According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera

Started Jul 2, 2011 | Discussions
adegroot
Senior MemberPosts: 2,444Gear list
Like?
According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
Jul 2, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98FZ8C6HneE

I think no one knows this and this is shocking news !

 adegroot's gear list:adegroot's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma SD10 Sigma SD15 +12 more
Barry Fitzgerald
Forum ProPosts: 29,888
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

I'm not really qualified to know if this is a real problem..maybe it is.

The film part was pretty interesting though

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
snake_b
Senior MemberPosts: 4,680
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to Barry Fitzgerald, Jul 2, 2011

Where should we forward to?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hotdog321
Forum ProPosts: 10,083Gear list
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

Interesting! Amazing we can shoot an acceptable image. If anyone wants to fast forward to the gamma ray/airplane problem, it starts at 8:00 minutes.

Still going to have to pry my ditcam out of my cold, dead hands.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sammy Yousef
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,416Gear list
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

It can't be all cameras. People would have noticed the correlation even if they weren't told. Specialised state of the art cameras? Well maybe. I have no experience with them.

A LOT of gear gets shipped via air freight, and a lot of camera enthusiasts test new gear. A lot also fly frequently. I've seen famous pros like Joe McNally talk about how best to stow gear based on their own experience and no one has even mentioned this problem.

Your camera is not Bruce Banner...

-- hide signature --

Sammy.

My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron Zimmerman
Contributing MemberPosts: 565
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 2, 2011

Sammy Yousef wrote:

It can't be all cameras. People would have noticed the correlation even if they weren't told. Specialised state of the art cameras? Well maybe. I have no experience with them.

A LOT of gear gets shipped via air freight, and a lot of camera enthusiasts test new gear. A lot also fly frequently. I've seen famous pros like Joe McNally talk about how best to stow gear based on their own experience and no one has even mentioned this problem.

Your camera is not Bruce Banner...

-- hide signature --

Sammy.

My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Apparently (according to the presentation) the camera companies incorporate software which hide the dead pixels. It's just best that consumers not know and avoid those nasty class action lawsuits. Go to around 9:40 on the video.
--
Kodak Z612, Pentax *ist DS, Nikon Coolpix 990

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
snake_b
Senior MemberPosts: 4,680
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to Ron Zimmerman, Jul 2, 2011

I call BS. Maybe a design did that in the past. I can't imagine that they didn't create something that wouldn't fry. And eventually, masking software can't hide dead lines of pixels when all adjacent lines are dead.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gordonpritchard
Senior MemberPosts: 1,011Gear list
Like?
Kodak is just desperate to preserve film sales
In reply to snake_b, Jul 2, 2011

When all else fails, spread the FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.

The motion picture industry is the last major consumer of film - the life blood of Kodak - and it's going digital. When that transformation happens Kodak's business will shrink to the point where it may no longer be sustainable. So Kodak is doing everything it can to prevent, or slow down, the switch to digital capture.

These are the same arguments (negatives) that were raised against digital still cameras compared to film cameras. They didn't stop people from switching to digital then and they won't stop movie makers switching now.

BTW, My old Sony 707 has flown to Australia several times, as well as Singapore, Japan, Europe, and hundreds of times across the US and Canada without suffering any Gamma ray problems. Just try taking film through airport xray machines and see how well it survives.

best, gordo
--
My photos: http://www.gordonpritchard.blogspot.com/

 gordonpritchard's gear list:gordonpritchard's gear list
Sony SLT-A57 Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Digirame
Forum ProPosts: 29,367
Like?
Re: Kodak is just desperate to preserve film sales
In reply to gordonpritchard, Jul 2, 2011

I can't say for sure, but it sure seems that that was all Kodak was trying to do, was to say anything to keep film alive. If it is such a problem, then why haven't we heard more of digital camera damage from people who have flown hundreds of times with their digital cameras in airplanes? We know, if there's any slightest problem with our digital camera, we are bound to hear about it.

Some people get overly upset when they find just one dead pixel, never mind about larger extensive gamma ray damage. I'm truly skeptical of what Kodak was claiming in that presentation. I mean there might be some damage possible, but it doesn't appear to be a great problem...not as great as people might have been led to believe.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joseph S Wisniewski
Forum ProPosts: 33,986Gear list
Like?
Cameras don't automatically map dead pixels...
In reply to Ron Zimmerman, Jul 2, 2011

Ron Zimmerman wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

It can't be all cameras. People would have noticed the correlation even if they weren't told. Specialised state of the art cameras? Well maybe. I have no experience with them.

