First roll of Harman Phoenix photos up!

ChrisGalway said:

You're right, and I agree.

Perhaps as background I should mention that in college (a very long time ago) I studied photographic technology on a 3-year course, and I swear we must have exposed, processed and measured many thousands of step wedge film strips (B&W and colour using a calibrated custom sensitometer for exposure) and plotted thousands of H&D curves in properly planned tests and experiments. This experience left its mark.

Click to expand...

I understand; that sort of experience tends to create scar tissue. I sometimes enjoy making plots etc, but it makes a difference that it's entirely voluntary in my case. And while entertaining to do, in a way, the insights gained rarely translate in more interesting photos...

pentaxuser said:

With no Greg Davis to make a video maybe you could do so on your attempts to print this film

Click to expand...

I tried my hand at videos briefly, but decided it's just not my medium, so you'll have to make do with the few prints I posted on my blog late last year.

There are a lot of discussions/disagreements on Photrio which one can boil down to differences between what people observe and what they conclude.
When their process is transparent about how they get from the former to the latter, it is far easier to evaluate the usefulness of both.
In these modern times, there are often a lot of unaccounted for variables that make the conclusions questionable.

koraks said:

I tried my hand at videos briefly, but decided it's just not my medium, so you'll have to make do with the few prints I posted on my blog late last year.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I had a look at your blog and realised I had seen some of these shots before but they hadn't been imprinted into my brain's memory cells fully

It just confirms my feeling that Harman has to go through several iterations before this film will ever prise money out of my pocket. So far in all the videos I have seen I like the GoPro video colours the best

pentaxuser

koraks said:

I find it problematic that most tests I see online are conducted by people who don't even realize the limitations of what they're doing. They draw all manner of conclusions about what "film X does", while in reality, it's often only 20% of the film that does it with the remaining 80% bring done by a person behind their keyboard, and as a result, what someone else gets from the same material will be wildly different. And yet, "Phoenix looks so and so". Well, I've made the exact same Phoenix frame look saturated and punchy like nothing else on the planet, and subdued and neutral but maybe a little grainy as if it were, well, Portra 800 or so. So which is the "real" Phoenix? And what conclusion would be really supported if only one of both renditions would be shown, with some suggestive allegations attached to it?

Anyway, I'll stop now. I've never made it a secret that I feel there's something odd going on with online film tests. I feel a bit like a stuck record at this point, and surely there's no fun in that for anyone.

Click to expand...

I can totally agree. And you shouldn't "stop now". It is very important to discuss such points, because we have also beginners here on photrio, and for them these things are very important to know.
And some youtubers are also reading here on photrio! I know for sure because they have sometimes given references to photrio.

I am glad to see Phoenix in 120, and at an competitive price. For me a clear sign their color film project is going on as planned.
And I will certainly buy it. For my own fun, and to support Harman.

Surely the true way to determine how Phoenix (or any colour film for that matter) compares is to optically print it using RA-4. Although paper is now 'optimised for digital printing' it will still give a truer rendition of the emulsion as the correct colour temperature light passes through the negative and projects the image onto the paper. Using a colour chart to balance the filter pack will give a true analogue version of the negative without computer interpretation?

@Supercine, yes, that's correct, although from an end-user viewpoint, one may wonder what the relevance of this is, given that very few people optically print RA4. If you're after a digital version of the film negative, does it really matter what the film does when printed optically? Mind you, I personally do care, but that's because I print optically. If I wouldn't do this and never plan to, I'm not sure I'd bother with this angle.

You can surely discover a lot about what a colour negative film does by examining the negatives and by optical printing. But that's not really the way CN film, certainly film aimed at consumers, is intended to be used any more. While it won't tell you what the films basic physical properties are, scanning and some small adjustments in your favourite photo editor show what the end user can do with a film. It's still pretty obvious that Phoenix is it's own beast....and that Color Plus is different from Portra 160.

I confess I'm tempted to buy a sensitometer and colour densitometer, and go back to my college days to do objective comparisons of the various available films/processing conditions! The densitometer would have to be a MacBeth TD-504AM, but does anyone have advice for a (daylight) colour sensitometer? Sounds like a fun ... but expensive ... project.

