Put some Super Presto through the carry-on scanner

[WJJ3]

I was recently on a trip down in Shikoku and scored a little grab bag of expired film from a local camera shop. I got:

• 3 rolls of Super Presto 1600 expired 2012
• 3 rolls of Tri-X expired 2012
• 1 roll of Presto 400 expired 2011

I snapped up this film and put it in my backpack. After I flew home to Hokkaido it dawned on me that my backpack went through the carry-on scanner in Osaka and may have fogged my film...

Does anyone know if my little grab bag of film got fogged by the airport carry-on scanner?

 

[lcpr]

I travelled from London to Manila and back with ten rolls of Neopan 1600 and another ten rolls of Tri-X pushed to 1250 and they turned out fine. My carry-on got scanned at London on the way out and at Manila and Singapore on the way back. Your grab bag should be good.

 

[Lauffray]

I can't help, but thought I'd mention I'm pretty jealous of your Neopan 1600

 

[craygc]

Does anyone know if my little grab bag of film got fogged by the airport carry-on scanner?

Not a chance...

 

[Freakscene]

I was recently on a trip down in Shikoku and scored a little grab bag of expired film from a local camera shop. I got:

• 3 rolls of Super Presto 1600 expired 2012
• 3 rolls of Tri-X expired 2012
• 1 roll of Presto 400 expired 2011

I snapped up this film and put it in my backpack. After I flew home to Hokkaido it dawned on me that my backpack went through the carry-on scanner in Osaka and may have fogged my film...

Does anyone know if my little grab bag of film got fogged by the airport carry-on scanner?

If it went through a high intensity scanner (like a CTX 5000) and the guidance software homed in on the part of your bag where the film was, maybe your film is fogged. But maybe it isn't.

Shoot it and develop it, and find out, then tell us what you found.

Marty

 

[x-ray]

Not a chance...

I had Neopan 400 totally ruined by the cary on scanner in Paris. Depend on the scanner and how it's setup.

I would do a test roll or at least do a few frames and clip it out and process to see before committing a roll to something important. The 1600 is ultra sensitive to x-ray.

I work in x-rays as an art form. I find different films with the same ISO to have different sensitivities to x-rays. For example TX 320 and HP-5 are very sensitive as apposed to Foma 400. It's like the color sensitivity to red in different films. Each film has a specific spectral sensitivity.

Neopan and the old Kodak 1600 are so sensitive that background radiation over time will increase the base density until it's unusable. Kodak actually stored the master rolls of their 1600 deep under ground in a salt mine to help reduce fog from background radiation. Here's a link to the article.

https://books.google.com/books?id=D...kodak 1600 film stored in a salt mine&f=false

 

[WJJ3]

Thanks for all the replies. I was thinking the fact that the film is a few years expired could increase the possibility for the film to be fogged?

Hearing lcpr's experience is reassuring. I hope I have the same experience.
x-ray's input is concerning. I will probably shoot 1 roll of the Super Presto and process to see the results before I use the film for more important photography.

Thanks again for all the input. I will follow up at a later date with the results!

 

[Rayt]

I have traveled all over the world with film with no such X-ray issues including through India and Pakistan on the same trip where my films were scanning over 20 times. Well what does X-ray damage from carry on scanners look like anyway. If it exists then surely there is proof.

 

[x-ray]

The Neopan 400 I had ruined had a distinct shadow of the metal structure of the cassette. The x-ray beam must have struck at an oblique angle on the bottom corner or top and the pattern was a dense black wave along the film. I was very similar to a sideways S along the length of the film.

The film probably won't just be fogged because there's metal around it with varying densities like the caps and the felt trap. I't possible to simple fog it if the beam passes through a uniform part of the metal but I think it's more likely to have a pattern. Simple fog would be more likely from non non directional scattered radiation not from a collimated beam. Virtually all x-ray equipment collimates the beam to minimize radiation scattering and escaping the machine or causing non image forming exposure. Scatter in x-rays is similar to flare in a lens. It's non image forming non directional and not desirable.

On the forum I posted scans of the clips. It would have been a few years ago.

I simply do not trust the machines. One incident is all it took. Not only did I lose a quantity of film which cost money I lost 10 days of images in Italy.

I'm going back in October and this time taking digital. Actually I'm taking a Nikon DSLR I had converted to IR. I'll leave the color to my wife.

You might get luck and I hope you do. Best of luck with it.

 

[WJJ3]

Well, I don't think the airport scanner had any effect on these films. But it seems like Super Presto doesn't like T-Max developer much. I am going to get some Super Prodol when I am ready to develop my other two rolls of Super Presto.

The Super Presto showing some uneven develop patterns around the sprocket holes.

Frames without dark areas look OK though.

Presto 400 seems OK in T-Max developer. This is a great film and its a damn shame its not available anymore. Presto 400: