Travelers: New X-ray machines WILL ruin your film

[Ulophot]

I picked this up from John Sexton's newsletter and post the link below. The new 3-D scanners will reportedly do in your unprocessed film instantly.

https://petapixel.com/2019/10/21/beware-new-3d-airport-scanners-will-destroy-your-camera-film/

[Tin Can]

Unprocessed film...

[Andrew O'Neill]

Unprocessed film...

I think he means, unopened, never seen the light of a camera, film.

[Andrew O'Neill]

...and film that has been shot but not processed...

[Tin Can]

Yes, both fresh and exposed but not processed film will be ruined

My point was, OP changed the Headline from "Beware: New 3D Airport Scanners Will Wipe Unprocessed Camera Film"

We should quote source exactly as not doing that is causing a lot of political damage in this PC era.




I think he means, unopened, never seen the light of a camera, film.

[cowanw]

Any personal reports of bad effects yet?

[jp]

Just went through Boston and Seattle and did not see any of these machines at the terminals I used.

Maybe hospitals can get these someday as hand-me-downs and not spend small fortunes to look at people's innards in 3d.

[Keith Pitman]

This TSA link lists where these scanners are in operation now:

https://www.tsa.gov/computed-tomography?fbclid=IwAR1JBaOvlInAVZYQ0RucrwtNd8xgx2E9OUplLAy2iiisXX-XzRaHn8LG_7Q

[Peter Collins]

Another nudge to digital?

[jp]

Send the film USPS if this becomes widespread. Just remember all the fun things are being restricted everywhere it's not just film. This is at a stadium. Looks like a bucket list to me...

197770

[Eric Woodbury]

Another nudge to digital?

Another nudge NOT to fly.

[Tom Kershaw]

Send the film USPS if this becomes widespread. Just remember all the fun things are being restricted everywhere it's not just film. This is at a stadium. Looks like a bucket list to me...

197770

How does one define a 'professional style' camera, 500mm lens on a DSLR?

[Bob Salomon]

Send the film USPS if this becomes widespread. Just remember all the fun things are being restricted everywhere it's not just film. This is at a stadium. Looks like a bucket list to me...

197770

They must not have ever seen a Dodgers game at Ebbitts Field!

[John Olsen]

Did Freestyle just pick the "thousand times" more radiation out of the air? I appreciate the warning, but how about some actual numbers, results of real-life tests? This forum has a lot of members who like to play with actual scientific concepts, so somebody, please, run a roll of 400ISO thru a scanner to give us a data point. I'll pay for the roll of film and develop it myself, if you wish.

[Jim Michael]

Here is some reading material that might help. One article references possible use of periodic exposures in the CT slice method, which has some implications for film (stripes?). Looks like you can calculate the exposure in mrem using the ma and kv values, assume a constant exposure based on the track speed. On first pass I don't see anything connecting mrem to film iso. Perhaps compare the older luggage scanner mrem to the new scanners. And never forget that radiation exposure is cumulative.

https://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q12361.html
http://2gxj9i15530c1434fe5wog0d-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ConneCT-Datasheet-180206.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_to_calculate_X_ray_dose_using_mAs_and_kV_without_using_any_detector
http://www.radprocalculator.com/RadProDownloads.aspx

[paulbarden]

The PetaPixel article only offers conjecture, not proof. Not one mention of any first hand experience with these new scanners. Someone needs to actually run a roll of film through one and see what actually happens.

[Tin Can]

One unexposed modern sheet film in the original packaging may tell more than a roll of 120

When processed...

[Jim Michael]

I agree. A sheet oriented orthogonal to the source and in the center of your baggage.

Re sending film through the mail, why should that be assumed to be a safe mode?

[NER]

When information about these new machines was first posted here over a month ago (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?154859-Do-new-airport-carry-on-scanners-fog-film), I immediately wrote to both Analog and TSA to inquire about possible effects on light meters, specifically those with silicon photo diode cells. Analog, the maker of the new machine, has not responded, but today I received an answer from TSA which I copy below for those who may be interested in what the agency had to say. I gather from the answer that their recommendation applies to all light meters regardless of type:

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.com


Good Afternoon,

We appreciate your recent inquiry through the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Contact Center (TCC) regarding Computed Tomography (CT) scanners and photographic film.

TSA does not have information on the effects that CT scanners have on the calibration or function of light meters in photographic film. Due to high sensitivity of undeveloped film and possible camera light meter issues, TSA recommends having film and cameras with light meters hand-inspected by a Transportation Security Officer to prevent possible damage.

