Solution to airport xray problem!
loc hoang
jacket pockets and walk through the metal detector. I tried this several
times and only once was the alarm triggered.
This leads me to a question: Why can't film makers use plastic instead of
metal for the containers??? Are they plain dumb or are there unsolvable
technical prolems associated with this idea? Anyone from Kodak reading this?
Becky Ouellette
>In article <55...@bu.edu.bu.edu> l...@bucsf.bu.edu (loc hoang) writes:
>
>>This leads me to a question: Why can't film makers use plastic instead of
>>metal for the containers??? Are they plain dumb or are there unsolvable
>>technical prolems associated with this idea? Anyone from Kodak reading this?
>
in bulk. That way, there are plastic refillable canisters. I like them
better than the metal ones(MHO).
Rebecca Ouellette Imaging Science
Computer Science House Bitnet: RJO7952@RITVAX
Rochester Institute Of Technology Internet: be...@ritcsh.csh.rit.edu
Intelligence is what makes you useful... Wisdom is what makes you tolerable
Andrew Koenig
> An (expensive) X-ray bag (especially those for high-speed
> films, and possibly two or more of them inside each other) is the best,
> according to my experiences.
I have trouble understanding why.
After all, if they X-ray a bag with one of those lead film bags
inside, it will show up as a roughly rectangular blotch inside which
nothing is visible. You could have a bomb inside and they wouldn't
notice. Therefore, why won't they just insist on opening the bag
and X-raying the contents?
--
--Andrew Koenig
a...@europa.att.com
Mike Smith
>In article <34...@bacchus.dec.com>, kl...@wsl.dec.com (Ken Lee) writes:
>> In the U.S., they don't X-ray your film if the
>> detector goes off. I don't know what happens in other countries.
The idea of pocket carry is a nice one that I will use for small batches;
but when carrying 20-40 rolls of flim ...
>Few other countries than the U.S. has a law that says that photographic
>stuff must be hand-inspected if one so wishes. A "please" doesn't always
>help either. An (expensive) X-ray bag (especially those for high-speed
>films, and possibly two or more of them inside each other) is the best,
>according to my experiences.
Hmmm, my experience has been the oposite; but I've mostly gone domestic
air. Anytime I've used my lead bags and tubes it has simply resulted
in my carryon bag being selected for thorough hand inspection! (Right
after the X-ray operator has reached over and turned up the 'strength'
nob in an attempt to peer inside the lead bag ...)
If the film is in Fuji clear plastic film cans in a clear baggy and
handed to the security clerk it is looked at and handed back. I make
sure that my camera is empty of film (even if I have to rewind a 1/2
shot roll, it's worth the $1 or two of film waste for the ease of
check in) and let the whole camera bag be X-rayed.
They seem to accept my letting the whole bag of camera stuff go through
the machine as a gesture of compromise and take a quick look at a BIG
baggy of clear film cans; figure I'm an OK guy who is being considerate
of them, and wave me through.
I end up carrying ALOT of film cans, though, since I repack the film into
KODAK dark cans for storage ... (I don't trust the clear cans in sunshine)
Sigh, the foibles of a paranoid shutter bug ...
--
E. Michael Smith e...@apple.COM
'Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has
genius, power and magic in it.' - Goethe
I am not responsible nor is anyone else. Everything is disclaimed.
David Kassover
...
>Few other countries than the U.S. has a law that says that photographic
>stuff must be hand-inspected if one so wishes. A "please" doesn't always
>help either. An (expensive) X-ray bag (especially those for high-speed
>films, and possibly two or more of them inside each other) is the best,
>according to my experiences.
My tuppence:
About a year ago I was flying home from Heathrow Airport,
specifically the British Airways terminal. They were extremely
polite (so was I), and were very happy to hand inspect camera
equipment, foto bags, etc. On one point, they were adamant:
Cameras that could not (or would not) be opened would be xrayed.