I've been printing color for (since I was a kid, Nixon was president), well too long. It seems to me that Ilford has decided to not use the orange mask because it's only needed for optical printing???

I bought a couple rolls of the Ilford film, not sure why other than to support Ilford. Not my cup of tea.

It's very cool that there's enough interest that Harman is doing this.

mshchem said:

It seems to me that Ilford has decided to not use the orange mask because it's only needed for optical printing???

Click to expand...

I think neither half of this statement is correct.
1: The mask is not just needed for optical printing. It's also required for good color fidelity when scanning.
2: It seems likely that Harman is working towards a regular, masked C41 film and Phoenix is just an intermediate step in that direction. They're probably working hard on getting the mask to work presently.

mshchem said:

I bought a couple rolls of the Ilford film

Click to expand...

Do you mean Harman Phoenix? That's not an Ilford-branded product. Note that there's also Ilford-branded color film. It has nothing to do with Harman.

koraks said:

I think neither half of this statement is correct.
1: The mask is not just needed for optical printing. It's also required for good color fidelity when scanning.
2: It seems likely that Harman is working towards a regular, masked C41 film and Phoenix is just an intermediate step in that direction. They're probably working hard on getting the mask to work presently.



Do you mean Harman Phoenix? That's not an Ilford-branded product. Note that there's also Ilford-branded color film. It has nothing to do with Harman.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know it's branded Harman and why. And I wouldn't even attempt to print this stuff in my darkroom because it would take forever to try and get a decent print.
This and the Adox stuff seems to rely on kids that want something weird, same goes for Cinestill stuff.

I use Kodak color negative still films (Portra and Ektar) because they amazing. I don't want light piping from polyester base, I want to support Kodak Alaris.

Not looking for an argument, I type with one finger on an Eyepad

Tomatoes/Tomatoes

mshchem said:

It seems to me that Ilford has decided to not use the orange mask because it's only needed for optical printing???

Click to expand...

Surely the orange dye is there to correct for the fact that the dyes in colour film are not perfect, and it does not matter whether you use optical printing or digital scanning and processing. Unless Harman come up with new dyes (possibly but unlikely), they will need a masking (orange or similar) layer.

ChrisGalway said:

The densitometer would have to be a MacBeth TD-504AM, but does anyone have advice for a (daylight) colour sensitometer?

Click to expand...

Q. How can you be sure it is a MacBeth?
A. Show it a negative and it says: "Is this a c41 negatíve which I see before me"

pentaxuser

ChrisGalway said:

Surely the orange dye is there to correct for the fact that the dyes in colour film are not perfect, and it does not matter whether you use optical printing or digital scanning and processing. Unless Harman come up with new dyes (possibly but unlikely), they will need a masking (orange or similar) layer.

Click to expand...

I am grossly incompetent when it comes to scanning color negative film. I get amazingly decent scans from transparencies, (especially my father's ASA 10 Kodachrome slides).
I think it's mostly me being "a stick in the mud"

I ordered 4 rolls of Phoenix 120 from Freestyle.
I have some ideas for some photos where its eccentricities will be appropriately exploited.

I haven't shot any colour film since the 90's. Back then I shot a bit of Provia and Velvia, in 4x5, then had a lab process them (when I lived in Japan). Colour just never did it for me, until I started tri-colour gum. I bought a pack of Pheonix 200 120, Kodak's C41 kit, and developed for the first time ever, a roll of colour film.
I could see some of the shots had a red cast, some had a blue cast, but overall, quite nice. I'll be uploading a video about my experience soon. In the meantime, here is one from the roll... (shot inside my Rolleicord at ISO 200. Straight scan. No PS adjustments):

...and I have to say, there is something quite appealing about the square format!

That's very nice!

Andrew O'Neill said:

there is something quite appealing about the square format!

Click to expand...

Yes, there is. It's definitive, or self contained, in a way.

pentaxuser said:

Just out of curiosity, Lachlan. what's your view as to the timescale likely to be needed to get Phoenix to that point at which it is at or close to Kodak colour film?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Click to expand...