If you require further information, please contact the TCC for assistance.

Thank you,

APM Communications Team
Contractor, E3 Federal Solutions

[Pieter]

TSA says you can put film in checked baggage. They also say CT scanning is currently being used for checked bags. Anyone have any experience with film being affected in checked bags? I assume hand inspection is still an option for film being carried on.

[cowanw]

TSA says you can put film in checked baggage. They also say CT scanning is currently being used for checked bags. Anyone have any experience with film being affected in checked bags? I assume hand inspection is still an option for film being carried on.

If true that is new information. Can you quote a source for that?

[NER]

"If true that is new information. Can you quote a source for that?"

No he can't because it's not true. All reliable indications are that film transported in checked luggage will be adversely affected. However, he is correct in stating that hand inspection remains an option for carry-on, and I believe this should not be a problem most of the time so long as the boxes are factory-sealed. (The last time I tried this, October 2019, the agent swiped the boxes for traces of explosives, but did not insist on breaking the factory seals and opening the boxes.) I have grave concerns about hand inspection for exposed sheet film which I transport home in boxes that are taped, and clearly labeled in all relevant languages as "Exposed photographic film, Please do not open in daylight" (an image appears below). As far as I can see, the best option for the time being is to fly, however inconvenient it may be, through airports that have not yet installed the new Analog scanners. If anyone has a better idea short of "stop using film" or "become a digitographer" I'd love to hear it.

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.com

198141

[Pieter]

"If true that is new information. Can you quote a source for that?"

No he can't because it's not true. All reliable indications are that film transported in checked luggage will be adversely affected. However, he is correct in stating that hand inspection remains an option for carry-on, and I believe this should not be a problem most of the time so long as the boxes are factory-sealed. (The last time I tried this, October 2019, the agent swiped the boxes for traces of explosives, but did not insist on breaking the factory seals and opening the boxes.) I have grave concerns about hand inspection for exposed sheet film which I transport home in boxes that are taped, and clearly labeled in all relevant languages as "Exposed photographic film, Please do not open in daylight" (an image appears below). As far as I can see, the best option for the time being is to fly, however inconvenient it may be, through airports that have not yet installed the new Analog scanners. If anyone has a better idea short of "stop using film" or "become a digitographer" I'd love to hear it.

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.com

198141

1. From the TSA website, under the heading "Advantages of CT": https://www.tsa.gov/computed-tomography?fbclid=IwAR1JBaOvlInAVZYQ0RucrwtNd8xgx2E9OUplLAy2iiisXX-XzRaHn8LG_7Q

2. If hand inspection is still an option, why all the fuss?

[NER]

1. From the TSA website, under the heading "Advantages of CT": https://www.tsa.gov/computed-tomography?fbclid=IwAR1JBaOvlInAVZYQ0RucrwtNd8xgx2E9OUplLAy2iiisXX-XzRaHn8LG_7Q

2. If hand inspection is still an option, why all the fuss?

No where does the link you provided say it's okay, i.e., safe, to put film in checked baggage - if it does then I have overlooked that information and ask you to point it out to me - you will have not only my apology, but my gratitude as well. The reason for the fuss - which is only with respect to exposed film in boxes no longer factory sealed - is that there is no reason to think a security agent will always believe the boxes contain only what you say they contain. I've flown enough to know not every TSA agent (or their counterpart in foreign countries) is familiar with large format photography - in fact most of the time I am pulled aside when going through security because the average inspector is not familiar with LF cameras or lenses and wants to see those items in my carry-on up close. If you happen to get tangled up with an agent who's in a bad mood, overly zealous, or otherwise skeptical that the box contains exposed film as you say vs. some contraband, there may be little or nothing you can do to prevent them from opening the box and ruining your work. That's my only concern. I am not at all worried about hand inspection for my light meters or factory-sealed boxes of film. I'm worried about getting my exposed film home without being molested because I refuse to put the film through one of the new CT machines.

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.com

[BrianShaw]

1. From the TSA website, under the heading "Advantages of CT": https://www.tsa.gov/computed-tomography?fbclid=IwAR1JBaOvlInAVZYQ0RucrwtNd8xgx2E9OUplLAy2iiisXX-XzRaHn8LG_7Q

2. If hand inspection is still an option, why all the fuss?

Where in that page (or anywhere else) does TSA say you can put film in checked baggage?

