Quote Originally Posted by Peter Simpson View Post
True, that. Last April, I flew out of Boston, and it's a good thing I read the sign twice: it said the carryon scanner was NOT film-safe. I asked for and received hand inspection. I wish I could remember the terminal, because this was unusual.
I've seen signs like that in Los Angeles once too. It was in front of a Invision CT scanner at the international terminal. Indeed, that is not a fimsafe scanner. But that is only used for scanning carry-on for certain "high risk" international flights. I won't mention the airline... y'all probably know which one is more cautious than all of the others.

In general (99% of the time) the carryon is scanned by Rapiscan equipment which is film safe within well-known limits. The signs will tell you that film over 800ASA might be affected. Every screening area I've ever been to in American airports have had that warning sign. Calling that equipment "not film safe" because of a condition that has existed since the dawn of xray scanning of carryon baggage is understandable, but perhaps a tad extreme. Within the well-known conditions of film speed and exposure rates, there is little risk of film damage.

But if people want to be especially cautious, that's fine. That is exactly why TSA opened the opportunity for hand check and the use of trace detection as an alternative.

Like Ian said a couple of years ago... I've never had a problem with it and I travel a lot. "As someone who travels extensively with film I've never had a problem and my films get scanned many multiples of times. Sometimes more than 20. " That was you, Ian , wasn't it?