As you have never got an answer to your question from anyone here, I will try my very best to give you an assassment as realistic as possible.
And that from the background that I had visited the Harman factory in Mobberley (with the amazing Simon Galley as our tour guide). And that I had also visited another four film factories, which all either already are producing colour film, or could produce colour film and have the plan or at least the long-term intention to produce colour film in the future.

The best we can do at first is to look at the recent (technically) successful attempts to re-enter the colour film market. There we have:
1. InovisCoat.
Founded by former Agfa (Leverkusen) engineers. They bought most of the film emulsion making machinery, and film coating machinery (K14) of the former Agfa factory in Leverkusen. A completely new factory building was constructed in Monheim, not far from Leverkusen. Operation started there in 2009. InovisCoat orginally did not want to go back (at least not completely) to film and photo paper production. Their long-term concept was to use modern coating technology outside the traditional film photo business. For example in the pharma industry.
But that was not as successful as planned, and already in 2011 they had their first insolvency. They lost their factory, which was bought by the main investors of "The Impossible Project" at that time, and the factory was then operated by their company Inovisproject (later The Impossible Project transformed into Polaroid, and Inovisproject as their daughter company has transformed into Polaroid Film GmbH). Polaroid is producing in Monheim the negative and positive film bases for their instant film. Assembling of these with the chemical pod and frame, as well as confectioning / finishing is then made in the Polaroid factory in Enschede, Netherlands.

After this first insolvency in 2011 InovisCoat continued operation. They had and have a contract with InovisProject / Polaroid which allows them to use the infrastructure of the Polaroid factory in Monheim at certain time slots for their own products. So the main assets of InovisCoat since then have been their knowledge / know-how, and the contract with Polaroid.
After the 2011 insolvency InovisCoat produced several film and photo paper products as OEM manufacturer for different brands. For example the "creative / experimental" colour negative films for Lomography like e.g. Lomochrome Purple, Turquoise, Metropolis. But meanwhile also the more "standard" film Lomochrome Color '92.
When I visited the factory in Monheim in 2019, InovisCoat was just in the final development phase of their so far best colour negative film product, an ISO 200/24° CN film with normal, traditional colour reproduction in the style of former Agfa Leverkusen films. That film was successfully coated a bit later. Also a bit later InovisCoat, together with FilmoTec in Wolfen, was bought by Jake Seal and his investment group. Shortly after that both companies went into insolvency.
The succesfully coated ISO 200/24° film was sold in the insolvency to another well known film brand, and is offered by them under their name.

If we now look at the time scale: InovisCoat needed about 10 years of R&D to produce a decent CN film.
Their advantages in comparison to Harman technology:
a) Access to a film factory which is state-of-the-art for color film manufacturing.
b) Agfa film technology knowledge (but not all of it).
Their disadvantages in comparison to Harman technology:
a) Very small R&D team.
b) Less funds.
c) No capability of own film confectioning for the formats 135, 120 and sheet film.

Now lets have a look at the second player:
2. Polaroid (former The Impossible Project).
They had the much much more difficult challenge, because they had to start from scratch. When the Impossible Project started in 2009, a new production of the former Polaroid integral film was impossible, as most of the raw materials were not available anymore.
The very first films The Impossible Project offered were more or less unusable because of that. With a bit of luck sometimes "a shadow of a picture" developed.
Instant integral film is probably the most complex and sophisticated chemical product available. 50 (!!) different chemical processes have to run, some of them one-after-the other, and others simultanously. It is both absolute chemical high-tech and a miracle that it works. Absolutely fascinating!
Despite the impossibility and all the huge difficulties the R&D team made progress, step-by-step. A big boost came when in 2015 Stephen Herchen of former Polaroid (one of the last R&D experts who still worked together with Edwin Land) entered The Impossible Project and became head of the R&D team. I got an insight of their R&D at the Enschede factory at my factory visit there, with a presentation by S. Herchen.
They made very significant progress over the years, and especially with their latest I-type film they now offer a very good quality, which has come relatively close to the excellent quality of Fujifilm instax instant film.

