Computed Tomography vs. films & light meters

[terri]

Before any of the above posts get reported further, let’s keep the tone conversational and on topic, please. Thanks!

 

[Original katomi]

If it’s poss one could allow extra time find security at the airport and explain concerns about film that one does not want to slow the boarding ok it’s been a long time since I went throu customs, and I may be talking out of my avi port.
Just asking is it an option

 

[Soocom1]

The hypothetical situation is actually a very real problem for those who travel and shoot film of any format size. The scanners as I pointed out are in fact detrimental to photographic material.

The main point I have tried to make is that the TSA folks in large part are not educated on the finer points of film sensitivity nor on photography in general.
The TSA (and speaking as one who have friends who are TSA agents BTW) are more concerned over playing their Game Boys, their kids, buying food and doing their general day to day ritual like so many others. Many are there to have a paycheck whilst they attend school and unless they are shutterbugs themselves, look at photography through the lens of their iPhones.

Most do not have the desire nor the incling to learn about the effects of CT scanners on the lives of others, they are there to do a job.

The TSA does have a specific part in their training dealing with film and photographic material and do train to a small degree the effects the scanners have on film.
Film

The main point on that page is at the bottom:

"The final decision rests with the TSA officer on whether an item is allowed through the checkpoint."

Many I know inside the TSA have expressed angst over the over-bearing attitude that they are required by their jobs to project, and as I stated, most are not versed in the finer points of silver halide sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation in the 0.03 to 3 nanometer range.

The effects on light meters may or may not be an issue but IMO this is a question best figured by contacting the manufacturers of said light meters and as I always point out....

If you don't like the situation,
Move to change it! Contact your members of congress and all powers that be to address the issue.

 

[NER]

my worry is that a security person may suspect that the boxes contain some kind of contraband vs. what the label claims they contain and will therefore insist that the boxes be CT scanned or opened

I think you worry too much. The machines are not for contraband, nor are the security staff seeking to identify everything that passes through for there will be many things that will be *new* to them.

All they seek to do is identify threats, and all they need to do is satisfy themselves that your sheet film isn't liquid explosive and doesn't contain a firearm. Take a wasted sheet with you so you can show them the contents if you wish.

I have never heard anything about x-ray machines damaging light meters, not even selenium cell ones.

You may be right that I worry too much, but believe it or not, last month in Italy I was given a hard time over the holders in my checked baggage. Yes, holders! The screeners didn't know what they were (though I included a slip of paper in each baggie identifying what they were), and they questioned me at length about my occupation, my reason for traveling to Italy, and why I had "so many" holders (I had 24). They couldn't seem to get their heads around the fact that each holder is good for only 2 shots at a time. Eventually they let me go. On most occasions here in the US I am questioned about the contents of my carry on even after x-ray. I've been made to open my carry on and to then unwrap the lenses for inspection, open the camera, and have my film boxes swiped for forbidden residues. (And all of this, by the way, despite the fact that I have a trusted traveller card from TSA which is supposed to simplify my life when it comes to TSA pre-check and clearing US customs.) Like you, I haven't read or heard that x-ray machines damage photosensitive cells , and I have put my meters through the old-styled machines many times without any problems, but these CT scanners aren't ordinary x-ray machines - so it seemed prudent to ask about this concern and it seems prudent to go with hand inspection until we know for sure that these new machines won't damage light meters. If there is a problem, I assume we'll hear about it soon enough as people begin to report that their cameras misbehave after passing through one or more of these new CT scanners.

N. Riley
http://normanrileyphotography.com

 

[Tim Tucker 2]

If there is a problem, I assume we'll hear about it soon enough as people begin to report that their cameras misbehave after passing through one or more of these new CT scanners.

A rash of poorly exposed images turning up on photo forums?



Your experiences are certainly useful though, I would travel with empty dark slides and load at destination, unload before return. It would certainly allow them to be inspected and fears eased.

@Soocom1, I do understand your point, and this could get so political so quickly, and so treading lightly on eggshells... The answer must be tolerance and understanding as the opposite hasn't exactly helped us avoid this mess. It is true that we all see the world from our own understanding and experience, how it affects us. We rarely see beyond our own experience and understanding. It's an immutable understanding of art that we are expressing our own viewpoints through shared experience otherwise there can be little understanding. The more obscure and personal the message the smaller the audience. It's also fact that minority groups are so because they are the least commonly understood. It appears film photographers now fall into a minority group...

Being one step ahead is expensive, it requires technology and education. It's far safer and cheaper just to limit what's permissible to what you can easily check and easily understand.

 

[Derrel]

I used to know a guy who worked for Alaska Airlines in Portland and he told me that TSA stands for thousands standing around. According to him , Airline employees have a pretty low opinion of TSA.

 

[daveo228i]

During the early 2000’s I did a great deal of flying to Europe, out of Atlanta. I always had one or two cameras, several lenses, and rolls of transparency film, E-6 processing. I would take the individual canisters, out of box, place in a plastic bags. Prior to any scanning I would pull out the bag(s) and request a hand search. Never had a problem going or coming back into the country.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[NGH]

I have traveled through many airports over the last few years both in the US and internationally. I have often carried film and much to my wife's annoyance I have requested hand inspections. Sometimes I get one but most of the time I am told that only high ASA films need that and they are very reluctant to understand my concern. I always have to wait for a supervisor to eventually give me their attention and 8 times out of 10 the film ends up going through the X-ray machine.
I have always been polite and had the film out and ready to make it as easy as possible.
One time I had pushed the film into the so called higher ratings and labelled the films accordingly but they refused to understand what I had done and the films again went through the machines. On one trip I passed through multiple airports and the film would (over teh entire trip) pass through 8 security checks; some places were accommodating but the least helpful to the point of being aggressive was Heathrow (technically my home airport).

If these new machines are really as bad as suggested I really do hope that TSA staff have been fully educated and are willing to help us photographers out.