From: Clay (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 09/06/03-07:48:57 AM Z
My feeling is that the dosage is cumulative. I have had boxes of Tri-X
run through the machines here in Houston on the way out and on the way
back, and have not been able to notice any discernible fog. But when I
took the same box on a third trip, I began to pick up some base fog
that wasn't there before. One hint from Dick Arentz is to make sure
that the boxes are put on the machine's conveyer with nothing on them
or around them that could possibly cast an 'X-ray shadow' if it does
fog slightly. You would certainly pick up the faint outline of your
ipod if you laid it on top of a film box and they gave it a good jolt
of x-rays. A minor amount of fog is a small, but tractable problem, as
long as the fog is consistent across the whole sheet of film.
FWIW, my experiences with this have been MUCH better since the TSA took
over at the airports. I generally ask for a hand inspection, tell them
it is film, and they just swab it and hand it back politely. I have not
been refused hand inspection since the TSA took over operations. This
was certainly not the case prior to 9/11, when each airport and each
worker seemed to have a different idea about what was allowed. The
slightly fogged Tri-X example I mentioned before was due to being
forced to put it through the machines prior to the TSA assuming their
present role.
Out of this country, all bets are off, though. When the guy with a
machine gun tells you to put it on the belt, you just do it.
Clay
On Friday, September 5, 2003, at 10:27 PM, Robert Schaller wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> This has been a persistent question of mine, as I often carry film
> when
> I travel. I have had mostly good experiences, getting hand
> inspections in
> LA, Istanbul, and Vienna in the last year, but not in Denver, where I
> have
> to fly out of when I go. They give that "less than 400 ASA"
> assurance, more
> recently even a "less than 3200 ASA" assurance, and so far it's been
> ok, but
> I wonder what that means: if we figure that commercial gelatin-silver
> film
> has, say, 8 stops of latitude, does that mean that if I shoot film at
> ASA
> 400, any details will be lost that were 4 stops dimmer than the center
> of
> exposure (zone 5)? Or, if 3200 is the number, does that mean that my
> latitude is only three stops on the dim side, since 3200 is 3 stops
> faster
> than 400? What, exactly, is the effective EI for these machines?
> Wouldn't
> that be a more useful number, one that we photographers could take into
> account? Don't we, in some sense, have a right and need to know what
> intensity of just what sort of radiation our materials are being
> subjected
> to? I know that I often push film, or use other developers and other
> speeds
> than those officially recommended, so that the assurances about speed
> are,
> for me, less than fully informative.
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> Robert Schaller
>
> On 9/5/03 10:08 AM, "Scott Walker" <walker@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>> Regarding X-ray bags... On the older machines they tell you that they
>> won't
>> expose the film under 400 ASA. If you put them in X-ray bags and it
>> obscures
>> the image as it goes through the machine they turn up the intensity
>> of the
>> x-ray to get a picture through the bag which is worse.
>>
>> In Detroit they now have machines that are so strong that there are
>> signs
>> telling you that your film WILL be exposed if left in the luggage.
>> They were
>> happy to hand inpect which means they open every 35mm canister and
>> swab it
>> with a cloth which they then check in a machine for ionic residue from
>> explosive chemicals.
>>
>> In other airports (recently) I have been refused hand inspection and
>> they
>> put it through the machine (older type) as a matter of policy. Then
>> again I
>> have had just the regular hand inpection as well.
>>
>> I always carry my film with in a ziplock and try my best to work with
>> the
>> inspectors to keep it out of the machines.
>>
>> Scott.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: epona [mailto:acolyta@napc.com]
>> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 11:53 AM
>> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>> Subject: Re: flying....
>>
>>
>> X-ray bags? where do i get those??????
>>
>> thx,
>> ~christine
>>
>> Dchiap2 wrote:
>>
>>> I flew to Italy last September via Amsterdam; I hand carried all my
>>> film
>>> (pola 55, 120 tmax 100 and 400, and 120 color neg) in xray bags, and
>>> had
>>> it hand inspected. No problems at all, and no rudeness; actually
>>> anyone
>>> who hand inspected it seemed nicely curious about photography and
>>> what I
>>> was doing. But it's probably just about who is actually on duty for
>>> hand inspecting any given day. The downside is that if you have a
>>> lot
>>> of film it can be cumbersome to lug around the airport etc.
>>>
>>> Re: Scotland - Sweetheart Abbey, and Castle Campbell stand out it my
>>> mind, as does Edinburgh and the small towns just south of Edinburgh.
>>>
>>> Don Chiappinelli, LCSW
>>> dchiap@msn.com
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: epona [mailto:acolyta@napc.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 4:26 PM
>>> To: the gurus
>>> Subject: flying....
>>>
>>> Hello folks,
>>>
>>> Hope you are all well. I'm flying to Ireland next week and I was
>>> wondering if you all had any advice about film and security. I shoot
>>> type 55 which is rather slow (50 asa) and may make it through the
>>> x-rays
>>>
>>> but I wasn't sure how much worse things may have gotten post 9/11.
>>> Caryy on and insist hand-checking? Or pack with luggage? I hear
>>> they
>>> X-ray that as well....
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Christine
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not
>> made for
>> humans any more than black people were made for white, or women
>> created for
>> men.
>> ~ Alice Walker
>>
>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/03-03:08:59 PM Z CST