A LOT of gear gets shipped via air freight, and a lot of camera enthusiasts test new gear. A lot also fly frequently. I've seen famous pros like Joe McNally talk about how best to stow gear based on their own experience and no one has even mentioned this problem.

Apparently (according to the presentation) the camera companies incorporate software which hide the dead pixels. It's just best that consumers not know and avoid those nasty class action lawsuits. Go to around 9:40 on the video.

Which, of course, is pure BS. No camera that I know of incorporates automatic hot, dead, or stuck pixel remapping. You can see the occasional (very occasional) appearance of these as cameras age.

-- hide signature --

Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list:Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Nikon D90 Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D100 +43 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joseph S Wisniewski
Forum ProPosts: 33,986Gear list
Like?
Airplane altitudes, gamma levels, and space, the final frontier...
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

adegroot wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98FZ8C6HneE

I think no one knows this

That is because it simply is not true. It is not possible to "know" that which is not true. It is possible to "believe" that which is not true, however, this particular non-truth is lacking in basic believability.

and this is shocking news !

No. In order for it to be "shocking", it would have to be true, and to have a large impact. As several people in this thread have pointed out, there is no impact...

  • Many of us have flown insane numbers of miles with our cameras, and have not noticed the sort of damage that Kodak is claiming.

  • Cameras do not automatically map out hot, dead, or stuck pixels. The annoying number of "do you have dead pixel mapping software for XXX camera" threads on dpReview is evidence of that.

Now, here's why it's not true...

  • Gamma radiation levels at an altitude of 40,000 feet are only 5x the average terrestrial surface level. Radiation effects are cumulative, not threshold based, so a 3 hour flight is no worse than 15 hours at ground level. Add up your total air hours. Even a 100,000 mile/year traveler only logs 200 air hours. That's equivalent to 1,000 ground hours or radiation, out of a 8,760 hour year. So, that much flying would cause a whole 11% increase in long term radiation failures.

  • Modern aircraft have many cameras on board. These cameras make multiple air trips each day, and accumulate many times more air hours than personal, or even professional cameras.

  • Gamma radiation has a biological effect, do you see flight crews wearing dosimiters? (dosimiters contain film, LOL!)

Ok, and don't forget this little tidbit...

What do you supposed the gamma ray levels are aboard the International Space Station, where some of the Nikon cameras are over 8 years old? How many high resolution imaging sensors are currently in space in the instruments on various space craft, some of which are operating closer to the sun than Earth's orbit. Trans mercurial orbit, anyone?

I bet Kodak's own sensor division is laughing their rears off at this bit of film marketing fluff.

-- hide signature --

Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list:Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Nikon D90 Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D100 +43 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jerome_munich
Contributing MemberPosts: 744
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

This is unlikely to correspond to reality. People use digital cameras in the space station where the radiation dose is much higher than in an airplane travel. Here: http://web.mst.edu/~umrr/cf086.pdf you will find a scientific paper discussing the effects of gamma radiation on cmos imaging sensors, but they consider radiations above 0.6 KGy or 600 Gy (Gray). 5 Gy on you and you are dead in less than 2 weeks. Here: http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/gareport.pdf you will find a report on natural radiation. At page 8, you will find that airplane crew receive an estimated annual dose of 3.0 mSv (milli Sievert), which for gamma radiation is the same as 3.0 mGy.

So, as a summary:

-dose to start to damage a cmos sensor: 600 Gy
-dose to kill you: 5 Gy
-dose the pilots receive per year: 0.003 Gy

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron Zimmerman
Contributing MemberPosts: 565
Like?
Re: Airplane altitudes, gamma levels, and space, the final frontier...
In reply to Joseph S Wisniewski, Jul 2, 2011

Joseph S Wisniewski wrote:

I bet Kodak's own sensor division is laughing their rears off at this bit of film marketing fluff.

Hummel doesn't work for Kodak, he made a presentation at a convention. A bit of googling turned up some information on the presenter.

"ASC associate member Rob Hummel, a senior vice president at Warner Bros.Studios, edited the 8th edition of the "ASC Film Manual." Hummel is uniquely qualified to edit this book. He began his career working closely with cinematographers in production while a representative of Technicolor Laboratories. He has held positions in visual effects, post-production for Sony, Walt Disney Pictures, Imagineering's Theme Park Productions, Disney and DreamWorks Animation, International Post Production, among others. He is an active member of SMPTE, and serves on the Scientific and Technical Awards Committee of the Motion Picture Academy."

http://www.amazon.com/American-Cinematographer-Manual-8th-Hummel/dp/0935578153
--
Kodak Z612, Pentax *ist DS, Nikon Coolpix 990

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ron Zimmerman
Contributing MemberPosts: 565
Like?
Re: Airplane altitudes, gamma levels, and space, the final frontier...
In reply to Ron Zimmerman, Jul 2, 2011

Further updated information on Rob Hummel. He can't be dismissed as a film shill, check out his digital resume.

"Rob Hummel is the CEO of Prime Focus Post Production, North America, and is helping lead its 2D-to-3D conversion efforts.

Rob began his career as the director of production services for the Professional Film Division of Technicolor Laboratories, then moved on to Douglas Trumbull's visual effects company during the making of Blade Runner (1982) and to post-production work on the Oscar-nominated Tron (1982). A former president of DALSA Digital Cinema, Rob has also served as senior vice president of production technology at Warner Bros., where he oversaw digital post-production (mastering films for digital cinema, HDTV, DVD, etc.) and digital restoration work on such classics as Gone with the Wind (1939) and The Wizard of Oz (1939).

Rob previously worked in post-production, animation, and Imagineering at Walt Disney Studios, headed animation technology at DreamWorks, and helped launch digital cinema units at Technicolor and Sony.

Rob currently serves on the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences' Science and Technology Council and on the Scientific and Technical Awards Committee. Rob has hosted several programs at the Academy on Film Formats, Film Technology, and 3D Stereoscopic Imaging. He is also an associate member of the American Society of Cinematographers and was the editor of the eighth edition of the American Cinematographer Manual."

http://www.maxhoward.net/team%20pages/Rob%20Hummel.html

-- hide signature --

Kodak Z612, Pentax *ist DS, Nikon Coolpix 990

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vlad S
Senior MemberPosts: 3,098Gear list
Like?
Does not compute
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

I seriously doubt his story is correct.

1. He claims that whole rows of pixels can be knocked out. Do you think that such a conspicuous defect would not have been discussed to death by the pixel peepers on dpreview?

2. He did not show any photographic examples, whereas he showed examples for the CA-like light scattering. I am sure he travels in sufficient amounts to have observed the pixels dying during the flight if it were a common problem.

I think he only uses the story to spice up his presentation.

Vlad

P.S. I am definitely going to map out pixels before my trip to Ecuador, and see how many new ones will appear after the trip. I think between the 8000 miles round trip flight, plus 2 weeks at 9000 ft elevation it will make a decent test of this theory.

 Vlad S's gear list:Vlad S's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
theswede
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,936Gear list
Like?
Re: According to Kodak airplane travel destroys your digital camera
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

The presenter is speaking in technical depth about subjects he's received an overview on from an expert, and it shows. He's horrible, speaking out of a conviction born out of ignorance. He's talking about how "film is immune to gamma rays", which I expect is why film has never been used for X rays ... oh wait! And humans are immune to gamma rays - better call all the relatives to firefighters in Chernobyl and tell them the heroes who put the fire out are unharmed!

Clueless and fear mongering. I don't care what credentials he can claim, this clip stands on its own as pure FUD and ignorance. Dunning-Kruger in full effect.

Jesper

 theswede's gear list:theswede's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D Sony SLT-A37 Sony 50mm F1.4 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Waldo_O
Senior MemberPosts: 1,538
Like?
the man, the legend
In reply to Ron Zimmerman, Jul 2, 2011

Ron Zimmerman wrote:

Further updated information on Rob Hummel. He can't be dismissed as a film shill, check out his digital resume.

"Rob Hummel is the CEO of Prime Focus Post Production, North America, and is helping lead its 2D-to-3D conversion efforts.

Rob began his career as the director of production services for the Professional Film Division of Technicolor Laboratories, then moved on to Douglas Trumbull's visual effects company during the making of Blade Runner (1982) and to post-production work on the Oscar-nominated Tron (1982). A former president of DALSA Digital Cinema, Rob has also served as senior vice president of production technology at Warner Bros., where he oversaw digital post-production (mastering films for digital cinema, HDTV, DVD, etc.) and digital restoration work on such classics as Gone with the Wind (1939) and The Wizard of Oz (1939).

