News Ban on cameras in cabin baggage - back to film?

[Lightmancer]

U.S. Bans Cameras and Electronics in Cabins of Planes from 8 Countries

It's only specific routes at the moment, but give it time. This could spell the death knell for a whole swathe of the photographic industry. The bit nobody is mentioning (yet) is that kit carried in hold baggage won't be insured by most policies...

I'll be going back to using my Leica II when I travel at this rate.

 

[Briar]

Not just the US:

US and UK ban cabin laptops on some inbound flights - BBC News

 

[Lightmancer]

Indeed. And it won't end there. There is clearly some credible intelligence being shared.

 

[Luke]

Indeed. And it won't end there. There is clearly some credible intelligence being shared.

well, I'd love to know what "intelligence" the governments have that terrorists are working on hiding explosives in cameras, portable DVD players, laptops and tablets, but NOT cel phones. I mean really.....how ridiculous is that?

 

[kyteflyer]

Seems to me its all about making people feel safe. I don't believe any of these actions make people more or less safe. Glad, in some ways, that I can no longer fly.

 

[SnapDawg]

Even though it's far easier to blow up people on the ground it doesn't need an engineering degree to bring down an airliner. I'm actually pretty surprised that it doesn't happen more often in times like these. Regarding travelling by air with film that has already been a major PITA many years ago and the situation hasn't exactly improved in the meantime.

 

[davect01]

Dumb

 

[donlaw]

No laptop, iPad, camera, wow it sound like boring flights ahead!

 

[bartjeej]

Soon, people will be reading books again, or worse - conversing with each other! The horror! :eek-54:

 

[MoonMind]

Soon, people will be reading books again, or worse - conversing with each other! The horror! :eek-54:

My thoughts exactly. I can furthermore introduce the immediate thread of being able to club everyone to death with my Pentacon Six ... One downside, though: You'll not be able to take any film. Chemicals are dangerous! It could be anything!

M.

 

[Ray Sachs]

If they're banning any camera with electronics in it, most film cameras from the past 20-30 years would qualify too. My old Pentax K1000 from the 1970s may not have had any electronics beyond a basic light meter (and I frankly don't recall if I had to change a small battery for that), but I know every film camera I've had since has required batteries for something, whether AF or auto-exposure modes to automatic film winding. And if the basic deal is it's easy to hide some sort of explosive in an electronic device, I'm not sure why you couldn't do the same thing in a film camera - probably more easily since you can open the back and get into a relatively large cavity...

-Ray

 

[drd1135]

Of course, if the camera is allowed in the hold it could still be an explosive device on a timer.

 

[Richard]

Of course, if the camera is allowed in the hold it could still be an explosive device on a timer.

Ban all cameras with self-timers.

-R

 

[theoldsmithy]

Of course, if the camera is allowed in the hold it could still be an explosive device on a timer.

Yes this is where I struggle. Why is a laptop or camera safer in the hold than in the cabin, when any such device could be remotely triggered, or as you say, on a timer? And while we're at it, when is the liquids ban being removed? Airports were supposed to have new scanning technology installed about a year ago. Oh well, this just makes me more convinced I shall be having a year without flying if I can possibly avoid it.

 

[drd1135]

Ban all cameras with self-timers.

-R

That's not that useful. Anything electronic could have a timer in it.

 

[Richard]

It wasn't a serious suggestion.

And it turns out that today isn't a good day for joking about such things, with an apparent terrorist attack in Westminster this afternoon. Hope everyone is safe.

-R

 

[Biro]

I can't imagine going back to film in terms of international airline travel. It was bad enough back in the day. Today, with heightened concerns and TSA people who probably wouldn't even recognize a film can for what it is, you have the potential for real problems. Also, it used to be if your film was below ISO 800, you'd be fine going through the x-ray machine. I wonder if that's still the case.

 

[Biro]

The bit nobody is mentioning (yet) is that kit carried in hold baggage won't be insured by most policies...

But Bill... I see a business opportunity! Flight insurance for digital cameras and other electronic gear. Creative destruction, Bill, creative destruction...

 

[drd1135]

It wasn't a serious suggestion.

And it turns out that today isn't a good day for joking about such things, with an apparent terrorist attack in Westminster this afternoon. Hope everyone is safe.

-R

Sorry, I missed your sarcasm.

 

[Lightmancer]

The reason, by the way, is that larger electronic items such as tablets and laptops have larger batteries. The batteries have the same consistency on X-ray scanners as explosives (so, incidentally, does chocolate). A small phone wouldn't be able to contain enough explosive to do much damage.

My Leica IID contains no electronics at all; it is just brass, glass and rubberised cloth. I can put a modern Voigtlander LTM lens on it, load it up with a modern film and shoot Sunny-16 and I'm sorted.