4 ms·

I've never run into any trouble getting film hand checked while traveling within the US. Sadly it's a completely different story internationally. Indian secur

by modo_ 7y ago

I've never run into any trouble getting film hand checked while traveling within the US. Sadly it's a completely different story internationally. Indian security has been the strictest in my experience -- flat out refusal to do anything other than run the film through the X-Ray machine. I don't travel with fast film (800+ ISO) anymore. It's just not worth the stress.

klodolph 7y ago
I decided to switch to digital for anything where I want to go over 400 ISO. My personal feelings are that the image quality of 800 ISO film is just terrible. YMMV based on personal preference, I know people who really like the look of fast film.
- ghaff 7y ago
  Leaving aside the work associated with chemical processing generally, you could “coax” ISO/ASA 400 B&W films up to 1600. Maybe 2400. But you definitely lost a lot as soon as you started pushing. For a lot of photography, especially basic journalist event stuff, I find the fact that I can go to about 3200 without even thinking about it a huge benefit of digital.
  - klodolph 7y ago
    Sure, you can push two stops if you like swaths of flat black in your photo. Same thing with TMZ, which says “3200” on the box but if you look carefully it doesn’t actually say “ISO 3200”, because its ISO speed is actually something like 800.
- i_am_proteus 7y ago
  Tri-X 320 pushes to 800 pretty well.
  - klodolph 7y ago
    I’m not happy with it. YMMV. I don’t like Tri-X in general though.
    - i_am_proteus 7y ago
      Fair enough. I should mention that I use diluted Ilfosol 3 when pushing and get better results than DD-X/D76.
      - klodolph 7y ago
        I use XTOL, which is the closest Kodak equivalent to Ilfosol 3. D-76 is a nice developer but it’s just not quite as good as the newer formulations like XTOL and Ilfosol 3. You can call it “push” development, but ISO speed is actually measured with a specific developer, and you will get a different speed with different developers before you even push it. This is typically true for XTOL and Ilfosol 3. You basically get an extra half or two thirds of a stop just by using a better developer.
- abruzzi 7y ago
  fast color film isn't my cup of tea, but I have shot Delta 3200 (in 120 format, 6x7 and 6x4.5) at exposures closer to 6400, and have gotten some great images. (developed in 24c Xtol.)
- copperx 7y ago
  Medium format 800 ISO film is beautiful and low noise. 35mm, in the other hand, sucks if not pushed 3 stops.
ninjin 7y ago
I have simply given up after a lot of abuse by Heathrow and Stansted “security”. Just try reasoning with them about “pushing” film above ISO 400, guidelines by film developers, etc. They do not care and at best refer to some “testing” of the machines that allegedly is in some document that they neither know the name of or know where to find. It is insulting, it is tiring, and I said as much in my customer feedback form on the day I gave finally gave it all up at Heathrow. Here is what `passengersupport@heathrow.com` responded a few weeks later: “Dear <NAME/>, Thank you for getting in touch with us about your journey through Heathrow Airport, we have received your feedback card and read it. I can understand your concerns about taking film through security. We can confirm, however, that independent tests undertaken by the British Photographers' Liaison Committee (BPLC) to establish the detail of any potential damage to film caused by baggage screening machines at airports have given the all-clear to the current hand-luggage x-ray inspection systems installed at Heathrow. These findings confirm that hand-luggage security scanning machinery is safe for all normal film types (up to and including ISO 400). Current digital camera storage media can also safely be examined by these x-ray machines without sustaining damage. If you are carrying professional film rated ISO 800 or faster, you can request the film be searched by alternative means, as I understand you did. We will accommodate this where possible but this cannot be guaranteed. I am not sure if you were travelling with one, but for your future travels please bring any documentary proof of the film rating with you. Damages of film rated ISO 800, through scanners, have not being confirmed though. We also recommend that you leave extra time to pass through security as additional screening requirements may be required. Thank you again for taking the time to write to us, we have passed the feedback to the relevant team for their review. I hope you will have a better experience on your next journey. I do recommend to have the document with you, if you do not have it already, because that would help processes through security and you certainly would not to have to give up film photography. Kind regards, <NAME/> Heathrow Passenger Support.” Pardon my French, but these people do not give a fuck. Also note the lack of a link to the documents I requested. I responded and asked for them again (along with point-by-point refutations and additional questions), that was more than two years ago and I am yet to receive a reply.

by modo_ 7y ago

klodolph 7y ago

I decided to switch to digital for anything where I want to go over 400 ISO. My personal feelings are that the image quality of 800 ISO film is just terrible. YMMV based on personal preference, I know people who really like the look of fast film.

ghaff 7y ago
Leaving aside the work associated with chemical processing generally, you could “coax” ISO/ASA 400 B&W films up to 1600. Maybe 2400. But you definitely lost a lot as soon as you started pushing. For a lot of photography, especially basic journalist event stuff, I find the fact that I can go to about 3200 without even thinking about it a huge benefit of digital.
- klodolph 7y ago
  Sure, you can push two stops if you like swaths of flat black in your photo. Same thing with TMZ, which says “3200” on the box but if you look carefully it doesn’t actually say “ISO 3200”, because its ISO speed is actually something like 800.
i_am_proteus 7y ago
Tri-X 320 pushes to 800 pretty well.
- klodolph 7y ago
  I’m not happy with it. YMMV. I don’t like Tri-X in general though.
  - i_am_proteus 7y ago
    Fair enough. I should mention that I use diluted Ilfosol 3 when pushing and get better results than DD-X/D76.
    - klodolph 7y ago
      I use XTOL, which is the closest Kodak equivalent to Ilfosol 3. D-76 is a nice developer but it’s just not quite as good as the newer formulations like XTOL and Ilfosol 3. You can call it “push” development, but ISO speed is actually measured with a specific developer, and you will get a different speed with different developers before you even push it. This is typically true for XTOL and Ilfosol 3. You basically get an extra half or two thirds of a stop just by using a better developer.
abruzzi 7y ago
fast color film isn't my cup of tea, but I have shot Delta 3200 (in 120 format, 6x7 and 6x4.5) at exposures closer to 6400, and have gotten some great images. (developed in 24c Xtol.)
copperx 7y ago
Medium format 800 ISO film is beautiful and low noise. 35mm, in the other hand, sucks if not pushed 3 stops.

ninjin 7y ago

I have simply given up after a lot of abuse by Heathrow and Stansted “security”. Just try reasoning with them about “pushing” film above ISO 400, guidelines by film developers, etc. They do not care and at best refer to some “testing” of the machines that allegedly is in some document that they neither know the name of or know where to find. It is insulting, it is tiring, and I said as much in my customer feedback form on the day I gave finally gave it all up at Heathrow. Here is what `passengersupport@heathrow.com` responded a few weeks later: “Dear <NAME/>, Thank you for getting in touch with us about your journey through Heathrow Airport, we have received your feedback card and read it. I can understand your concerns about taking film through security. We can confirm, however, that independent tests undertaken by the British Photographers' Liaison Committee (BPLC) to establish the detail of any potential damage to film caused by baggage screening machines at airports have given the all-clear to the current hand-luggage x-ray inspection systems installed at Heathrow. These findings confirm that hand-luggage security scanning machinery is safe for all normal film types (up to and including ISO 400). Current digital camera storage media can also safely be examined by these x-ray machines without sustaining damage. If you are carrying professional film rated ISO 800 or faster, you can request the film be searched by alternative means, as I understand you did. We will accommodate this where possible but this cannot be guaranteed. I am not sure if you were travelling with one, but for your future travels please bring any documentary proof of the film rating with you. Damages of film rated ISO 800, through scanners, have not being confirmed though. We also recommend that you leave extra time to pass through security as additional screening requirements may be required. Thank you again for taking the time to write to us, we have passed the feedback to the relevant team for their review. I hope you will have a better experience on your next journey. I do recommend to have the document with you, if you do not have it already, because that would help processes through security and you certainly would not to have to give up film photography. Kind regards, <NAME/> Heathrow Passenger Support.” Pardon my French, but these people do not give a fuck. Also note the lack of a link to the documents I requested. I responded and asked for them again (along with point-by-point refutations and additional questions), that was more than two years ago and I am yet to receive a reply.