(You can imagine why)
I happened to have a couple of loaded bodies, and after a while
agreed to let them go through the machine. (I cannot recall now
exactly why I decided to do this rather than rewind the film and
open the cameras)
*I* cannot, on casual examination, find any damage to the film
(Kodak 100 print film, species unknown) that was in either the
metal bodied or the plastic bodied camera.
This doesn't mean an expert would or would not be able to detect
anything. Also, as far as I know, there was only one trip
through the machine for these two rolls.
Another experience at Kennedy airport (Admittedly extremely
busy): An Xray technician refused my request for hand
inspection. I grabbed my bag back from her, and repeated my
request. She shook her head. I inquired in a LOUD voice why I
could not get someone who spoke English. 20 seconds later a
supervisor appeared and happily conducted the hand inspection.
I'm not sure I would have the chutzpah to scream Nyet Kulturni in
the Moscow Airport, though...
Moral, if you will: Travel early. Be prepared for inspections.
Don't leave film in cameras. Stand your ground, within reason.
--
===================================================
David Kassover
kass...@ra.crd.ge.com
kass...@crd.ge.com
Esther Heller
I also carry my film in clear cannisters in a zip-lock bag to get through
the airports (US only) security. Almost every time I hand the bag to the
guard, who frequently just glances at it, go through the metal detector and
pick it up on the other side. But last year, on my way back from Zion,
Bryce, etc, the two guards in Las Vegas, who seemed very unbusy, opened
the bag, opened the cannisters and took out each roll of film. Then they
seemed to get tired and one suggested that they "let" me put it all back
together (I had about 20 roles). Then one of them went off on break. Beats
me. I always allow plenty of time and try to have the camera empty.
One time, they hand searched my camera bag after asking me what something
in the x-ray was. I wasn't sure from the position, but I think it was my
polorizing lens. Speculation?
Oh, I also have tried carrying film through in my pockets. Interestingly,
in the San Jose, CA airport, just one roll set off the metal detector. The
guard, in broken English, seriously scolded me (I think :) ). After that I
went back to the clear containers.
Esther
(I get by with a little help from my friends
Galileo, Leela and Romana)
Esther A. Heller est...@hpcuhd.HP.com
DSO Software Quality Lab
Hewlett-Packard
Cupertino, CA
Brian Godfrey
-About a year ago I was flying home from Heathrow Airport,
-specifically the British Airways terminal. They were extremely
-polite (so was I), and were very happy to hand inspect camera
-equipment, foto bags, etc. On one point, they were adamant:
-Cameras that could not (or would not) be opened would be xrayed.
My brother just went through Heathrow about two weeks ago. He said that
They will not allow any hand checking. All film and computer tapes (and
everything else) goes through the Xray machines. Period. Carrying film in
your pocket might work if you don't get frisked. He said about one person
in 30 got a full-fledged, very thorough pat-down. (He was one who got the
pat-down.) Maybe times have changed or maybe they were alerted due to a
threat or something.
--
--Brian M. Godfrey
Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
{uunet|ogicse|tektronix}!sequent!brian
sequent!br...@cse.ogi.edu -or- br...@sequent.UUCP
David Kassover
>In article <70...@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> kass...@jupiter.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) writes:
>-About a year ago I was flying home from Heathrow Airport,
>-specifically the British Airways terminal.
> My brother just went through Heathrow about two weeks ago. He said that
>They will not allow any hand checking.
It's possible that this doesn't belong here any more. But I
believe it was a British Airways 747 that blew up over Scotland
in December 1988. My travel was in April, 1989.
Another thing they were VERY PICKY about in the terminal was
whether ones' baggage was packed personally, and was it ever left
unattended after packing, etc. If you could not answer these
questions to their satisfaction (I could), the bags got a very
thorough going over.
Even if I were possessed of "typical American bullheadedness", I
can see why they may get rather stiff about "suspicious" parcels and
circumstances. (you should have seen the almost-ruckus that got
raised when some idiot tried to take a picture of Britains Tomb
of the Unknown Soldier. But that's another story)
I'll stop now, before I get political.
