4 ms·
Why isn't there any mentioning of radiation exposure effects on film? Or are they so insignificant that it's not worth mentioning?
by dschuetz 7y ago
Why isn't there any mentioning of radiation exposure effects on film? Or are they so insignificant that it's not worth mentioning?
- cjslep 7y agoIt's in the article. Search for film fogging. It's not significant.
- lostlogin 7y agoIts mentioned. According to the article, film was slower then too, so the effect was lesser then.
- NikkiA 7y agoThe curtain alone would be enough to stop the alpha and beta particles, the mirror might cut down on some of the gamma, thorium dioxide is qouted as being 'no signficant source of gamma radiation' though so not a problem.
- masklinn 7y agoThere is (in the paragraph after the last picture): > First of all the most commonly used films in the early 1950s were slower (less sensitive) than modern emulsions, and consequently less prone to fogging due to radiation. Second, all Leica rangefinder cameras use a focal-plane shutter, which means the film behind the lens is shielded from the radiation it emits except for the instant the shutter is open when making an exposure, which would produce negligible fogging. Since the decay chain of thorium consists exclusively of alpha and beta particle emission, neither of which is very penetrating, the closed shutter protects the film from the radiation from the rear of the lens.