Rob previously worked in post-production, animation, and Imagineering at Walt Disney Studios, headed animation technology at DreamWorks, and helped launch digital cinema units at Technicolor and Sony.

Rob currently serves on the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences' Science and Technology Council and on the Scientific and Technical Awards Committee. Rob has hosted several programs at the Academy on Film Formats, Film Technology, and 3D Stereoscopic Imaging. He is also an associate member of the American Society of Cinematographers and was the editor of the eighth edition of the American Cinematographer Manual."

November 2010
http://hollywoodinhidef.com/2010/11/hummel-named-president-legend3d/

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=PFOCUS.BO&t=1y&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=
selfless leadership... or taking one for the team perhaps???

By the way, have you seen The Green Lantern yet? I have and I considered it to be entertaining eye candy. For some reason however, outstanding 'film' work never crossed my mind...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
snake_b
Senior MemberPosts: 4,680
Like?
Re: Airplane altitudes, gamma levels, and space, the final frontier...
In reply to Ron Zimmerman, Jul 2, 2011

It doesn't matter what he believes, what he knows is true or not, or what really is the truth. He will say whatever the person giving him his paycheck tells him to say, and they will in turn use his qualifications as spin to back it up for cred.

Ron Zimmerman wrote:

Further updated information on Rob Hummel. He can't be dismissed as a film shill, check out his digital resume.

"Rob Hummel is the CEO of Prime Focus Post Production, North America, and is helping lead its 2D-to-3D conversion efforts.

Rob began his career as the director of production services for the Professional Film Division of Technicolor Laboratories, then moved on to Douglas Trumbull's visual effects company during the making of Blade Runner (1982) and to post-production work on the Oscar-nominated Tron (1982). A former president of DALSA Digital Cinema, Rob has also served as senior vice president of production technology at Warner Bros., where he oversaw digital post-production (mastering films for digital cinema, HDTV, DVD, etc.) and digital restoration work on such classics as Gone with the Wind (1939) and The Wizard of Oz (1939).

Rob previously worked in post-production, animation, and Imagineering at Walt Disney Studios, headed animation technology at DreamWorks, and helped launch digital cinema units at Technicolor and Sony.

Rob currently serves on the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences' Science and Technology Council and on the Scientific and Technical Awards Committee. Rob has hosted several programs at the Academy on Film Formats, Film Technology, and 3D Stereoscopic Imaging. He is also an associate member of the American Society of Cinematographers and was the editor of the eighth edition of the American Cinematographer Manual."

http://www.maxhoward.net/team%20pages/Rob%20Hummel.html

-- hide signature --

Kodak Z612, Pentax *ist DS, Nikon Coolpix 990

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tko
tko
Forum ProPosts: 10,343
Like?
an idiot
In reply to adegroot, Jul 2, 2011

I work in the aerospace industry and have to work with this all the time. You can read this article, but the bottom line is that there is no permanent damage. Guys who spread FUD shouldn't be allowed to speak. 20,000 feet isn't a problem. You still have 1000:1 attenuation of gamma rays.

Do cell phones stop working? Do computers stop working? I designed a star tracking system using an off-the-shelf CCD for use in military aircraft. No problem.

If what he said happened actual happened if was due to an unpressurized and non-temperature controlled luggage area.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_event_upset

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joseph S Wisniewski
Forum ProPosts: 33,986Gear list
Like?
Thanks for the link...
In reply to jerome_munich, Jul 2, 2011

jerome_munich wrote:

This is unlikely to correspond to reality. People use digital cameras in the space station where the radiation dose is much higher than in an airplane travel. Here: http://web.mst.edu/~umrr/cf086.pdf you will find a scientific paper discussing the effects of gamma radiation on cmos imaging sensors, but they consider radiations above 0.6 KGy or 600 Gy (Gray). 5 Gy on you and you are dead in less than 2 weeks. Here: http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/gareport.pdf you will find a report on natural radiation. At page 8, you will find that airplane crew receive an estimated annual dose of 3.0 mSv (milli Sievert), which for gamma radiation is the same as 3.0 mGy.

So, as a summary:

-dose to start to damage a cmos sensor: 600 Gy
-dose to kill you: 5 Gy
-dose the pilots receive per year: 0.003 Gy

Excellent. That corresponds to what I remember reading.

Thanks for the link, it was totally rad!

-- hide signature --

Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list:Joseph S Wisniewski's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Nikon D90 Nikon D2X Nikon D3 Nikon D100 +43 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads