LF or not? Trip advice needed...

[jackies]

I spent a week in the Eastern Sierras last fall. I took my 4x5 + 3 lenses and a DSLR + 2 lenses - 24-105 and 100-400. I always take wide angle, normal and telephoto lenses to cover all possible opportunites. Glad I did.

It was so windy the whole time I was there no matter where I was (in the meadows/lake or on the top of the mountain) that I shot only @ 7 LF and all the rest DSLR. Summer winds may be different.

I fly regional jets most of the time and pack it all into the MP-3 backpack and load it into the overhead. The film and other digital stuff goes in a roll-on briefcase that fits under the seat.

Have fun. It sounds like a wonderful trip.
J

[tom north]

I am asking the same question. I will be going to Europe in early August and have decided to keep my 5 x 7 system at home and bring my 6 x 7 Mamiya and 6 x 12 Horseman instead. For years I carried a full backpack with 5 x 7 gear and would like to try something different. Most of what I shoot is architectural and will be blowing up negs to print platinum. I know people who bring multiple formats to very remote places and have no problem switching but I prefer one format and to travel light. Let us know how it went.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Having just been through this last month, I'd back up my 4x5 Quickloads with a DSLR when flying. There's plenty enough to worry about getting to my destinations when the light is epic without worrying about my images being destroyed by a too-vigilant scanner look-see inside my bag on the TSA conveyor.

You might want to consider that when flying boxed film will pretty much have to be blasted by X-rays, as there are no Quickloads in 5x7. Maybe carry-on X-rays machines don't bother you but the result is cumulative and it bugs me enough to always request hand inspection. Checked bags get a MUCH bigger dose, incidentally.

You can always request it, but with boxed film I really couldn't argue to point for out of concern for having the lids come off to fog all my film accidentally. Lot harder to screw up Q/Ls.

120 film may get explosives swabbed, but at least it can put in a ziplock to be hand inspected. It will add 15 minutes to your clearing TSA so get there plenty early.

No doubt about it, film can be a hassle when flying nowadays. Post 9/11 security measures played a significant role in the stampede to digital among pros.

[rdenney]

Post 9/11 security measures played a significant role in the stampede to digital among pros.

It's one of the main reasons that I usually limit myself to digital when I have to travel by air. I had half a dozen rolls of 120 film damaged or ruined by fogging when coming back from Alaska two years ago, and I don't get there often enough to be prepared to suffer that kind of loss. All that film was run through the checkpoint in carry-on bags. Before 9/11, I almost always took along at least one medium-format camera even on business trips in case I had an opportunity to play.

Rick "waiting (but not with bated breath) for affordable digital backs for large format" Denney

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Rick, what ISO film was it that you had damaged? Did the TSA balk at a request for hand-inspection? One of the strategies I've gleaned off the web for insuring hand inspection with film include putting a junk roll of ISO 3200 in the ziplock bag. Or even a slower roll rated at a 2 stop push with a hand label... Haven't had resort to that one yet, myself, but it sure seems worth remembering.

In late June, because I'd scheduled a one-way trip on less than 24 hours notice, I got the full explosives-swipe treatment. Despite this, I did still manage to get my slow ISO professional film (with particular emphasis on "professional") hand-inspected rather than run through the scanner.

If I had to deal with this multiple times per week or month, I could see where the time and hassle might soon push me towards an all-digital workflow, just not a MF or LF digital workflow.

So long as the films I like to use are yet available for a reasonably-affordable premium in Q/L, and digital MF and LF backs remain so freakishly expensive, I can deal with the TSA a few times per year .

[rdenney]

Rick, what ISO film was it that you had damaged?

Both 100 and 1000 (the roll of the 1000 was in the bag in case we had a good night for Aurora) transparency films were damaged. I did not ask for hand-inspection, because I had not had problems with film running through the check-point X-ray before. I suspect that it was only one airport that had juiced up their machine too much.

I travel a lot but not for photography, and usually try to get through the checkpoint as predictably as possible. I know what it's like to be behind someone insisting on a hand inspection or causing some other slowdown, and I know how surly and arbitrary the security people have become now that they are government employees, especially at smaller airports (such as Anchorage). It's a lot easier to achieve that objective with digital equipment, but even then my camera bag usually attracts a (often surly) hand inspection at smaller airports.

Rick "who is nice to government employees (particularly the one I'm married to), but for whom the favor is not always returned" Denney

[sanchi heuser]

Take the Canham

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Rick,
My somewhat limited understanding in the TSA lines is that the standard pass through the scanner is relatively mild and largely not injurious (though gamma and Xray exposure is cumulative). But whenever they see anything that the first X-ray view can't penetrate or that looks suspicious, they bump it up and the dose gets much stronger for the deeper look (and which also explains why lead foil pouches are counterproductive these days).

[rdenney]

Rick,
My somewhat limited understanding in the TSA lines is that the standard pass through the scanner is relatively mild and largely not injurious (though gamma and Xray exposure is cumulative). But whenever they see anything that the first X-ray view can't penetrate or that looks suspicious, they bump it up and the dose gets much stronger for the deeper look (and which also explains why lead foil pouches are counterproductive these days).

I don't recall seeing them conduct a deep look, but it could also have been the briefcase of the guy in front of me in line. From my perspective, it becomes a risk that is difficult to control. If I was paid to control it, I would. But for fun, though, I alleviate the risk by just taking digital. If I want to do film on a fun photographic vacation, I'll find a way to drive or go by train.

Rick "for whom this was one of the main motivations for buying a motorhome" Denney

[htswv]

I've decided to take the 5x7 Canham setup. I'll be shipping my Ries tripod, changing bag, film and film holders ahead via Fedex/UPS and will do the same on the return trip...it will cost money, sure, but American Airlines wants a fortune to add an extra bag and there's no guarantee that it will arrive safely or even arrive at all! The UPS charges are very reasonable. I'll probably also tote along my 35mm just to be safe.

For those of you who shoot 5x7, do you think a 90mm Nikkor is going to be too wide for shooting landscapes out there?