Free resources GUIDE
AIRPORT CT SCANNERS AND FILM: WHICH AIRPORTS HAND-CHECK FILM
CT scanners at airport security damage undeveloped film in a single pass, at any ISO. This table lists which major airports have them, whether they will hand-inspect film if you ask, and what travellers report at the lane. Every row is sourced and dated, and corrections are welcome.
What this is: a dated, sourced table of 52 major airports, saying whether passenger security uses CT scanners and whether officers will hand-check film, with every source linked. What it is not: an official list. No authority publishes one, and TSA's own CT page names no airports. Kodak says CT scanners fog all unprocessed film at any speed, and TSA itself recommends asking for a hand inspection of undeveloped film. Hand-check reports here lean heavily on Handcheckfilm, the larger crowdsourced database.
The short version
- CT scanners at security fog undeveloped film at any speed, and the damage is visible after one pass. Conventional X-ray machines are generally safe for film up to ISO 400 for a few passes, and usually to 800.
- You cannot tell a CT scanner by looking, and the liquids rule is not a reliable clue. Assume CT at any major airport and ask for a hand check.
- Hand inspection is a request, not a right. In the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand the authority tells you to ask. In the European Union there is no rule about film and it is up to the airport.
- Film that has been shot but not developed shows the damage more than fresh film. The flight home is the one to protect.
- Checked luggage is scanned with higher-energy CT. Film goes in the cabin, always.
- A lead bag cuts the dose by 30 to 50 percent. That is not enough for CT, and it invites a rescan.
We make CANISTER 135, a steel canister for one roll of 35mm. It does not protect film from X-ray or CT scanners. The hand check does: print the hand-check card and ask at every lane.
The table
| Airport | Security scanners | Hand check for film | Notes and sources | Last verified |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North America | ||||
| ATLHartsfield-Jackson Atlanta InternationalAtlanta, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Named in 2026 national coverage as a CT hub; no TSA or airport statement says every lane is CT. No traveller reports in the community database, so the hand-check answer rests on TSA national guidance alone. |
low confidence |
| BOSLogan InternationalBoston, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
One of TSA's two original 2017 CT test airports. The new Terminal E international checkpoint opened with seven CT lanes. CT lanes require every item in a bin, so a film pouch cannot ride through inside a bag; hand it over before the belt. |
medium confidence |
| DENDenver InternationalDenver, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
The best-documented US case. TSA confirms CT at both consolidated checkpoints, West (February 2024) and East with 17 lanes (August 2025), with eight more lanes due in late summer 2026. Nearly all passengers use those two checkpoints, so assume CT and ask every time. |
medium confidence |
| DFWDallas/Fort Worth InternationalDallas, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Appears in TSA's 2026 budget testimony in a CT funding context; no release confirms coverage across the five terminals. No traveller reports in the community database. |
low confidence |
| EWRNewark Liberty InternationalNewark, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Documented as genuinely partial: TSA announced eleven CT scanners in Terminal B only, with no airport-wide claim. You may get a CT or a conventional lane depending on terminal. |
medium confidence |
| IADWashington Dulles InternationalWashington DC, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
On the 2018 CT pilot list and listed in 2022 and 2023 TSA releases as receiving CT; no current confirmation of coverage. Travellers report hand checks are easy with very informed staff. |
low confidence |
| IAHGeorge Bush IntercontinentalHouston, United States | Not confirmed | Usually granted |
No airport-specific CT source found; TSA's 2018 pilot list named Houston Hobby, not Intercontinental. Travellers rate hand checks very likely with mostly informed staff. |
low confidence |