I saw a recommendation somewhere, that to avoid Xray damage, one
might consider having one's film developed before leaving on an
airplane. Or buying pre-paid mailers, and posting them before
embarkation. Or attempting to rent or borrow darkroom
facilities.
None of these are perfect, but may be preferable to getting in a
hassle with customs agents and the like.
Robert Claeson
: >Few other countries than the U.S. has a law that says that photographic
: >stuff must be hand-inspected if one so wishes. A "please" doesn't always
: >help either. An (expensive) X-ray bag (especially those for high-speed
: >films, and possibly two or more of them inside each other) is the best,
: >according to my experiences.
: Hmmm, my experience has been the oposite; but I've mostly gone domestic
: air. Anytime I've used my lead bags and tubes it has simply resulted
: in my carryon bag being selected for thorough hand inspection!
Well, isn't that what one wants -- hand inspection rather than X-ray?
: (Right after the X-ray operator has reached over and turned up the
: 'strength' nob in an attempt to peer inside the lead bag ...)
That's why I sometimes use two bags inside each other.
--
Robert Claeson E-mail: rcla...@erbe.se
ERBE DATA AB
Robert Claeson
: After all, if they X-ray a bag with one of those lead film bags
: inside, it will show up as a roughly rectangular blotch inside which
: nothing is visible. You could have a bomb inside and they wouldn't
: notice. Therefore, why won't they just insist on opening the bag
: and X-raying the contents?
I use to (politely) tell them that I have undeveloped, high-sensitive
films inside that bag and in an equally polite voice ask them if they
would mind to inspect the rolls by hand. It has worked fine for me,
but one should certainly be prepared for this in advance and be there
in time.
It is almost impossible to eliminate the risk of having the films
X-rayed completely, but then, most low- and medium-speed films won't
record anything even after 20 or so passes thru one of those machines.
Ian Mitchell
David Kassover writes:
> It's possible that this doesn't belong here any more. But I
> believe it was a British Airways 747 that blew up over Scotland
> in December 1988. My travel was in April, 1989.
Just being picky here, it was a **Pan Am** 747 that suffered explosive
structural independence over Lockerbie.
> Another thing they were VERY PICKY about in the terminal was
> whether ones' baggage was packed personally, and was it ever left
> unattended after packing, etc. If you could not answer these
> questions to their satisfaction (I could), the bags got a very
> thorough going over.
Any US-UK flight these days has a mandatory ? minute interview with
the airline personnel. Of course, once you know the questions it's
easy to breeze through. As a for instance:
"Do you have any electrical devices in your baggage?"
"Yes, a calculator"
"Has it ever been out of your sight where someone else might
tamper with it?"
"No"
Now consider here that if you use such a thing at work an answer like
this is actually the most sensible (especially if it's a small one)
but usually a lie.
Back to the main subject - Xrays. I travel a lot and my whole camera
bag goes through the machine every time, but always as hand baggage.
I've never had Xray trouble with my film. The biggest problem I have
is composition!
Tarqs [the photo-badger]
Jack Campin
br...@sequent.UUCP (Brian Godfrey) wrote:
> kass...@jupiter.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) writes:
>> About a year ago I was flying home from Heathrow Airport, specifically the
>> British Airways terminal. They were extremely polite (so was I), and were
>> very happy to hand inspect camera equipment, foto bags, etc. On one point,
>> they were adamant: Cameras that could not (or would not) be opened would
>> be xrayed.
> My brother just went through Heathrow about two weeks ago. He said that
> They will not allow any hand checking. All film and computer tapes (and
> everything else) goes through the Xray machines. Period.
Both are wrong, the second more so. I go through Heathrow frequently.
They insist on X-raying all cameras - simply taking the lens off so they
can look inside doesn't satisfy them. They will hand-check film, but
insist on opening every box or plastic tub to see the cassette inside.
Fuji film is quicker than Kodak here because the tubs are transparent.
