Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
> New x-ray scanners at airports NOT safe for ANY Ilford film |
*** Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks *** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Modern tech and modern travel is not considerate of "filmers" There may be a film revival or so they say but the needs of those who use film are considered as a very low to non existent priority in my opinion
There is allegedly an understanding now between the Department of Transport and U.K. airports as stated by Ilford that a request for hand inspection will be expected to be granted. However this does not have the strength of law to the best of my knowledge and is only an understanding so in the last analysis it depends on the attitude of the head of airport security in whatever U.K. airport you leave from It is not clear to me nor has it ever been what the EU's official position is in all of this. There is limited anecdotal evidence that some travellers have been successful in getting hand inspections in EU airports I don't think I have heard either way about success or failure in getting a hand inspection at U.K. airports What is clear is that Ilford and I think Kodak carried out tests with the newer CT scanner that gave them enough evidence that no film was safe even for one pass Eventually and likely quite soon, all but the most minor airports will adopt the new scanners Mike |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
I have flown from Edinburgh to Berlin and back this past week. I took a selection of 35mm film (C41, CineStill and Ilford B&W) which was stored in a plastic film case in my hand luggage. It all went through scanners twice. I have developed a roll of Ilford SFX this morning, and it is fine. I’m pleased, but annoyed that I didn’t take advantage of reasonably priced Kodak and Fuji film available in Berlin. It is a good bit cheaper than here, and there seemed to be plenty available. It would have been an expensive gamble, however, if it had all been fogged.
Alex Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Alex, was it the new CT scanners at both airports? It is those that Ilford and I think the other film manufacturers claim are unsafe for any film?
Mike |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
I don’t know, Mike. Edinburgh is a major international airport, and Berlin Willy Brandt has just opened, so I would expect both to have the latest equipment.
Alex Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
OK Thanks Alex
Mike |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Alex, am I right in assuming that of your films you have currently only developed the SFX and the rest remain to be developed
If so a report on the rest will be helpful. It tends to throw the whole assertion by Ilford of inevitable damage up in the air Mike |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Will do, Mike. The SFX was already 5 years beyond expiry, but showed no fog in the unexposed film base. The other films are colour negative, the faster one being 500. I’m not expecting them to be fogged.
I’m travelling again this week, using two different airports. I’ll try to look for names on the scanners. Alex. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
That's great Alex. As far as I know the latest, allegedly film fogging, scanners are called CT scanners. There's even a picture of one at Edinburgh bu I think it was one taken by a journalist/photographer from the Scotsman as that was where I picked up the 2019 article saying that in Nov 2019 Edinburgh was trialling the new scanners for hand luggage inspection
Mike |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
If it is any help Alex, Ilfrd in its statement about CT scanners list some as follows:
Smiths – CTIX L3 – Clearscan Rapiscan - 920CT / Connect CT IDSS - Detect 1000 Nuctech - Kylin Analogic Cobra Mike |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Under the provisions of S1 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971. 1) A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence. Let us look at 'Without Lawful excuse'. They have a duty to examine any package for dangerous articles which are prohibited from being carried, that is without question. However if you request a hand search and they are MADE AWARE of what the reason is then they ignore your request the 3rd provision of the section comes into affect:- 'being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence' It is not only my interpretation but one from a friendly but totally unbiased solicitor (My daughter in law) Of course this would only apply in UK airports (and possibly only those of England and Wales because Scots and Ulster law differs) What the law is abroad I cannot say. Last edited by John King; 9th June 2022 at 07:37 AM. |
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Safe to buy Film from Overseas? (post office xrays checks) | danielb | Photography in general | 9 | 6th November 2020 10:27 AM |
film scanners | bumble | Photography in general | 2 | 16th May 2019 05:47 AM |
Playing it safe TOO safe | MartyNL | Photography in general | 35 | 15th April 2013 11:52 AM |
Film rolls and Airports | raulpc | Equipment miscellaneous | 24 | 6th January 2012 04:38 PM |
Scanners | kazer | New products and offers | 5 | 8th October 2009 02:45 PM |