And if we now look here at the time scale: The Impossible Project / Polaroid needed about 12-13 years of R&D to produce a decent colour instant integral film. Starting from scratch.
Their advantages in comparison to Harman technology:
a) Access to a film factory which is state-of-the-art for color film manufacturing.
b) Much bigger R&D team.
Their disadvantages in comparison to Harman technology:
a) Much worse situation at the starting point. They had to start from scratch, Harman has a good basis and fundament with their XP2 Super.
b) Instant integral colour film is a much more difficult / sophisticated product then a standard colour negative film for C-41.

My assesment is that Harman technology will probably need 8-12 years to produce a decent colour negative film. Decent means a colour film with a good, natural colour rendition and a detail rendition (fineness of grain, sharpness, resolution) that comes close enough to a film like ColorPlus 200, so that customers will accept it for small and medium print sizes and scans viewed in normal size (without pixel-peeping) on a computer monitor.
R&D for a film with better detail rendition than that (quality level of a Gold 200, Fujifilm C200 or even Superia 200) will take many years more.
The target of a good, natural colour rendition will probably be reached at first.

Of course it depends on the means Harman technology can implement in that project. Financially, but especially concerning human resources. Additional chemists must be hired, and they have to be trained and educated as emulsionists (no university offers education in that tiny niche). So the training and education of these new chemists have to be done in-house by Harman, by their established experienced chemists / emulsionists. That binds partly capacity for a certain time. To become a very good emulsionist needs years.

Harman technology has started a "marathon" with this project. It is really a long-term endeavour.
Do I think they can make it in the long run? Yes, definitely! The spirit of the Mobberley team was really great and inspiring when I made the visit there. It was one the most interesting days in my life. I trust them.
And I will support them by continue buying Ilford BW films, and by continue buying their Harman colour films. And I will also continue to support further efferts by others in the market like ADOX and Film Ferrania. We need more variety in the market for a long-term healthy and sustainable colour film market.

Best regards,
Henning

Wow thank you for that, Henning!

Andrew O'Neill said:

Wow thank you for that, Henning!

Click to expand...

My pleasure, Andrew .

Best regards,
Henning

Henning Serger said:

When I visited the factory in Monheim in 2019, InovisCoat was just in the final development phase of their so far best colour negative film product, an ISO 200/24° CN film with normal, traditional colour reproduction in the style of former Agfa Leverkusen films. That film was successfully coated a bit later. Also a bit later InovisCoat, together with FilmoTec in Wolfen, was bought by Jake Seal and his investment group. Shortly after that both companies went into insolvency.
The succesfully coated ISO 200/24° film was sold in the insolvency to another well known film brand, and is offered by them under their name.

Click to expand...

We all know which ISO 200 film that is. What is quite puzzling (at least to me) is that everybody seems to except the fact that this film can't be produced anymore. So, I wonder why that is? The only explanation I can come up with is that this was a joint effort and that this cooperation somehow can't happen again.

If it was solely Inoviscoat's know-how I can't think of a reason why Lomography (via Inoviscoat) wouldn't now be rocking the magnificent Color '08 instead of '92 (which, to be fair, is a better film that most will admit, but still far from CM 200).

Henning, do you have an explanation or would at least like to speculate on where the setback lies?

brbo said:

Henning, do you have an explanation or would at least like to speculate on where the setback lies?

Click to expand...

No problem, there is an explanation. No need for any speculation.
Both InovisCoat and FilmoTec suffered a lot in their current insolvency (which is officially still going on, but a restructuring plan has been approved).
There has been a massive brain-drain at both companies (which even before the insolvency have been extremely small). About all of the former long-year experienced employees including the leading staff have been gone, left the companies. Machinery at the FilmoTec facility in Wolfen had to be sold because of the insolvency as well.
The former CEO of InovisCoat and their chief chemist / emulsionist I talked to at my factory visit in Monheim have both left the company as well. The emulsionist was responsible for the development of the mentioned ISO 200/24° film. He was a former Agfa (Leverkusen) employee, very experienced.

But the current team has at least announced recently that a new ISO 200/24° CN film is coming. We'll see.

Best regards,
Henning

Many thanks for your two posts, Henning, most interesting.