Airports and 4x5 film

[rguinter]

...I do worry about cumulative effects. Normally I'll buy a batch of fresh film for a trip. (As a working photojournalist/documentary photographer I could easily shoot 100 rolls of 120 or 200 sheets of 4x5 on a 2-week trip.) Whatever film I don't use during the trip I save for projects closer to home. That way my film won't get exposed to x-rays more than once or twice...

I also carry a sharpie marker in my kit.

I strike a line on the end of each 120 roll and film box each time it goes through a scanner. And when I get home I put them aside in the refrigerator in a box labeled "use first."

So far no apparent problems with films that have been scanned twice.

Bob G.

[rguinter]

You have your personal knowledge. I have my knowledge. Stay curious where from.

I'm only trying to separate fact from opinion. So far you have stated nothing that indicates you have any insider knowledge or anything that indicates you fly frequently through different airports.

My opinions are based on experiences that have happened to me over the course of the last ten years.

So if you have some specific expertise that makes your opinions more valuable then please advise.

Bob G.

[rguinter]

...they reposition your 40-pound pack to see the item of interest from a different angle because they were not able to identify it from the picture taken (shades and shapes are confusing for them). It only takes a new scan - nothing to cry about...

Isn't this pretty much what I said?

Why reiterate something I've already stated clearly?

Bob G.

[rguinter]

Yes, they may move a bag back in front of the machine and run it through again after they have removed or repositioned the offending item, but the statement that we have put to rest is the notion that they have a button on the machine that pumps up the dosage for any given item as it passes through. That is not the case with carry-on bags (it is the case, however, with checked bags). And if the belt stops, the scan stops, and all they do is move the image from the previous scan around to study it more closely. When they back up the belt, they are not scanning again--they are repositioning the belt to the point where they stopped looking before so they don't miss anything. Everything on the belt still only gets one blast. The only way for an item to get an extra dose is to be pulled from the belt when it is ejected and placed on the belt upstream of the scanner to be scanned again.

You know when the X-ray is on--the red light is on.

Rick "whose knowledge is based on close observation during 30-50 flights a year" Denney

I'm starting to wonder about everyone's opinions here and why they keep challenging personal observations and experiences.

I've stated clearly, that frequently during my flights since 2001 my carry on backpack has been physically carried off the downstream side of the belt and repositioned on the input side for an additional scan.

Why is this so hard for others to understand or believe?

And my only suggestion as a result of this observation is to put film in a separate tub and send it through the scanner without anything else in it that might attract attention.

This is all I've said here and in several other threads. And it is something that simply makes sense to me that will reduce the cumulative number of exposures from successive scans.

Bob (who only travels about 10-times a year and prefers to sleep at home) G.

[Noah A]

I also carry a sharpie marker in my kit.

I strike a line on the end of each 120 roll and film box each time it goes through a scanner. And when I get home I put them aside in the refrigerator in a box labeled "use first."

So far no apparent problems with films that have been scanned twice.

Bob G.

I basically do the same thing, but I mark it when I get home. Though I guess making marks on 100+ rolls of film would pass time when my flights are delayed .

And to reiterate, I've had no problems with ISO 400 film getting zapped 2-3 times.

I do have lead bags that I used pre-9/11. I may consider using them again for overseas trips but as with here in the US, I assume they will just lead to more inspection and they may just cause more trouble than they're worth.

Incidentally, since I went back to film I haven't gotten pulled aside for additional screening and they haven't wanted to hand-check my camera bag after it went through. I use domke satchels so most of the gear is in a single layer, and I guess they can see it well enough with the x-ray.

When I was shooting digital and with all of the electronics I used to carry, they would almost always want to hand-check my camera bag after it went through the x-ray.

[GPS]

I'm only trying to separate fact from opinion. So far you have stated nothing that indicates you have any insider knowledge or anything that indicates you fly frequently through different airports.

My opinions are based on experiences that have happened to me over the course of the last ten years.

So if you have some specific expertise that makes your opinions more valuable then please advise.

Bob G.

You haven't noticed that yet but people have no duty to tell you the source of their knowledge.
The fact that you have some knowledge from your experience does in no way mean that other sources of knowledge are less valid. A doctor doesn't need to have his heart operated to know how to operate hearts neither is his knowledge less valuable because his heart is healthy and yours not...

[GPS]

Isn't this pretty much what I said?

Why reiterate something I've already stated clearly?

Bob G.

In doing so you just repeated what I said in the post n.31. I don't even ask why.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

If you've got your film in a separate tub, it's pretty easy to request hand inspection and swabbing instead, isn't it? Why subject film to Xrays, at all, so long as other non-invasive procedures are available?

Whether or not an individual's film has yet been hit by a strong enough single dose or enough cumulative doses of Xrays to fog or ruin their film is beside the point. Suggesting that because it hasn't happened to you in your experience, means that it doesn't happen at all or that it's nothing to worry about, to me sounds like going around insisting that folks never get hit by stray bullets because you've been in a bad neighborhood or war zone and heard rounds go off but lived to tell the tale.

Xrays most certainly can have a deleterious effect on film. TSA suddenly cranking up the dosage our bags receive on the conveyor in response to changes in the threat level is something we'd be unlikely to know about until after the damage is done. So, call me a chicken, but to whatever degree possible, I don't subject my films to Xrays. When flying with film, I'll arrive a half an hour earlier than normal to get swabbed and patted down, if necessary, when I request hand inspection. And I fly with Quickloads only.

Realizing QL's won't be around forever, I also mail ahead. This also has meant before mailing or dropping it off, asking a supervisor at a courier service whether they Xray.

(I won't send undeveloped film to the lab via FedX due to a response I got last year--nor do I care to route film anywhere near DC or NYC via the USPS, either.)

[rguinter]

...Incidentally, since I went back to film I haven't gotten pulled aside for additional screening and they haven't wanted to hand-check my camera bag after it went through. I use domke satchels so most of the gear is in a single layer, and I guess they can see it well enough with the x-ray...

Yes that might be the situation with my travel. My backpack is multi-level and I carry a gamut of supplies, lenses, 4-cameras, and misc parts.

With all my trips since 2001, about 100 flights, there has only been two times that the pack has not been double-triple scanned and then opened up and swabbed afterwards.

There is something about the multi-levels and all the misc. parts that causes this I know. But I learned to accept it early on and just give myself an extra 15-minutes for the inspection. No worries.

Bob G.

[rguinter]

In doing so you just repeated what I said in the post n.31. I don't even ask why.

Well then I guess you didn't read my post #9 did you?

And somehow you miss the point that I am merely advising others about experiences I've had personally and how to reduce the number of x-ray scans on their films through security checkpoints if they are inclined to want to do that. And many of us do want to do that.

Me I just let the film go through typically for up to 2-scans, sometimes as many as 4... as I've said very early on in this thread and several others.

So just who is repeating who here!

Bob G.