| JFKJohn F. Kennedy InternationalNew York, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Received one of the first CT units in 2018 and remains a mix of X-ray and CT; terminals are separately operated, so coverage varies between 1, 4, 5, 7 and 8. Travellers report staff are very informed and often offer the hand check unprompted. This is where Kodak ran its 2020 Portra 400 CT test. |
medium confidence |
| LASHarry Reid InternationalLas Vegas, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
On the 2018 pilot list and home to TSA's Innovation Checkpoint, so equipment is deliberately mixed, including self-service lanes. Travellers report hand checks are easy and staff informed. |
low confidence |
| LAXLos Angeles InternationalLos Angeles, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
One of TSA's original 2018 CT pilot airports and still named as a CT hub in 2026. Nothing confirms every lane across TBIT and Terminals 1 to 8. Travellers report hand checks are easy at any ISO and staff are well informed. |
medium confidence |
| MCOOrlando InternationalOrlando, United States | Not confirmed | Usually granted |
No usable source found for CT status and no traveller reports in the community database. The hand-check answer rests on TSA national guidance alone. |
low confidence |
| MIAMiami InternationalMiami, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Named in 2026 coverage as a CT hub and photographed with a CT checkpoint as early as 2019; nothing confirms coverage across North, Central and South terminals. No traveller reports in the community database. |
low confidence |
| ORDO'Hare InternationalChicago, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
On the 2018 CT pilot list and named as a CT hub in 2026; nothing confirms coverage across Terminals 1, 2, 3 and 5. Travellers report hand checks are easy and staff are well informed. |
low confidence |
| PHXSky Harbor InternationalPhoenix, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
One of the two original 2017 CT test airports and a current self-screening pilot site, so lanes are not uniform across Terminals 3 and 4. No traveller reports in the community database. |
low confidence |
| SEASeattle-Tacoma InternationalSeattle, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
TSA said in March 2021 that it uses CT technology at the SEA checkpoint to screen carry-on bags, so assume CT lanes are in use. No current statement covers every lane, and coverage of the new checkpoint that opened in 2025 does not name the scanner type. Two separate traveller reports both rate hand checks easy at any ISO. |
medium confidence |
| SFOSan Francisco InternationalSan Francisco, United States | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
USA TODAY reported on 29 September 2026 that SFO is among the California airports receiving TSA's new CT scanners; no TSA release or airport statement gives lane-by-lane coverage. Hand checks are consistently reported as easy with well-informed staff. Assume CT is present and ask. |
medium confidence |
| YULMontreal-Trudeau InternationalMontreal, Canada | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
On CATSA's CT list with partial coverage. Traveller reports are mixed: possible below ISO 1600, reliable above 800, and one traveller needed high-ISO film to avoid the X-ray. |
medium confidence |
| YVRVancouver InternationalVancouver, Canada | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
CATSA's first complete CT installation, but that refers to one new checkpoint (September 2024), not the whole airport, and Vancouver still appears on CATSA's rollout list. The hand-check answer rests on CATSA's published policy rather than traveller reports. |
medium confidence |
| YYZToronto Pearson InternationalToronto, Canada | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
CATSA lists Pearson among airports with CT, but only about 46 CT machines were operating nationally across eight airports in December 2025, so conventional lanes remain. Travellers report hand checks granted for 35 mm, 120 and even sheet film; bring a changing bag for the latter. |
medium confidence |
| Europe | ||||
| AMSSchipholAmsterdam, Netherlands | CT at every lane | Usually granted |
First major hub to convert, about 35 lanes in 2021; the airport describes CT at departure and transfer security. Travellers still mention a few old X-ray lanes in Terminal 1. The 100 ml rule is still enforced despite CT. Three good 2025 hand-check reports, and one officer who insisted CT is film-safe. |
medium confidence |