(OK, my experience is entirely with the domestic and European terminals -
1, 2 and 4. Terminal 3 may do things differently for all I know).
I attribute this simply to a public relations exercise on the part of a
bunch of bozos who've been caught with their pants down. I can think of
several kinds of lethal weapon that would easily pass their checks.
--
-- Jack Campin Computing Science Department, Glasgow University, 17 Lilybank
Gardens, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland 041 339 8855 x6044 work 041 556 1878 home
JANET: ja...@cs.glasgow.ac.uk BANG!net: via mcvax and ukc FAX: 041 330 4913
INTERNET: via nsfnet-relay.ac.uk BITNET: via UKACRL UUCP: ja...@glasgow.uucp
Al Bowers
>In article <10...@alice.UUCP>, a...@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) writes:
>: After all, if they X-ray a bag with one of those lead film bags
>: inside, it will show up as a roughly rectangular blotch inside which
>: nothing is visible. You could have a bomb inside and they wouldn't
>: notice. Therefore, why won't they just insist on opening the bag
>: and X-raying the contents?
>I use to (politely) tell them that I have undeveloped, high-sensitive
>films inside that bag and in an equally polite voice ask them if they
>would mind to inspect the rolls by hand. It has worked fine for me,
>but one should certainly be prepared for this in advance and be there
>in time.
Last time I checked the FAA regs in this country you can insist on
hand inspection of film and cameras. Airport security must provide
this to you, it is not necessary to send your film through the X-ray
machines. Once you go international though, they are not required to
do anything for you. If you are polite and use a clear plastic baggie
that can be easily hand inspected, most will oblige you. The only
instance of rudeness that I have ever encountered with technique was
in Hong Kong where I was told (while being prodded with the butt of an
automatic assault rife) that the option was not available. This is
also true of video tapes, cameras and camcorders.
BTW, there are some countries (mostly European) that have strict
limits on the number of unexposed rolls of film that can be brought
in. Tarriffs are common if you exceed the limits whether or not you
ultimately export the rolls of film. I guess they figure that if you
bring it in then you aren't buying their film...
--
Albion H. Bowers bow...@elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov ames!elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov!bowers
`In the changing of the times, they were like autumn lightning, a
thing out of season, an empty promise of rain that would fall unheeded
on fields already bare.'
attributed to Abe Shosaburo by Dave Lowery
William R. Pearson
] My brother just went through Heathrow about two weeks ago. He said that
]They will not allow any hand checking. All film and computer tapes (and
]everything else) goes through the Xray machines. Period. Carrying film in
]your pocket might work if you don't get frisked. He said about one person
]in 30 got a full-fledged, very thorough pat-down. (He was one who got the
]pat-down.) Maybe times have changed or maybe they were alerted due to a
]threat or something.
When I was in Scotland last summer, I was surprised to find
that the one-hour photo places were about 30% cheaper than they are
in the US. If you are there for a few days, it might make sense
to do the developing there and not have to worry about the machines.
(I checked my camera and film with my luggage. It came out
fine (Ektar 125).
Bill Pearson
Robert Claeson
> BTW, there are some countries (mostly European) that have strict
> limits on the number of unexposed rolls of film that can be brought
> in. Tarriffs are common if you exceed the limits whether or not you
> ultimately export the rolls of film. I guess they figure that if you
> bring it in then you aren't buying their film...
Say what? I travel a lot in Europe (heck, I *live* here/there) and have
been able to bring 30 or 40 or more rolls of film with me without any
complaints. I've heard about some obscure country (Turkey, I believe)
that has such regulations, but aside from that, I don't know of any
country in Europe that won't let you bring as much film as you like.
