (1/1000 of medical X-ray) mode, these very low dose machines were first installed about 2012. Radiation received during a standard chest x-ray can be 0.1mSv - 4 mSv, 1-400X higher than from a single backscatter scan. After 3 years of experimentation, the European Union banned backscatter x-ray scanners and now use nonionizing microwaves. Major US airports have recently decided to switch from backscatter x-ray scanners to microwave systems.

What Kodak said in 2003 https://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml

 

[BAC1967]

I've never had a problem with my 100 ISO negative film going through the x-ray as a carry on but most of the time I ask for a hand inspection. The only time I had a problem was with a roll of 8mm Kodak E100D reversal film. It was scanned at the airport going to New York. I loaded it into a Bolex movie camera with a pistol grip. When I went to the Empire State building they had us put our bags through an x-ray. The pistol grip got their attention so they ran it through again. The same thing happened at the airport going home so it got 5 doses of x-rays on that trip. Sure enough, you can see the damage when watching the movie. It's as if the focus gets blurry off and on which wasn't an operator error since it was a fixed focus lens. on another trip after that a TSA agent told me that Chrome film is more likely to be damaged by x-rays. I don't know where he got that from, I can't find any mention of it on the internet.

 

[CropDusterMan]

When I was assisting in New York, the guy I worked with travelled all the time...mostly domestic, but some international
too...Britain, India, Nepal, Middle East etc. Domestic flights here in the U.S, it is within your rights with the TSA to have your film hand searched, and I printed out that page from the TSA website. They ask, what film speed is it, and try to protest, saying "if it's below 800ASA you'll be fine"...being the loyal government employees they are-prone to extra effort (Laughing here). I tell them I do night photography and the film is rated at 3200 speed, then if need be, I show the letter.

I remove the film from the boxes and leave it in the foil packs. For the middle east, we had press credentials from Time Inc., which helped but I also had letters explaining what we were requesting in the native language of the country. I had a machine gun pointed at me in Quatar when they tried to grab the bag with 8x10 to xRay and I nicely protested. "F"ing jerks in the middle east...Every country I've been to there. In India, I bribed one security guard to let the 8x10 film boxes through. I even had a dark bag on hand for them to open the boxes if need be. Here in the US, the TSA are douche bags too...trying to do the minimum they can. Before 9-11, I used to fly with exposed 665 negs in Polaroid buckets, then went to small Pelican cases just about the size of a Sony Walkman. Nowadays, I try to buy film where I travel to, and travel with my jobo hand tanks and small amounts of chemical and process on-site before flying home.

Oh how the world of traveling with film has changed in the age of modern terrorism.

 

[mnemosyne]

My apologies for not uploading the scans! I got held up, and I likely won't have them up tonight either as I won't be home. I really wanna show you guys!

Rather than upload scans, take a close up picture of the film strips (good and bad ones next to eacht other for comparison) against a diffuse light source. Scanning introduces all kinds of automatic image corrections that make it hard or impossible to assess what is wrong with your negatives (or not).

 

[KidA]

I will scan the prints. And I can also do as you asked with the negs.