Protecting Unexposed Film from Cosmic Radiation? 142
iblink asks: "Last year Fujifilm stopped producing a color slide E-6 sheet film called Velvia 50. It has unique color characteristics that I love so I decided to purchase the remaining stocks in Europe. I now have hundreds of boxes that need to be stored for up to thirty years. A number of film experts assured me that freezing the Velvia would stabilize the dyes for long term use. However, they all mentioned that cosmic radiation would eventually fog the film, and they offered little help in finding a relatively inexpensive barrier. I found various ideas on proton cosmic radiation barriers — a big bucket of water, lead, certain plastics — but nothing convincing or sufficiently detailed (which plastic? How thick?). The film is currently in a freezer, unprotected. Any ideas?"
Four Astronauts (Score:4, Funny)
LOTS of foil (Score:1)
What does tha manufacturer say? (Score:5, Interesting)
--Mike
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Film is a perishable good. They manufacture it and ship it. It's not worth putting in a lead warehouse to defend it from cosmic radiation.
Re: (Score:2)
Out on a limb here...contact the Smithsonian? How much of this film did you buy and how much space does it take up? I am curious.
There are people out there who store this type of stuff routinely just in case it's needed by some process/function/etc.
dark hole (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you not only need protection against cosmic radiation, but also against terrestrial radiation. You could use a ventilation system to minimise the radon problem, but this will cost you a lot of money if you want to store the film for 30 years.
Also make sure your construction material isn't too radioactive; materials like wood, cement, stones
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a waste of time and money - because the material can have an activity level an order of magnitude below the counters detection threshold, and still have enough activity to be threatening to the film on the timescale of years. It's the accumulated (chronic) damage that matters here, not the acute damage.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously its actually really surprising how many cosmic rays are hitting you right now. They are also extremely penetrating, often being muons (by the time they reach us). Basically its already got through 120km of atmosphere which although isnt that dense, it sure is thick so you're goin
What you need is mass (Score:1, Redundant)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Premature (Score:5, Informative)
I note that it's now past late spring 2007.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I won't be the same (Score:3, Insightful)
Think "New Coke." It was supposed to be the same, wasn't it? In fact, some bottlers changed formulas and put New Coke in remaining stocks of old cans. The first time I tried one of th
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I won't be the same (Score:4, Informative)
Snopes, as per usual, has good info on this subject.
Thanks,
Re: (Score:2)
She discovered that she likes European soda, but doesn't like the US stuff.
Long Live Big Corn!!
Re: (Score:1)
Re:I won't be the same (Score:4, Interesting)
OTOH, ask those Dr. Pepper fans who live near and dote on the output of the one Dr. Pepper bottler in the U.S. who still uses cane sugar. They'll tell you they can easily tell the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where is this plant? I would like to see if I can get some.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
What would that show up as on the ingredient list? Looking at a bottle of Canadian Dr Pepper, the 2nd ingreedient is "Sugar/Glucose-Fructose", and no corn syrup is listed anywhere.
Re:I won't be the same (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK, Canada, Europe, Latin America, and everywhere else in the world tends to use cane sugar in their soft drinks. It's only in the U.S., where farmers are inexplicably Hell-bent on growing corn or nothing, that soft drink companies use corn syrup instead.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds kind of funny to say, but in order to get drinks that taste good, we have to fix the whole "campaign finance" hole in our democratic process.
that looks like corn syrup to me (Score:2)
Cane sugar is sucrose.
Corn sugar is naturally glucose, but there is a chemical process that can turn half of the glucose into fructose.
I'm surprised you're not getting sucrose up in Canada. WTF?
Re: (Score:2)
Check the lowest post on the page.
Also this one [notmartha.org], mostly for the comments.
Looks like it's saying that it could have either. Probably in case HFCS is cheaper in a given month than sugar, so they can switch back and forth as necessary, or because some of their plants use cans from one source but may have different sweeteners.
The only difference I noticed in sugar-sweetened Dr. Pepper is that the aftertaste is much sweeter, rather than just flattening out to a blah, vaguely smoky flavor. N
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
But West Jefferson, NC [glassbottlesoda.org] is still on the list.
Re: (Score:2)
If the emulsion has been stored (even under the best conditions) for 30 years it's not very likely to be the same thing either, is it?
Re:Premature (Score:5, Funny)
6 months into the future...
FUJIFILM U.S.A., Inc. is sad to announce that they are ceasing production of Velvia II after massive stocks of surplus first-generation Velvia film - enough to supply a photographer for 30 years - inundated the market. The film's sensitivity to cosmic radiation severely limits its shelf life, forcing Fujifilm to stop production so existing stores could be consumed before radiation damage occurs.
Dan East
Re: (Score:2)
Fujifilm are forever... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You've never had my wife's cooking
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sadly, the layers of patents, trade secrets, and other such fun bits make it that the only two companies able to make a film of the level of quality of Velvia 50 are Kodak and Fuji. If you want the silver film grains to be the correct shape, you need to accurately control the growth of silver halide crystals and that means custom, proprietary mixing machines.
Also, Fuji does not make every last bit of the film. Many of the chemicals and components involved have many uses besides ma
Meh.. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Velvia 100 not 100F (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Other strategies (Score:3, Insightful)
If you are concerned about being able to use Velvia film in the long term, it might be easier and cheaper to get together with other like-minded folk and find a cheap contracting manufacturer somewhere like China or India who can copy the Velvia manufacturing process (if they bother follow licensing protocols...) to provide a supply of fresh film.
Kodak says... (Score:3, Informative)
Obviously, there's a problem, know-nothing slashdot smartmouths be damned. Here's what Kodak says: [kodak.com]
Re: (Score:2)
To iblink (Score:2)
I only posted to try and shut up the folks who were belittling the question. Eventually, I found real progress toward an answer here. [slashdot.org] I hope those folks can help you.
Don't bother (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't bother (Score:4, Funny)
So does light ...? (Score:2)
I think you might need to insulate a little more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The box will give some protection, the metal of the freezer some, a lead box some, a 2km deep mine some... how much do you want? All radiation cannot be shielded because your shielding material will invariably be radioactive. Although, you can cut down that effect a bit by purchasing very expensive ancient lead from Roman shipwrecks. You'll be competing with a couple of observatories though.
Re: (Score:2)
Ceramics (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I used to have a chunk of orange Fiestaware - it was significantly radioactive wrt background.
A trivial detail... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
E6 will be around a while yet.
The place to go (Score:5, Informative)
Like lots of photo buffs, the first thing I thought of was the Rochester Institute. And that led me to an answer.
I'm not going to put directly on Slashdot the name and phone number of a real person. However, if you visit the Image Permanence Institute [imageperma...titute.org] web site and poke around, you'll find a name and phone number you can call to get in touch with an expert on these subjects who will either know the answer or know where to find it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ah yes, the best way to hide personal information from Slashdot. Put it in an article!
Graded Z shielding (Score:4, Informative)
You may want to investigate "Graded-Z shielding". The name comes from the fact that it uses layers of shielding with decreasing atomic numbers. You might first have a layer of lead, then a layer of tin, then one of copper. The lead stops the cosmic rays (protons, electrons, light atomic nuclei), but generates X-rays in the process. These X-rays might also fog your film. The X-rays produced as the lead absorbs the cosmic rays have a characteristic energy (88keV) which is not well absorbed by the lead itself - that's where the tin comes in. Again, the tin stopping the X-rays from the lead generates X-rays with a lower characteristic energy (29keV, which is in medical X-ray energy territory), which it doesn't absorb too well. The copper absorbs the X-rays from the tin and again emits X-rays with a yet lower characteristic energy. I don't know if the 9keV X-rays produced by the copper are a problem for Velvia. If they are, you'll need a yet lighter layer; a glance at the periodic table shows aluminium is a likely candidate.
I have no idea about the sensitivity of Velvia to cosmic rays or X-rays, so can't suggest thickness of the materials. My wild-ass-guess is somewhere in the 10s of mm. 30 years is a hell of a long time though. There are companies which specialise in shielding of this type (search for 'radiation shielding', 'graded-z shielding' and the like), they may be able to provide advice and sell you enclosures.
IBM study on background radiation (Score:1)
IBM did a study, long ago, on the effect of background radiation and cosmic rays on electronic component reliability. They found that high-altitude places such as Denver, Co. were getting an order of magnitude more Single Event Upsets (that is, one solar/cosmic ionizing particle tricklin
How about... (Score:5, Funny)
A: Digital camera, Raid 5, good backups.
Q: But only velvet#50 has the unique qualities I'm looking for. I can't reproduce that with digital.
A: Photoshop CS7, Filters -> Artistic -> Velvitize.
Q: But I have to have REAL velvet#50 for all these Elvis and Bengal tiger prints I'm doing. I can't print on velvet with an inkjet!
A: I heard fujifilm has a good film that does this, see if they still make it.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed they are, but you usually have quite a lot less than 30 years exposure time, so it's not quite such a big deal. For long CCD exposures (minutes to hours in astronomy), you can guarantee you'll see some cosmic ray effects. However, taking multiple exposures and combining them digitally is pretty much standard these days, so removing cosmic ray effects (which, unlike the astronomical objects, won't be consistent in all the individual exposures) is fairly triv
My long-term film storage experience (Score:2, Informative)
Protection from Cosmic Rays? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The best material to protect your film! (Score:1)
This too will pass (Score:2)
Electronics die. And there are very few cameras produced today that do not have any electronics in them.