| ARNArlandaStockholm, Sweden | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Terminal 5's rebuilt checkpoint (2023) is CT; Terminals 2, 4 and 5D are still conventional. The split matters: Terminal 5 is rated easy at any ISO with very informed staff, the X-ray terminals not likely below ISO 1600. Fly from Terminal 5 if you can choose. |
medium confidence |
| BCNEl PratBarcelona, Spain | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
35 CT units across Terminals 1 and 2 as of mid-2026, mixed with conventional lanes; the 100 ml rule still applies. The 2025 reports predate most of that installation and describe an X-ray airport where even ISO 1600 film was forced through. Expect to escalate to a supervisor. |
low confidence |
| CDGCharles de GaulleParis, France | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
CT at some checkpoints only; France keeps the 100 ml rule with no date for relaxing it. The most divided reports of any airport here: unlikely below ISO 1600, possible with an explanation above it. Orly is all CT and reports much better. |
low confidence |
| CPHCopenhagen KastrupCopenhagen, Denmark | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
20 CT scanners live by May 2026 with the full rollout targeted for summer 2026; conventional lanes ran alongside during the transition and the 100 ml rule stays pending EU approval. Four positive 2025 reports at varying ISOs, still officer-dependent. For motion-picture film bring a dark bag. |
medium confidence |
| DUBDublinDublin, Ireland | CT at every lane | Usually granted |
About 30 CT scanners across both terminals by September 2025, ahead of the EU deadline. Has the clearest published film policy in this table: film can be excluded from X-ray, but the canister is then hand searched and swabbed, so keep rolls accessible. The airport disclaims liability for film damaged in screening. |
high confidence |
| EDIEdinburghEdinburgh, United Kingdom | CT at every lane | Usually granted |
First Scottish airport to lift the 100 ml rule, in July 2025, after an upgrade that put CT on all eight lanes. Travellers report hand checks became easy once every lane was CT; before that, film was often diverted to an old X-ray machine instead. |
high confidence |
| FCOFiumicinoRome, Italy | CT at every lane | Sometimes |
CT across Terminals 1 and 3, with 2-litre liquids allowed from July 2025. The CT units carry large not-film-safe stickers, but staff believe the one remaining Terminal 1 X-ray is safe and often divert film there instead of hand-checking. Roughly even odds below ISO 1600. |
medium confidence |
| FRAFrankfurtFrankfurt, Germany | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
Unusually specific official page: CT at most Terminal 1 checkpoints and all of Terminal 3, while gates C1, C2, C4 and C6, some special checkpoints and all transfer security still run conventional X-ray. Transfer passengers are the most exposed. Hand checks are possible but may need insisting. |
medium confidence |
| ISTIstanbulIstanbul, Turkey | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
Outside the EU framework, so the 2-litre relaxation does not apply: 100 ml in a 1-litre bag, cameras and laptops out. A mix of CT and X-ray with film-safe stickers that officers use to decline. Bags are scanned twice, and again at international transfer. Difficult below ISO 1600. |
low confidence |
| LGWGatwickLondon, United Kingdom | CT at every lane | Usually granted |
CT completed across all 19 lanes in April 2025; the 100 ml rule was dropped by January 2026. Officially allows hand checks at any ISO. North Terminal reports are positive. |
high confidence |
| LHRHeathrowLondon, United Kingdom | CT at every lane | Sometimes |
Completed a CT rollout across all four terminals in January 2026, the largest airport in the world to do so; the 100 ml rule is gone. Historically the hardest major airport in the world for film hand checks, with a reported ISO 800 threshold that makes no sense for CT. Reports improved through 2025, especially in Terminal 3. Ask at every terminal. |
high confidence |
| LISHumberto DelgadoLisbon, Portugal | No CT reported | Usually refused |
No announcement of CT or a liquids exemption was found; the standard 100 ml rule applies. Historically famous for flatly refusing hand checks, in five or more reports. A late-2024 policy change is mentioned with one 2025 success at ISO 400, a single data point. Plan around conventional X-ray. |
low confidence |
| MADBarajasMadrid, Spain | CT at some lanes | Usually refused |