Al Bowers
>In article <BOWERS.90A...@drynix.dfrf.nasa.gov>, bow...@elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers) writes:
>> BTW, there are some countries (mostly European) that have strict
>> limits on the number of unexposed rolls of film that can be brought
>> in. Tarriffs are common if you exceed the limits whether or not you
>Say what? I travel a lot in Europe (heck, I *live* here/there) and have
>been able to bring 30 or 40 or more rolls of film with me without any
>complaints. I've heard about some obscure country (Turkey, I believe)
I heard this story from an engineer who went to a AGARD conference in
Spain last year, so my info is admittedly second hand. He had 12
rolls with him at the time and I don't know if he flew into Lisbon
(Portugal) or Madrid (Spain). At any rate he was required to pay a
tariff as he exceeded the maximum allowable number of rolls of film (I
don't know how many).
Perhaps my info is wrong (I've never been to Europe) as this is from
memory. I've never had a problem going across the Pacific with the
number of rolls of film I've hauled with me.
Alan S. Mazer
> BTW, there are some countries (mostly European) that have strict
> limits on the number of unexposed rolls of film that can be brought
> in. Tarriffs are common if you exceed the limits whether or not you
> ultimately export the rolls of film. I guess they figure that if you
> bring it in then you aren't buying their film...
I haven't heard anything about this in Europe, but I have read this about
Central America, specifically Guatemala. But I'm not sure how strict the
limit is; I heard customs people will sometimes look the other way. And I
doubt that the tariff is as much as the extra cost of buying the
film locally (about 100 % when I was in Costa Rica).
-- Alan # "But seriously, what could go wrong?"
..!cit-vax!elroy!alan
al...@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov
David Kassover
>In article <BOWERS.90A...@drynix.dfrf.nasa.gov>, bow...@elxsi.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers) writes:
>> BTW, there are some countries (mostly European) that have strict
>> limits on the number of unexposed rolls of film that can be brought
>> in.
>I haven't heard anything about this in Europe, but I have read this about
>Central America
I haven't traveled outside the USA much at all (Several times to
Canada, and once to England, so all I can do is report what
happened to me, not necessarily what was *supposed* to happen.
Regarding film quantities: I've been told that some countries
are more jealous of local purchase than others (particularly
those with "national insult" laws). And I suspect that customs treatment
within the common market or EEC by citizens of the common market
or EEC countries is somewhat different than such for Americans,
or other non-EEC citizens.
Furthermore, the system in many countries is that the police
(customs inspectors) are paid minimally by their employers, and
are expected to supplement their income from those who use their
services. I cannot say whether it is "right" or "wrong" to have
such a system. It *is* a little strange to those of us who are
conditioned to a different style of "professional practice".
Cy Shuster
foil bag, and had no problems. Didn't hand inspect, just let it
go through the machine.
--Cy--
Jack Campin
kass...@jupiter.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) wrote:
> Regarding film quantities: I've been told that some countries are more
> jealous of local purchase than others (particularly those with "national
> insult" laws). And I suspect that customs treatment within the common
> market or EEC by citizens of the common market or EEC countries is somewhat
> different than such for Americans, or other non-EEC citizens.
I've never heard of this in any European country, nor have I ever seen one
where it would be possible - at every European airport I've been through
(quite a few) there is only one customs checkpoint; EC and other citizens
are not separated, and customs doesn't usually look at your passport. The
EC trade regulations are different for stuff coming in from outside the EC,
but they depend on where the goods came from, not on the citizenship of the
person transporting them.
Turkey has a regulation that you should only bring one camera in. As far
as I know they don't enforce it.
Robert Claeson
And I passed the security control at the Kallax airport in Lulea, Sweden
on a domestic flight a few weeks ago without problems. I didn't even ask
if the machine would expose undeveloped film, since the person before me
was from a hospital and let undeveloped X-ray film pass thru the machine.
I later asked him how he could do that and got the response that they've
tried sending X-ray film thru it several times without any problems. So it
should be quite safe.
The machine was apparently installed just a few months ago and is of a new
type.
John Humphrys
It has three sink areas: each will hold a development tray. In addition,
it has a light box between the sink areas. It has all the plumbing fixtures.
The sink is fiberglass and the base is sheet metal.
Price $300.00
Call after 6pm. 617-444-3305
Sink is located in Needham, Massachusetts.