Film in airport X-ray machines

olifaunt said:
Why not? In the U.S. you can get hand checks without problems, so there is an existence proof that it can be done.
Click to expand...
In October 2018 I went through Washington Ronald Reagan and Chicago O'Hare airports machines with a fair amount of Fuji Neopan 400 films in my cabin luggage.

No fogging on my negatives so I guess the new machines hadn't been installed there yet ? Those airports are on "the list" onwards from now. Uhuh.

At Washington Ronald Reagan, that was the control guy himself who kindly asked me if I wanted to benefit from a hand check of films because he had noticed my old Nikon rangefinder camera around my neck, and this was me who politely declined because I had no concerns about my 400 ASA films going through the cabin luggage machines, as usual...

So I can at least confirm that in this airport, hand inspection of films this can be asked and obtained with no hassles.

I wouldn't be that confident about other airports and for instance European airports once the new machines are everywhere.

Monitoring the new machines location and not taking films to go through those airports is the only secure solution that I can think of as for flying.

Other solution is to travel by train instead of by plane. After all, once upon a time it was pretty easy for any destination within a 1,000 km radius. But - the times, they are a changin'... :rolleyes:
 
Ste_S said:
Sure, it could be done... but isn't judging by all the people up thread who've been refused at Heathrow.

I'd probably want a guarantee somewhere that film hand checks will be done before I fly from/to and airport with a CT scanner
Click to expand...

True, but it just means our U.K. citizens can follow the example of their U.S. brethren who successfully advocated for hand checks in the past. They just have some more work to do to make their authorities change their rules. I know it's a monarchy; still, it is not like it is some authoritarian regime where citizens don't have a say, is it?
 
Use a digital camera for trips in which you must take airplane flights. This is what I suggest.
 
raid said:
Use a digital camera for trips in which you must take airplane flights. This is what I suggest.
Click to expand...

The trips that I get on flights for are the ones that I want to use film the most.

I suggest raising our voices, writing to Ilford, Kodak, Fuji in support of them as they are already aware. The more people stand up, the more likely policies change.
In the USA TSA has actually asked me if I want hand checks.
In the UK signs show film is ok under 800 ISO, so perhaps with lobbying they will change their policies.
 
raid said:
Use a digital camera for trips in which you must take airplane flights. This is what I suggest.
Click to expand...
This means that you cannot go and take film photos where you go by airplane any longer.

If this is what it means, it also means a severe hit at the film market sooner or later. If this what we want ?
 
Highway 61 said:
This means that you cannot go and take film photos where you go by airplane any longer.

If this is what it means, it also means a severe hit at the film market sooner or later. If this what we want ?
Click to expand...

Raid's suggestion could devastate the film industry.
This is why one does not sit back and accept it.
 
Ste_S said:
Sure, it could be done... but isn't judging by all the people up thread who've been refused at Heathrow.

I'd probably want a guarantee somewhere that film hand checks will be done before I fly from/to and airport with a CT scanner
Click to expand...

+1. And it must be a clear fact, not an option depending on the personal mood of who is in charge of controls.
 
I feel badly for our friends in the UK and EU. I hope there can be a positive resolution (no pun intended) for the new film destroying CT scanners. I'm not sure how popular instax is with travellers and tourists compared to "traditional" 135, 120, or large format film, but now that Fuji has put out a warning, perhaps that will help the cause.

Here in the US, I flew from San Jose to Denver yesterday for the long weekend. SJC doesn't have the new CT scanners yet, and normally I would have just sent everything through the X-ray machine, but I just wanted to see how amenable TSA employees would be to a request for hand check. I requested hand check for the 5 rolls of 35mm film I was carrying (in a Japan Camera Hunter film case), and had no issues. It was a mix of home bulk-rolled cassettes, and some factory loaded HP5+. I don't think the Denver airport has the new CT scanners either, but I'll report back on my return leg.
 
Photographers who mainly shoot film need to fight for their rights to carry film across the world. In my own case, I use both types, so I do not mind carrying digital cameras and sometimes one film camera. If the used XRay machines mess up film, this would encourage me to use digital cameras instead. It has nothing to do with my choice destroying the film industry as we know it.
 
I agree with Raid. I am carrying both digital and film on my trip to Asia at the moment. I prefer the feel of film cameras but recognize the technological advancement of digital. I doubt the world of government bureaucrats concerned with security is going to bend much to the demands of film users since they are so few.

Some have said a M2 with a 35 and TriX is all they need (and that is my favorite combo) but my FujiX100F comes damm close and is much more capable and does not cause worry when passing through an Xray machine.
 
ktmrider said:
Some have said a M2 with a 35 and TriX is all they need (and that is my favorite combo) but my FujiX100F comes damm close and is much more capable and does not cause worry when passing through an Xray machine.
Click to expand...

The Fuji X100 may come damn close, but a 100% mechanical rangefinder film camera with a 35mm lens and fed with real black and white film which you can develop and archive in real folders so that you don't store digital files but actual analog photographic material at home, well it is not. Damn definitely.

raid said:
Photographers who mainly shoot film need to fight for their rights to carry film across the world.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong but I don't remember cases of explosives prone to blow out the plane having been discovered hidden in film rolls, the same for weapons. That we now need to "fight for out rights" to carry film in our cabin luggage without them to be destroyed by the new CT machines is just to cry about with anger - our world is now turning mad 100%. What's next ? Teeth brushes not allowed on board ?

All of this should make us film photographers stop to travel by plane (which is, in most cases, quite possible if you decide to travel differently when you don't have to go to another continent for some mandatory reason).
 
Here is a visual aid how the scanners look like so you can identify them:

Airoirt_Scanners.jpg
 
There's always the possibility to FedEx your film to your destination or purchase film there. And I recommend getting your film developed at your location so you don't have to fly back with exposed film.
 
Stop whining and buy your own private jet. You can get a Boeing 737 Max jet real cheap these days. You can finance it by making quick stops in Colombia on your way home. :D
 
I had a chat with an online agent for Schipol airport in Amsterdam. They can't guarantee hand check and is at the discretion of security staff. I suspect this will be the same Europe wide.

Quite sad, days of travelling with film are over.
 
Ste_S said:
I had a chat with an online agent for Schipol airport in Amsterdam. They can't guarantee hand check and is at the discretion of security staff. I suspect this will be the same Europe wide.

Quite sad, days of travelling with film are over.
Click to expand...

I am using film locally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top