[Pieter]

No where does the link you provided say it's okay, i.e., safe, to put film in checked baggage - if it does then I have overlooked that information and ask you to point it out to me - you will have not only my apology, but my gratitude as well. The reason for the fuss - which is only with respect to exposed film in boxes no longer factory sealed - is that there is no reason to think a security agent will always believe the boxes contain only what you say they contain. I've flown enough to know not every TSA agent (or their counterpart in foreign countries) is familiar with large format photography - in fact most of the time I am pulled aside when going through security because the average inspector is not familiar with LF cameras or lenses and wants to see those items in my carry-on up close. If you happen to get tangled up with an agent who's in a bad mood, overly zealous, or otherwise skeptical that the box contains exposed film as you say vs. some contraband, there may be little or nothing you can do to prevent them from opening the box and ruining your work. That's my only concern. I am not at all worried about hand inspection for my light meters or factory-sealed boxes of film. I'm worried about getting my exposed film home without being molested because I refuse to put the film through one of the new CT machines.

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.com

I (nor the TSA) never stated it is safe to put film in checked baggage. All I was pointing out is that people are getting their shorts in a wad over the new CT scanners for carry-ons. I asked if anyone had had film ruined in checked baggage, sine the CT scanner seem to be in use for that.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I just flew to OKC and they had signs up that said film would be ruined if in checked baggage.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I (nor the TSA) never stated it is safe to put film in checked baggage. All I was pointing out is that people are getting their shorts in a wad over the new CT scanners for carry-ons. I asked if anyone had had film ruined in checked baggage, sine the CT scanner seem to be in use for that.

I will find out. I had my 35mm film camera in my checked bags.

[John Layton]

Time to dig out the old Rand McNally I guess!

[HMG]

I will find out. I had my 35mm film camera in my checked bags.

Unfortunately, all you'll find out is whether that particular film, run through that particular scanner, at that particular time was safe or not.

I don't know how these new scanners will effect film. My suspicion is that these new scanners may require some time to "dial in" and their impact on film today could be better or worse than it is 6 months from now. Personally, I will continue to hand check film and allow extra time through security.

[Tin Can]

I assume you mean, drive to all locations.

However some cities seem to have truck scanners that can see inside while it drives by...

Ports definetly have various methods, https://phys.org/news/2017-05-company-scanning-technology-smugglers-nightmare.html

I am sure we don't find everything on Google


Time to dig out the old Rand McNally I guess!

[NER]

I (nor the TSA) never stated it is safe to put film in checked baggage. All I was pointing out is that people are getting their shorts in a wad over the new CT scanners for carry-ons. I asked if anyone had had film ruined in checked baggage, sine the CT scanner seem to be in use for that.

I did not come on here to argue with you or anyone else. I urge you to do whatever you want with your film. To be clear, I entered this thread only to call attention to TSA's recommendation that light meters also be hand-inspected. And my shorts are fine, thank you.

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.

[Steve Goldstein]

When information about these new machines was first posted here over a month ago (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?154859-Do-new-airport-carry-on-scanners-fog-film), I immediately wrote to both Analog and TSA to inquire about possible effects on light meters, ...snip...

The manufacturer is Analogic, not Analog. I worked for Analog Devices for over 35 years and can assure you that while both companies are headquartered in Massachusetts, they are very separate and distinct entities. Analogic is a good customer of Analog's.

[NER]

The manufacturer is Analogic, not Analog. I worked for Analog Devices for over 35 years and can assure you that while both companies are headquartered in Massachusetts, they are very separate and distinct entities. Analogic is a good customer of Analog's.

Thanks for the correction.

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.com

[BrianShaw]

I (nor the TSA) never stated it is safe to put film in checked baggage. All I was pointing out is that people are getting their shorts in a wad over the new CT scanners for carry-ons. I asked if anyone had had film ruined in checked baggage, sine the CT scanner seem to be in use for that.

Might want to edit your post 20 then. :)

Quote Originally Posted by Pieter View Post
TSA says you can put film in checked baggage.

[MrFujicaman]

And this is why I mail my film ahead when I go to Las Vegas.... I've had TSA swear that their X-ray machines don't fog film and refuse to hand inspect film.

How does this new machine foul up light meters?

[BrianShaw]

And this is why I mail my film ahead when I go to Las Vegas.... I've had TSA swear that their X-ray machines don't fog film and refuse to hand inspect film.

How does this new machine foul up light meters?

