HIE infrared film

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Allo - 21 Apr 2004 20:35 GMT

Any body know if Kodak HIE infrared film could be damaged by airport X-ray
(hand luggage).
Thank You for your help.

Reply to this Message

James Robinson - 21 Apr 2004 21:55 GMT

> Any body know if Kodak HIE infrared film could be damaged by
> airport X-ray (hand luggage).

Yes it can. It needs to be hand inspected. It should be interesting
keeping them from opening the containers, even though they say not to
open in room light.

Reply to this Message

Rainman - 22 Apr 2004 19:39 GMT

James Robinson <wascana@212.com> skrev i
meldingsnyheter:4086DFD5.C065246E@212.com...

> > Any body know if Kodak HIE infrared film could be damaged by
> > airport X-ray (hand luggage).
>
> Yes it can. It needs to be hand inspected. It should be interesting
> keeping them from opening the containers, even though they say not to
> open in room light.

Kodak HIE can be damaged, but i have not experienced this. I use a leadlined
bag, available in a good retailer. The film is, after all, only ISO 400, and
most xray-machines at the airport are said to not damage film up to ISO
1600, at least here in Europe. In the US, I have travveled throug Seattle
Internatinal, Chicago O'Hare and San Franscisco International without
damage.

The X-rays on checked baggage is stronger, so handluggage is preferable.
Don't let the airport personel inspect by hand, which means opening the
containers, as this WILL ruin the film.

Knut O
- Norway, home of giants

Reply to this Message

photo - 25 Apr 2004 04:47 GMT

I just travelled through San Fran three weeks ago.
Handluggage xray machines damaged my tmax 400 (no leadbag).

Will using leadbags cause airport personel to increase xray power to see
whats inside?
Is it worth using leadbags?

What about couriering film only with "film-only" stickers?

Please post your infrared experience here.
Good luch with HIE.

> > > Any body know if Kodak HIE infrared film could be damaged by
> > > airport X-ray (hand luggage).
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> Knut O
> - Norway, home of giants

Reply to this Message

Sam G - 25 Apr 2004 05:14 GMT

I shoot mostly ASA 400. I past years, I passed my film around the scanner
and asked them to hand inspect it. In the last year or so with tightened
security, I have been told repeatedly that up to 1000 or 1200 ASA film is
safe for the hand luggage scanning. As a result, I have passed film through
at least twice each roll (once each time on a round trip) and have seen no
fogging I could detect. I have yet to try my HIE.

Sam

"

Reply to this Message

James Robinson - 25 Apr 2004 13:30 GMT

> I just travelled through San Fran three weeks ago.
> Handluggage xray machines damaged my tmax 400 (no leadbag).

That's unusual. Kodak makes no mention of problems with a pass or two
through airport x-ray machines with 400 speed film, and I haven't had
any problems with even higher speed B&W film. I wonder if there wasn't
another cause that you have not connected.

> Will using leadbags cause airport personel to increase xray power to see
> whats inside?

No. Except for some very rare types of machines, the power of the
typical airport scanner cannot be adjusted by the operator.

> Is it worth using leadbags?

That's up to you. Lead bags do not block out x-rays entirely, they only
reduce the exposure. Domke, one of the major manufacturers of the bags,
did some tests with the type of machine used for checked bags, and
concluded that for a bag to be fully effective, it would be too heavy to
be practical. Thus, the light weight bags available to consumers are a
compromise. Keep in mind that the film's exposure to radiation is
higher when you are actually in the aircraft at altitude than in the
x-ray scanner. The scanners are only a small part of the problem.

> What about couriering film only with "film-only" stickers?

Personally, I wouldn't bother, but some people prefer that with high
speed film compared to the hassle of dealing with airport security
personnel. I would worry about additional exposure to heat, if you are
sending the film to someplace hot, and the film might sit in a truck
somewhere, i.e. Phoenix in the summer.

Reply to this Message

Wilko Bulte,,,,TZ=WET From: - 25 Apr 2004 18:28 GMT

>> I just travelled through San Fran three weeks ago.
>> Handluggage xray machines damaged my tmax 400 (no leadbag).

>That's unusual. Kodak makes no mention of problems with a pass or two
>through airport x-ray machines with 400 speed film, and I haven't had
>any problems with even higher speed B&W film. I wonder if there wasn't
>another cause that you have not connected.

FWIW: I had 800ASA in my bag that went thru Amsterdam Airport scanners
twice and no problems.

SFO has a sign up that claims up to 1600 ASA is supposed to problem free.
(or was it 1600ASA in Amsterdam and 3200ASA in SFO? I forgot).

Reply to this Message

Wilko Bulte,,,,TZ=WET From: - 25 Apr 2004 18:26 GMT

>I just travelled through San Fran three weeks ago.
>Handluggage xray machines damaged my tmax 400 (no leadbag).

Why didn't you ask for hand inspection? I was at SFO in March and
my request for hand inspection was handled very courteously and
professionally.

Took a while, and there are now a couple of security folks who know all about
the inner life of a Hasselblad, but no problems at all.

Basically all films were wiped for explosive 'sniffing' but freshly factory
sealed films were taken for granted, no desires to look inside the sealed
packaging.

HIE is a bit of a pain here (no handling in daylight), but TMAX400 should
have been no problem.

Just allow enough time, I was there very early (for a flight back to .nl).

>Will using leadbags cause airport personel to increase xray power to see
>whats inside?

Generally yes.

Wilko

Reply to this Message

Jevin Sweval - 02 May 2004 01:11 GMT

> Basically all films were wiped for explosive 'sniffing' but freshly factory
> sealed films were taken for granted, no desires to look inside the sealed
> packaging.

Thats what irks me about all of this new security. Much of it seems
pointless. If I wanted to blow up a plane I don't care if my film
(which isn't even film; its explosives) so I would simply send it
through the machine.

Reply to this Message

James Robinson - 25 Apr 2004 13:43 GMT

> James Robinson skrev:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> most xray-machines at the airport are said to not damage film up to ISO
> 1600, at least here in Europe.

I was simply repeating the warnings from Kodak. Infrared film seems to
be more sensitive to x-rays than other types of film, so the "above ISO
800" rule doesn't apply. While Kodak suggests that ISO 800 film can be
safely passed through the inspection machines a few times, they also
state that no exposure to x-rays is considered safe for infrared film.

That said, people have reported passing their infrared film through
airport scanners without noticeable problems. Kodak might be being
somewhat conservative in their recommendations, since they would be
concerned about professionals who don't want to see anything that would
affect the consistency of their results. The first effect that an
airport scanner would have on the film would be a reduction in contrast,
which would not be seen by someone simply looking for fog on the film,
but would be seen by someone comparing similar photos taken on affected
film and unaffected film. An amateur would not necessarily notice the
contrast change on a few photos.

Reply to this Message