52 CT units across Terminals 1, 2 and 4 alongside conventional lanes; the 100 ml rule is unchanged. The hardest refusal in this table: multiple reports say no chance below ISO 1600 because the Rapiscan lanes carry film-safe-below-1600 stickers that officers cite. Above 1600 you will get a hand check with an explanation. |
medium confidence |
| MANManchesterManchester, United Kingdom | CT at every lane | Usually granted |
CT reported in every lane of Terminals 2 and 3 (Terminal 1 is closed), yet Manchester still enforces the 100 ml rule, proof that the liquids rule is a poor clue to the scanner. Customer services said by email in 2024 that no camera film should go through CT; that is second-hand, not published policy. |
medium confidence |
| MUCMunichMunich, Germany | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Official page lists CT at selected checkpoints only. In practice staff divert film below ISO 1600 to a conventional X-ray lane rather than hand-inspect it, a good outcome but not a true hand check. Secondary reports say the 100 ml rule lifts airport-wide from 18 September 2026, which would imply full CT; not yet confirmed on the airport's site. |
medium confidence |
| STNStanstedLondon, United Kingdom | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
Sources conflict: the airport's own 2025 social replies say not all lanes are equipped, 2026 trade coverage says almost all. The 100 ml rule still applies. Travellers report hand checks are easy at CT lanes and about even odds at X-ray lanes. |
low confidence |
| VIEVienna InternationalVienna, Austria | CT at every lane | Not confirmed |
35 CT units went live across all terminals from 3 July 2026 with 2-litre liquids. That invalidates every existing film report: all five prior reports describe a conventional airport where hand checks below ISO 1600 were officially not possible. What happens after the rollout is genuinely unknown. Contact the airport before travelling. |
low confidence |
| ZRHZurichZurich, Switzerland | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
All 26 lanes in the main security building became CT on 26 June 2026 with no conventional equipment left there, but transfer passengers are excluded and transfer screening still runs conventional X-ray with the 100 ml rule. Connecting through Zurich is a different risk from departing. Hand-check reports predate the rollout. |
medium confidence |
| Asia-Pacific | ||||
| AKLAucklandAuckland, New Zealand | CT at every lane | Usually granted |
CT live for international departures from January 2024, after Christchurch and Wellington, with the authority stating CT is going into every screening point nationwide. Scanners are labelled not film-safe and staff are well informed; hand checks granted at any ISO. Ignore the authority's own advice to put film in checked luggage. |
medium confidence |
| BKKSuvarnabhumiBangkok, Thailand | Not confirmed | Usually granted |
The weakest hardware sourcing in the table: the community database records conventional X-ray across four reports, while a paywalled report of the operator replacing about half the scanners with CT could not be verified. Hand checks, by contrast, are easy at any ISO with very informed staff. |
low confidence |
| HKGHong Kong InternationalHong Kong, Hong Kong SAR | CT at every lane | Sometimes |
The passenger guide describes smart channels using 3D CT, and an airport-wide rollout was phased from July 2024 starting with Terminal 1 departures. Two years on, assume CT everywhere. Hand checks are obtainable with an explanation; officers sometimes open film packaging. |
medium confidence |
| HNDHanedaTokyo, Japan | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
First airport in Japan to run a CT carry-on scanner, in the international terminal from April 2018. No statement that all lanes are CT, and domestic checkpoints run mixed-vintage airline smart lanes. Hand inspection is the norm in Japan and is consistently granted. |
medium confidence |
| ICNIncheon InternationalSeoul, South Korea | CT at some lanes | Usually refused |
Ten CT units supplied to Terminal 1, a partial fit-out; Terminal 2 is unaddressed. The worst hand-check risk in Asia-Pacific: reported as refused under ISO 800, with permission below 800 requiring an advance request, and one 2025 traveller denied repeatedly. A request in Korean improves the odds; the card has one. |
medium confidence |
| KIXKansai InternationalOsaka, Japan | Not confirmed | Usually granted |
Signals conflict and neither is dated: the community database records conventional X-ray, while the airport advertises smart lanes that elsewhere in Japan pair with CT. Hand checks are reported granted at any ISO with informed, friendly staff. |