TSA isn’t obligated to hand inspect. They do it as a courtesy... when they feel like it. Those folks are paid low salaries to do a thankless task so expecting anything more than the minimum is wishful thinking. I’ve encountered some very nice TSA folks but in general they are not very motivated.

X-ray, no matter how many dimensions, has never been shown harmful to exposure meters. Mine, both electronic and mechanical, have survived over the years of being x-rayed. I suspect vibrations from the aircraft would be more harmful.

That response from the TSA communications contractor is the classic “we don’t know; won’t find out; but need to say something to be polite so well say something very conservative to be safe... despite no information “. Frustrating!

[revdoc]

My suspicion is that these new scanners may require some time to "dial in" and their impact on film today could be better or worse than it is 6 months from now.

A quick google suggests they've been in use at dozens of airports since 2016, just not in the US. Consequently, I think they're as dialled in as they ever will be :)

[Bob Salomon]

TSA isn’t obligated to hand inspect. They do it as a courtesy... when they feel like it. Those folks are paid low salaries to do a thankless task so expecting anything more than the minimum is wishful thinking. I’ve encountered some very nice TSA folks but in general they are not very motivated.

X-ray, no matter how many dimensions, has never been shown harmful to exposure meters. Mine, both electronic and mechanical, have survived over the years of being x-rayed. I suspect vibrations from the aircraft would be more harmful.

That response from the TSA communications contractor is the classic “we don’t know; won’t find out; but need to say something to be polite so well say something very conservative to be safe... despite no information “. Frustrating!

Since Congress doesn’t seem to do much why don’t you ask your Representative and your Senators to find the answer?

[Pieter]

Might want to edit your post 20 then. :)

Quote Originally Posted by Pieter View Post
TSA says you can put film in checked baggage.

TSA states you can bring film in carry-on or checked baggage. They don't say the film won't be affected. They recommend asking for hand inspection.

198174

[BrianShaw]

Since Congress doesn’t seem to do much why don’t you ask your Representative and your Senators to find the answer?

Politicians don’t listen to me; there is no political issue here to solve. Besides, I’d like a credible answer. If all I wanted was smoke blown up my skirt I’d read some of the inane posts in this this thread. :)

It’s purely an engineering question for which nobody has data to support or refute assumptions and fears.

As you well know, back in the days before film became a niche item there was a consortium that did testing that was the basis of TSA and film company recommendations regarding film safety at airport x-ray inspection.

Nobody cares any more...

[Bob Salomon]

Politicians don’t listen to me; there is no political issue here to solve. Besides, I’d like a credible answer. If all I wanted was smoke blown up my skirt I’d read some of the inane posts in this this thread. :)

It’s purely an engineering question for which nobody has data to support or refute assumptions and fears.

As you well know, back in the days before film became a niche item there was a consortium that did testing that was the basis of TSA and film company recommendations regarding film safety at airport x-ray inspection.

Nobody cares any more...

They can get the information you want divulged. But you could also ask PMA or NPPA or ASMP or even Nat Geo or a large news paper.

[BrianShaw]

Sorry Bob, but I doubt it...

[Bob Salomon]

Sorry Bob, but I doubt it...

Then you should try it as you aren’t getting an answer here.

[BrianShaw]

The data probably doesn’t exist on those exact machines... no matter who is asked. Why would anyone bother figuring out if film is vulnerable to CT since it’s already well understood. Right now I’m still busy working for a living to pay for a family. But maybe when I retire I’ll crowdfund an effort to actually measure the impact of these new CT machines. I have more than just a passing knowledge of the past efforts. But I don’t work cheap so the funding will have to be generous!

[MrFujicaman]

Okay, my point is that if it screws up light meters-what does it do to digital sensors in cameras?

[reddesert]

There's not been any evidence posted that it affects light meters. That was brought up in post #19, but the poster did not offer any reason for being concerned that the X-ray machine would affect silicon photodiodes. He contacted the TSA, and the TSA response was basically "we can't assure you that it won't affect light meters." I can't blame them for that. I haven't seen one of these machines or passed anything through it yet.

In general, I believe the semiconductor junction of a typical SPD light meter is larger than an individual pixel of a CCD or CMOS sensor (which are a few microns), and size typically makes a semiconductor more tolerant to individual faults such as radiation damage. If the X-ray machine were harmful to light meters, it would likely be destroying digital cameras left and right, and probably cellphones, computers, and other silicon devices.