So rather than considering just the film issue, you have to consider the overall package for the next 30 years, and that includes:
1/ Film storage
2/ Camera oeration and maintenace
3/ Developement chemicals
If anyone of these 3 fails you in the future, th
Re: (Score:2)
Almost every 4x5 camera on the market does not have any electronics. As for the longevity of the camera... My Busch Pressman Model D is about 50 years old, and working fine.
This question was about 4x5 sheet film, not APS or 35mm.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not trying to dis the use of such cameras
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Note that everything that exists wasn't necessari
Re: (Score:2)
BTW by electronic I did not mean digital (or digital cameras)- all early film cameras with electronics were analogue not digital.
And as for my "short lifetime" I have been around
Re: (Score:2)
As long as information is still available on these things, it will remain possible to do so yes.
Especially if there's actually a market, which there most certainly is currently and will be for the foreseeable future.
Here's an example for you: Gun collectors. There are HUGE numbers of people with VERY old guns that make their own ammo as it is not available anymore. People still make bread the traditional way even with th
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
We're talking about something like this [bhphotovideo.com] or this [bhphotovideo.com].
Re: (Score:2)
But from a systems point of view, what is common place now will not be common place in 30 years time, so you need to consider the total cost of ownership for the next 30 years
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that the poster is considering the overall cost, but is instead only focussing on one small area
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And yes I also own 50 year old cameras (Finetta's from the 50's). Some of them work, some don't. They don't even need or have batteries, but I have decided that it is not worth my $$ to resurect the cameras that are non functional.
Re: (Score:2)
sensitivity (Score:2)
Digital is not an option (Score:1)
The original poster is asking about sheet film, not 35mm film, so we should assume they are using at least a 4"x5" camera for high-end work, not taking snapshots of aunt Millie's poodle.
Switching to digital is *not* an option for most people in his situation. Digital SLRs, while I love them and use them every day, suck in comparison to medium or large format. In oversimplified terms, to prevent moire patterns from showing up they need to "blur" the image and re-sharpen it in software, and you can never ac
Re: (Score:2)
Now all we need in this thread is some pro-foveon zealots t
you yourself gave the answers (Score:2)
2. digital backs for medium format cameras in the 22-35MP range
Cost? Compared to buying and storing pricy film for 30 years, I think the answer is obvious.
In 5 years we'll have disposible 16MP cameras and the pro cameras will be 100MP.
Re: (Score:2)
The number of pixels is (nearly) irrelevant to image quality. What matters is the physical size
sensor, and unfortunately Moore's law doesn't help you there. Squeezing more and more pixels
into the same size sensor eventually reaches a point where
It's going to fog. Deal with it. (Score:2)
On the bright side, at least you get some number of years before it goes bad.
The part that I'm really pissed off about is that Koadk Ektachrome IR has been discontinued and there's nothing remotely like it... unlike with Velvia where Velvia 100 non-F is actually a
Faraday Cage? (Score:1)
You'd just need to make sure the mesh holes are super tiny, because, as you know, cosmic radiation has an EXTREMELY short wavelength. Then again, if you ground the fridge, it might work on its own...just make sure you've got some kind of conductive sheath over the gaskets on the
Lead (Score:2)
Shielding can make things worse (Score:2, Interesting)
It's counterintuitive, but shielding can actually make more radiation. The problem is that when a high energy cosmic ray strikes a nucleus, it can make a whole bunch of secondary particles which still have a lot of energy. Then those particles interact again, and so on, producing a "shower" of particles that can interact with your film. Sensitive neutrino experiments go far under the earth's surface to avoid cosmic rays, and even there they get a fair number of (low interacting) muons. I helped test a l
Mass (Score:2)
But then you are just as likely to have radio active isotopes in that shielding mass that may or may not cause a problem.
The really big question is if this just a myth or not. Yes radiation will fog film but is this film that sensitive and is your 30 year time frame long enough to make a difference?
My best suggestion and it really is off the top of my head is put your freezer in a well ventilated basement. You could put some lead and polyethylene sheets around it just to be sure and best
They are wrong (Score:2)
No. Background radiation will eventually fog the film.
Wrong Question (Score:2)
I'd be surprised if you will even want to use this film in 30 years, when every phone in the world will be taking 3D holographic video that can be played back directly into your brain.
*sigh* Yes... I know it will be used mostly for porn.
Re:Faraday cage (Score:4, Informative)
It also won't protect you against radioactive radon gas seeping out off the ground.
Re: (Score:2)
I've also heard rumors that Faraday cages won't stop panda attacks, syphilis, or Jack Thompson.
Makes you wonder what they're good for.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radi
Another Idea (Score:2, Insightful)
you can try to protect with some kind of magnetic shield, to maybe trap these evil particles in some kind of "magnetic swirl" or like that....
hummm, but fast spining particles will radiate any way....
and probably you will need a lot of power (i mean $$$$) to produce a strong enought "force field"
well, just a few ideas.