low confidence |
| MELMelbourne TullamarineMelbourne, Australia | CT at every lane | Usually granted |
The best-documented airport in the table. CT in Terminal 2 international plus new CT lanes in Terminal 1, with screening now identical across terminals. Uniquely publishes the film procedure: sealed film out of its box gets a visual inspection and an explosive trace swab with the lid on, loose canisters with the lid off. A camera with film loaded goes through X-ray unless you unload it. Some officers wrongly believe CT is film-safe, so email ahead. |
high confidence |
| NRTNaritaTokyo, Japan | CT at some lanes | Usually granted |
CT trials from 2018 but no all-lanes statement. Narita's own bilingual security FAQ explicitly offers manual inspection of camera film and asks passengers with very sensitive film to declare it, the strongest official airport-level film statement in this table. |
high confidence |
| SINChangiSingapore, Singapore | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
Terminal 4 has had CT since it opened and Terminal 3 trialled CT-based detection in 2023, while travellers report Terminal 1 still uses older gate-level X-ray. Terminal 4 carries notices that its CT is unsuitable for film. Reports: even odds below ISO 1600, staff sometimes resist under 3200. |
medium confidence |
| SYDSydney Kingsford SmithSydney, Australia | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
The airport's own page still says upgrades are in progress, with some points requiring electronics in trays, and promises full CT by 1 January 2026, a date now well past without the page being updated. Treat partial as a floor. Reports are roughly even below ISO 1600 despite an official policy allowing hand checks regardless of ISO. |
medium confidence |
| Middle East | ||||
| DOHHamad InternationalDoha, Qatar | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
First airport in the Middle East to deploy CT checkpoint scanners, in November 2020, with a transfer-hall lane in 2021, but no claim of every lane. Transfer passengers are rescreened. Reports are mostly positive, with one account of a supervisor refusing on police grounds before relenting after about 45 minutes. Budget time. |
medium confidence |
| DXBDubai InternationalDubai, United Arab Emirates | CT at some lanes | Sometimes |
Mid-rollout: in February 2026 only five or six upgraded machines were live, with more than a hundred to convert across all terminals during 2026, so a lane may be either. Reports: may take lengthy convincing below ISO 1600, several unfriendly or refused hand checks, and a layover means being screened twice. |
medium confidence |
| Latin America | ||||
| GRUGuarulhos InternationalSao Paulo, Brazil | Not confirmed | Not confirmed |
No source confirms CT on passenger lanes and the airport does not appear in the community database. The one documented upgrade, a TSA-donated Terminal 3 international checkpoint in August 2025, is dual-view X-ray plus body scanner and trace detection; dual-view is not CT. A swab-based hand check is technically possible, but there is no published policy. Assume nothing. |
low confidence |
| MEXBenito Juarez InternationalMexico City, Mexico | Not confirmed | Sometimes |
No evidence of CT on passenger checkpoints; the airport's only recent equipment announcement covers cargo and vehicle access. The airport publishes a film page permitting manual inspection, worth showing staff. Enforcement is inconsistent: a photographer documented supervisors forcing three loaded cameras through X-ray in February 2025 despite repeated requests. |
medium confidence |
No airport matches. Clear a filter, or ask for one to be added.
How this was made and who to thank
Two kinds of evidence, kept apart. The scanner column comes from official CT deployment statements: airport and authority announcements, security pages, and dated press reports of them. The hand-check column comes mostly from traveller reports of what happened at the lane, which vary with the officer and the day. Each airport's own page lists its sources and marks which ones are traveller reports.
Credit to Handcheckfilm. Handcheckfilm, run by the Berlin film shop Fotoimpex, is the larger crowdsourced database of airport hand checks, and 44 of the 52 rows here cite its reports. Check it as well as this table, especially for recent reports on your route, and add your own report at handcheck.fotoimpex.de. The scanner sources, the summaries and any mistakes are ours.