The light-sensitive reaction is different for film versus electrical sensors (CdS meter cells, SPDs, CCDs, etc) and so even if a X-ray machine exposes film, it doesn't necessarily follow that it damages electrical/electronic light sensitive devices. I can't assure you that it's safe, I'm just not worried about that aspect of it.

[Tin Can]

I think the Light Meter comment was a confusion with 2 languages

Perhaps the OP meant emulsion sensitivity

[Arne Croell]

Here is some real life experience with one of the new scanners. I was traveling back from Germany to the US through Amsterdam and got an additional security check going from the EU flight section to the international one there. They had one of the new carry-on CT scanners, this one a “ClearScan” by L3Harris, here is a link: https://www.sds.l3t.com/aviation-checkpoint-screening/ClearScan.htm. It looks a bit different than the Analogic machine shown in the article mentioned above, but it is essentially the same thing. I had a bunch of 120 roll film with me and asked for a hand inspection, which they fortunately did. However, anticipating I might encounter a CT scanner on this trip, I left one roll of T-Max 400 in my carry-on. That roll had some blank frames plus some frames exposed to approximately Zones 1-3 on it. I just developed it plus a similar roll that had not seen the scanner, shown side by side on the light table in the attached image - the regular roll on the left, the scanned one on the right. The new scanner fogged the whole film, unevenly, with some repeating pattern visible. The fogging is a bit weaker on the inside of the roll due to the shielding by the outside film layers. Measuring the additional density over the film base + fog of the regular film results in additional values of 0.53 -0.59 for the end of the roll (i.e. the outside) and 0.46 - 0.53 at the start of the roll ( the inside of the exposed roll). In short, any film going through one of those machines will be rendered unusable.

[Fred L]

...however, anticipating i might encounter a ct scanner on this trip, i left one roll of t-max 400 in my carry-on. That roll had some blank frames plus some frames exposed to approximately zones 1-3 on it. I just developed it plus a similar roll that had not seen the scanner, shown side by side on the light table in the attached image - the regular roll on the left, the scanned one on the right. The new scanner fogged the whole film, unevenly, with some repeating pattern visible...

yikes !!!!

[Dugan]

Thank you for doing that test and sharing the results.

[BrianShaw]

A very useful report, Arne. Thanks for including the details. For absolute clarity... this was after a single exposure?

[Arne Croell]

A very useful report, Arne. Thanks for including the details. For absolute clarity... this was after a single exposure?

Yes Brian, that was one single run through that machine. BOTH films shown went through 3 regular (non-CT) carry-on X-ray machines in addition, so the difference you see is just the one pass through the ClearScan machine.

[Tin Can]

I expect this type machine to be used in many more places, other than airports.

Buses, trains, government buildings and shopping Malls for starters...

Thanks for testing

[MartinP]

Bizarrely, I just flew to the UK from Schiphol (Amsterdam, NL) and found a slightly different scanning problem. I did indeed have a film camera with me, but was planning to scrounge a few rolls of HP5+ 120 from my sister and develop that before returning, so the potential photography problem was avoided.

As this was a Christmas visit, I took two large stollen cakes with me as gifts and these were immediately flagged as suspicious. Apparently the almond-paste with which they are filled appears 'suspicious' on the colourised, 3-D, hand-baggage scanners, so the two cakes were swab-tested - with apologies from the staff - before being cleared through. Apparently this is not an unusual event for cakes containing almond-paste. Very strange.

[BrianShaw]

I had same problem a few years ago at Heathrow with toffee. I was told it was a “density detection” that initiated a second look.

[Bob Salomon]

Bizarrely, I just flew to the UK from Schiphol (Amsterdam, NL) and found a slightly different scanning problem. I did indeed have a film camera with me, but was planning to scrounge a few rolls of HP5+ 120 from my sister and develop that before returning, so the potential photography problem was avoided.

As this was a Christmas visit, I took two large stollen cakes with me as gifts and these were immediately flagged as suspicious. Apparently the almond-paste with which they are filled appears 'suspicious' on the colourised, 3-D, hand-baggage scanners, so the two cakes were swab-tested - with apologies from the staff - before being cleared through. Apparently this is not an unusual event for cakes containing almond-paste. Very strange.

Could the cake been mistaken for a plastic explosive on the X-ray?

[Drew Wiley]

Well, thank you, Arne, for sacrificing a bit of your own film to prevent other people ruining their own.

[MartinP]

Could the cake been mistaken for a plastic explosive on the X-ray?

I asked the security person what was the reason and she politely refused to give any details. I suppose the almond-paste filling could have been appearing as something 'hidden' inside the cake, or the sugar and almond mixture might share some chemical characteristics of improvised explosives. In either case, the whole problem was dealt with thoroughly inside a couple of minutes, but it was unusual as it isn't the first time I have taken that brand of cake through that airport (a regular present at Christmas time).

[cowanw]

My "The Pod" Bean Bags always get flagged.

[John Layton]

Gotta reiterate...time to dust off the old Rand McNally!

[reddesert]

Lately, I have been getting flagged a lot when I carry food through a (US, TSA) security checkpoint. I often carry something like sandwiches or fruit through the checkpoint, and recently if it's in my bag, they usually want to look through the bag until they find it. After this happened a couple of times, I started taking my lunch out of the bag and putting it through the X-ray separately in a tray, and that seems to keep them happy. I was told essentially that they've been told to look harder at such items. My guess is that it's something like the water content in food that shows up distinctively on the scanner; the traditional scanners have roughly 3 different bands that are sensitive to different materials.

I haven't seen any carry-on CT scanners yet and thank Arne for making the test. I was in China over the summer and wound up putting a roll of 35mm film through scanners a bunch of times at subway stations, museums, airports, etc, but they were all the ordinary machines and there was no effect on the film. On exiting China, the airport scanned my checked bag and noticed a spare compact digital camera battery that I had forgotten, smaller than my thumb, and we had to go through the bag until I found it, so I could carry it on. That was impressive. It may have been with a CT scanner, but this hadn't come up yet so I wasn't looking at the machine type.

[Drew Wiley]

Not the end of the world. Roll film can be shown to them unopened in a Zip-Lock plastic bag, sheet film in unopened boxes which they can swab if necessary. A film changing tent is portable enough. No sense gambling.

[jp]

Food can cause some issues with customs.. Certain types of food and plants are not legal to import into certain countries due to insects, food laws, etc.. e.g. you can't bring whale meat into the US from someplace where it's legal..

When in Boston, I've bought Mike's Pastries, which have a distinctive box everyone working in Boston knows... They treat them with care at their airport.

[Arne Croell]

Some updates from both Ilford and Kodak Alaris with bad, but not unexpected news:

From Kodak's Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=kodak%20alaris&epa=SEARCH_BOX):

"Kodak Professional January 27 at 7:00 AM ·

CT Scanning X-Ray Technology and Film

As many of you know, the United States Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has recently been installing Computed Tomography (CT) scanners for carry-on luggage in US airports. In the coming months these scanners will be operational at 145 airports in the US. CT scanning technology has been used for checked luggage for many years, and Kodak Alaris and Eastman Kodak have warned photographers not to check their film, but rather to carry it on and request it be hand-checked by TSA agents at Security.

To better assess the risk to film from the new carry on scanners we brought a small quantity of Portra 400/135 to John F Kennedy Airport in NYC. With the help of TSA representatives the film was put through the new carry on CT scanners from 1-10 times. The film was then evaluated at Eastman Kodak Research facilities. The initial results are not good. Just 1 scan shows significant film fogging, leading to smoky blacks and loss of shadow detail. This will be more significant for higher speed films. Although it’s possible that a roll of 100 speed film would show less degradation, we strongly recommend against putting any unexposed or exposed but unprocessed film through a CT Scanner.

We reached out to the TSA to ask what options there might be to warn passengers. We originally asked if it would be possible to add signage at airports that utilize CT scanning technology. We are developing warning stickers that can be placed on your film. These will be available in a label format so they can be printed on your in-home or in-office printer. Just attach the label to the plastic bag as described in the TSA description below.

The TSA did tell us that all TSA screeners are trained to hand check roll and movie film as well as single-use cameras. Sheet film in boxes may require more diligence on the part of the photographer.

From the TSA:

Most x-ray machines used to screen carry-on bags should not damage undeveloped film under ASA\ISO 800. There are a limited number of screening checkpoints that use x-ray equipment that may damage undeveloped film. These airports will have signage in front of the x-ray stating that the x-ray may damage undeveloped film.

If you are traveling with the following types of film, please pack it in a clear plastic bag, remove it from your carry-on bag at the checkpoint, and ask for a hand inspection:

• Film with an ASA\ISO 800 or higher
• Highly sensitive x-ray or scientific films
• Film that is or will be underexposed
• Film that you intend to “push process”
• Sheet film
• Large format film
• Medical film
• Scientific film
• Motion picture film
• Professional grade film
• Film of any speed that is subjected to x-ray screening more than five times

In most cases, the x-ray equipment used for screening checked baggage will damage undeveloped film; therefore, please place undeveloped film in carry-on bags.