Dated, row by row. The table was compiled on September 17, 2026. Each row shows the date it was last verified and a confidence rating, which is our judgement of its sources: low means the row rests on traveller reports, national guidance or older sources. CT rollouts are still under way, so a row can go stale within a season.
Corrections. If you have been through one of these lanes, tell us what happened: the date, the terminal, the film and what the officer did. The row will be checked, updated and re-dated.
What the authorities and the film makers say
TSA, United States
Its film page, last updated in 2017, tells travellers to take undeveloped film to the checkpoint and ask for a hand inspection. In July 2026 a TSA spokesperson said CT scanners can expose film to higher levels of X-rays that may fog or ruin it, and that TSA recommends travellers carrying undeveloped film or film cameras request a hand inspection. The same statement put CT at 1,162 units across 296 airports, and not at every lane even in major hubs. There is no ISO figure on any live TSA page.
CATSA, Canada
Published and unambiguous: you can ask the screening officer to conduct a manual inspection of your equipment and film. CATSA lists ten airports with CT and counted 46 machines across eight airports in December 2025, so conventional lanes remain.
European Union
No EU rule mentions photographic film. The right to refuse a scanner and ask for a hand search applies to body scanners, not bags, so hand inspection of film is at the airport's discretion everywhere in the EU. The 100 ml liquid rule is not a reliable sign of the scanner type: the Commission restricted some CT units in 2024 and lifted the restriction only for retested Smiths CTiX machines in July 2025, so airports with CT at every lane can still enforce 100 ml.
United Kingdom
The Department for Transport has published nothing on film. Heathrow, Gatwick, Edinburgh and Manchester have completed CT rollouts; Manchester still enforces 100 ml. Gatwick allows hand checks at any ISO. Heathrow's reported practice applies an ISO 800 threshold that makes no sense for CT, and reports improved through 2025.
Japan
The story that Japan refuses hand checks does not survive the sources. Narita's own FAQ, in English and Japanese, says that a manual check by a screener is possible for film and tells passengers with very sensitive film to declare it. Traveller reports for Tokyo and Osaka agree.
Australia and New Zealand
Home Affairs says to tell the screening officer if your film is unsuitable for X-ray. Melbourne publishes the actual procedure: sealed film gets a visual check and an explosive trace swab with the lid on, loose canisters with the lid off. New Zealand's Avsec grants manual inspection of unprocessed film on request, then on another page tells you to put film in checked luggage. Ignore that second page; hold scanners are worse.
Kodak
Kodak Alaris strongly advises against putting any unexposed or exposed but unprocessed film through a CT scanner, says not to check film because checked bags are also CT scanned, and suggests assuming any major airport now uses CT. Eastman Kodak says CT scanners have been proven to fog all unprocessed film. In a January 2020 test at JFK, Portra 400 showed significant fogging after one pass.
Ilford and Harman
The source of the phrase that gets attributed to everyone: CT cabin-baggage scanners are unsafe for any Ilford or Kentmere film irrespective of ISO speed rating. Older X-ray machines are normally safe for all films below ISO 800, with Delta 3200 the exception. Hold-baggage machines are more powerful and may cause fogging.
I&P Europe, the film makers' association
September 2023, signed by the major manufacturers: CT scanners are more impactful than older X-ray technology and can degrade image quality even for the slowest films. Because hand inspections are not guaranteed at all airports, contact the airport in advance.
Independent test, SilvergrainClassics 2024
The most careful test published. Fresh colour film, bracketed, with control rolls, through six conventional X-ray passes at Berlin and up to three CT passes at Schiphol and Geneva. Conventional X-ray: safe to ISO 200, a small fog gain on Portra 400 and HP5 after six passes, visible damage on 800 and above. CT: damage at every speed including ISO 50, Portra 400 clearly degraded after two passes, ISO 800 and up ruined on the first. Lead bags cut the dose by 30 to 50 percent, which is not enough. 35 mm fares better than 120 because the steel cartridge shields the inner wraps.