For more information please download the film Storage and Care Information sheet from our website: https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/…/f…/wysiwyg/pro/CIS_E30.pdf

For more information on TSA use of CT technology, please:
https://www.tsa.gov/computed-tomography

For more information on TSA screening procedures, please visit https://urldefense.com/…/www.tsa.gov__;!!NtZYYMejrjoc!zT1yW… .

These US airports currently use CT scanning technology:

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL)
Baltimore-Washington International Airport (BWI)
Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD)
Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG)
Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW)
Houston Hobby Airport (HOU)
Indianapolis International Airport (IND)
John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
Logan International Airport (BOS)
Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
Miami International Airport (MIA)
Oakland International Airport (OAK)
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX)
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA)
St. Louis Lambert International Airport (STL)
Tampa International Airport (TPA)
Washington-Dulles International Airport (IAD)"

And here is Ilford (https://www.ilfordphoto.com/faqs):

"Advice for Airport X-ray scanners: Film & papers

We are working with the DFT and Heathrow airport in the UK and will shortly be updating our information relating to the new CT type x-ray scanners being installed at major airports worldwide.

Based on our initial testing it is almost certain the new CT type x-ray scanners for cabin baggage will be deemed unsafe for any of our ILFORD and KENTMERE film products irrespective of ISO speed rating.

You must therefore ask for hand inspection of your films if the airport is using one of the new type scanners. We will be issuing more specific advice as we complete our testing and evaluation.
How to identify the CT type x-ray scanners

The following machines are currently on the market;

Smiths – CTIX
L3 – Clearscan
Rapiscan - 920CT / Connect CT
IDSS - Detect 1000
Nuctech - Kylin
Analogic Cobra

For airports without the new machines, the following advice is still relevant.

If you need to travel on aircraft with film, we recommend always taking your film in carry on cabin luggage. The X-ray scanners used to check hand luggage are safe for all but the highest speed films, so except for DELTA PROFESSIONAL 3200, this is our recommendation. It is also possible to request a hand inspection for films and most security staff will allow this (although this varies between airports and countries). For DELTA 3200 you should request a hand inspection or alternatively buy the film at your destination.

Please Note: We do not recommend taking any film in your checked hold luggage, the X-ray machines used for scanning hold luggage are more powerful than the hand luggage scanners and may cause fogging of your films."

[Tin Can]

Good to know

and I bet scanners will have stronger intensity going forward

Thank you

[Arne Croell]

And here is a rogue's gallery of our CT nemeses, using the list from Ilford's FAQ:
200110

[Corran]

I went through Atlanta (Hartsfield-Jackson) this week and I didn't see any of these, and from what I've read online, one tell-tale sign of the new CT scanners is not having to remove your laptop or liquids from your bag, which I did have to do. So I assume they were normal scanners.

I didn't ask for a hand-check because I was kind of in a rush and I just had a few rolls of 35mm film and my Widelux as a travel camera since I was on a work trip. Haven't developed anything as I only shot a few images on one roll.

Anyway, I wanted to mention the tip about not removing electronics/liquids, since that's easier than trying to ascertain whether the new CT scanners are installed. And somehow I doubt TSA agents will take kindly to probing questions about what scanner they are using.

[DHodson]

Thanks Arne - great summary. Does anybody know if commercial freight gets similar treatment or is it just public travel? I haven't seen anything but I wonder if suppliers are at any risk if they ship airfreight.

Regards
Dave

[Bob Salomon]

Thanks Arne - great summary. Does anybody know if commercial freight gets similar treatment or is it just public travel? I haven't seen anything but I wonder if suppliers are at any risk if they ship airfreight.

Regards
Dave

How does Kodak ship? Truck? Air? Train? Ship? How do their distributors ship? How do their dealers ship? At some point UPS, FedX, USPS or their equivalents are involved. If they ship by major carriers then you can ship undeveloped film the same way and bypass those scanners.

[Peter Lewin]

Thanks to various posts, I now check the TSA website to determine whether the U.S. airports I use have the new scanners or not. If not, I can continue the easier routine of keeping film in my carry-on bags without the extra effort to get it hand inspected. Is there any equivalent list for international airports?