At the lane
- Pack the film to be handed over. Every roll in one clear zip bag, out of boxes and foil, before you get to the lane. Loose rolls or rolls in canisters both work; officers swab the outside, and some will want the lid off.
- Ask before anything goes on the belt. Hold the bag up and say, or show on the card, that it is undeveloped film and you would like a hand inspection. Once it is on the belt it is going through.
- Say why in one sentence. The film makers say CT scanners fog undeveloped film at any speed. Most officers have heard it; the card says it in their language if they have not.
- If refused, ask once for a supervisor. Then accept the answer. Arguing at the lane does not produce hand checks, and it will not save the film.
- If the film must go through, keep the passes to one. One pass through a conventional X-ray machine is harmless for film up to ISO 400 and usually fine to 800. One pass through a CT scanner does visible damage; two passes, an ordinary return trip, is clearly visible on Portra 400.
- Exposed film is the fragile leg. Shot but undeveloped film shows CT damage more than fresh stock. If you can only win one hand check, win it on the way home, or get the film developed before you fly.
- Never put film in checked luggage. Hold-baggage scanners are higher-energy CT and fog film of any speed. This is the one rule every film maker agrees on.
Questions
Do CT scanners at airports damage film?
Yes. Every film manufacturer says so, and independent tests confirm it. A single pass through a cabin-baggage CT scanner fogs undeveloped film of any speed: shadows lift, contrast drops, colours shift and grain grows. Two passes, which is an ordinary return trip, produce clearly visible damage on an ISO 400 colour film. Older conventional X-ray machines are a different technology and are generally safe for film up to ISO 400 for a few passes.
Does Heathrow have CT scanners for film?
Yes, at every lane. Heathrow completed a CT rollout across all four terminals in January 2026. Film there should be hand-checked on request, but Heathrow has historically been the hardest major airport for hand checks and reportedly applies an ISO 800 threshold that does not make sense for CT. Ask at every terminal, and take a card. Reports improved through 2025, especially in Terminal 3.
Can I refuse to put my film through the scanner?
You can ask for a hand inspection, and in the United States, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand the authority tells you to ask. You cannot refuse screening. If the officer declines the hand check, the film is screened or it does not fly. In the European Union hand inspection is at the airport's discretion and there is no rule about film at all.
What ISO is safe through airport X-ray?
For conventional X-ray machines the film makers say up to ISO 800 is normally safe for a few passes, and an independent 2024 test found ISO 200 and below unchanged after six passes with a small fog gain on 400. For CT scanners there is no safe speed. The ISO 800 figure is often attributed to the TSA, but it does not appear on any live TSA page.
Does a lead bag protect film from CT scanners?
Partly, and not enough. Measured protection is 30 to 50 percent, which keeps ISO 400 usable through one pass but not two. Six millimetres of lead rubber was needed to keep Portra 400 nearly unchanged, which is not something you can carry. In the United States an opaque bag also guarantees a manual search or a higher-power rescan. Ask for the hand check instead.
Is it safer to put film in checked luggage?
No. Hold-baggage scanners are higher-energy CT and fog film of every speed. Kodak, Ilford and Fujifilm all say to carry film in the cabin and never check it. Some official pages, including New Zealand's, still suggest checked baggage for film; that advice is wrong.
How do I know whether a lane is CT or X-ray?
You usually cannot tell from the machine. If you are told to leave laptops and liquids in the bag, it is CT. If you are told to take them out, it may be either: Manchester, Schiphol and Frankfurt run CT lanes that still enforce the 100 ml rule. Assume CT at any major airport and ask for the hand check regardless.
Does the canister protect film from scanners?
No. CANISTER 135 is stainless steel and a CT scanner sees straight through it. What it does is keep a roll in one place so the hand check takes seconds: open the cap, the officer swabs the roll, done. A 35 mm cartridge is itself a small steel shield, which is why 35 mm survives a scan better than 120.