[Bill Poole]

This may seem obvious or have been answered, but film is shipped by USPO every day without a problem. For this reason, I have always ordered fresh film from B&H to be delivered to my destination before I arrive. I now think that I will simply mail my exposed and unused film home when I return. Plenty of processing houses receive exposed film by mail, yes. Can anyone suggest why this would not work, cutting out the whole "please hand inspect" hassle? I have been using priority mail envelopes and packages for years and they have never lost one yet. It seems like a cheap way to avoid the headache of traveling with film.

[Bob Salomon]

This may seem obvious or have been answered, but film is shipped by USPO every day without a problem. For this reason, I have always ordered fresh film from B&H to be delivered to my destination before I arrive. I now think that I will simply mail my exposed and unused film home when I return. Plenty of processing houses receive exposed film by mail, yes. Can anyone suggest why this would not work, cutting out the whole "please hand inspect" hassle? I have been using priority mail envelopes and packages for years and they have never lost one yet. It seems like a cheap way to avoid the headache of traveling with film.

+1!

[jp]

Furthermore, there are often mail boxes for sending located at the entrance to TSA screening.. So you can mail home that knife or film rather than lose it. But if you have time, it would be better to send it from a post office or something rather than hope you find a place to mail at the airport.

I attended a workshop... I mailed my 8x10 and film ahead to general delivery in the destination town. Success. Tripod I checked and it missed a connecting flight. Sent film home by usps just fine.

[barnacle]

Isn't mail from out-of-country locations bulk x-rayed once it arrives in the country? Any number of 'border guard' TV programmes seem to suggest that this is the case.

If so, there would be little difference between posting film back and hand-carrying it.

Neil

[HMG]

Keep in mind that you can send a package (address to yourself) to a US post office with instructions to "Hold for Pickup". Be aware that some POs will not hold them for too long before sending back to sender, so best to call them in advance.

[RedSun]

It is always advised that, keep your film separately and hand over to airport agents to hand check them.

I still have the foil bag for film. I wish it can be larger and I can bring more film. We never know what effects those machines can do to our films.

[HMG]

It is always advised that, keep your film separately and hand over to airport agents to hand check them.

I still have the foil bag for film. I wish it can be larger and I can bring more film. We never know what effects those machines can do to our films.

I still have a couple of lead foil containers. I don't know for sure that they will work with the machines. The main benefit if it does work, as I see it, is that it forces a hand inspection. Though screener could still insist that film be removed and then go through the scanner. Of course, either way, this ends up taking more screening time than if they agreed to hand inspection to begin with.

The crux of the problem is that screeners prioritize effectiveness and throughput over our desire to photograph with film. Assuming, of course, that hand inspection is effective. From their perspective, I suppose it makes sense.

[Kiwi7475]

I’m not too versed in these things, but isn’t there something already existing that is thin, flexible, that makes film fit snuggly and is light tight such that if handed to an inspecting officer he could *feel* there’s film to the touch (or paper, or something like that... anyway something safe)?

I mean rather than handing a box and telling them “don’t open it, it’s film”?

[Bob Salomon]

I’m not too versed in these things, but isn’t there something already existing that is thin, flexible, that makes film fit snuggly and is light tight such that if handed to an inspecting officer he could *feel* there’s film to the touch (or paper, or something like that... anyway something safe)?

I mean rather than handing a box and telling them “don’t open it, it’s film”?

You mean for sheet film? Or roll film?

[Kiwi7475]

You mean for sheet film? Or roll film?

For sheet film. Like a 4x5 or 8x10 light-tight sleeve of sorts. After shooting one could easily slide the film sheets it in that. One could still carry that it in a box (so that it doesn’t get all bent and stuff during transport) but then the box could be safely opened and the sleeve handled/touched (with care of course) to show its just paper-like inside.
Obviously it also has to be clean and the material inside be the right one to not scratch film, or be sandwiched in some thin cardboard...

Surely some company thought of this before and manufactured and sold something like that?

[Tin Can]

Some bad things can be made into sheet, roll, stacks of sheets, sealing tape is easy to fake

I doubt hand search will be offered much longer

We all have too many threats appearing

Mail it, while we can...

[Drew Wiley]

They could always hypothetically have a low-dose X-Ray unit on hand to see into such things; doubt they'd bother. Last thing I'd ever want is someone opening a box and actually handling sheet film, even in total darkness - do you expect to hire experienced LF darkroom workers to do that, and have them just sitting around for three weeks until they're needed? We'll all soon be waiting in line at the taxidermy shop to get stuffed and put in some arcane history museum diorama of our own.