If that is the case I’d be surprised if Harman hasn’t contacted a few labs.
Harman Photo cryptic announcement/teaser
-
A
- Thread starter analogwisdom
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Zone VI Development Timer and Newsletters
- Started by 2Dogs
-
Sold Nikon s2 with 50mm 1.4
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
Sold Fujifilm 4x5 Fujichrome Veliva 100 and Fujifilm 4x5 Fujichrome 64T. EXPIRED
- Started by Renato Tonelli
-
Sold Fujifilm Neopan 100 Acros 120 and 4x5
- Started by Renato Tonelli
Forum statistics
- Status
If that is the case I’d be surprised if Harman hasn’t contacted a few labs.
That doesn't sound much like a vocabulary one would use in the context of a color film.
He couldn’t yave used a different one without giving it away.
Mr McAdam posted that two weeks ago. Pity none of us saw that then - or is it, I wonder? It mightn't have made much difference to the course of the thread.
Everytime I hear one of these, reveals, happening among Ilford, Kodak, Fuji or the new Polaroids projects, I default to the memory of all the hype, a years worth, IIRC, about "the Thing" and how it was going to change the World, etc.
While it is a nice self balancing, electric two wheeler, the hype was far too much for many of us, so let's hope this Ilford announcement is a real, and 'Pleasant' surprise for photographers, shooting traditional Ilford B&W products, and we can all afford it!
While it is a nice self balancing, electric two wheeler, the hype was far too much for many of us, so let's hope this Ilford announcement is a real, and 'Pleasant' surprise for photographers, shooting traditional Ilford B&W products, and we can all afford it!
Regarding polyester vs. acetate, in the reel-to-reel tape world the switch to "Mylar" was made, I think, in the early 60s. I collect LOTS of tapes from that era and the poly tapes are fine but many of those acetate tapes have become brittle and, worse, some have acquired a vinegar aroma which means their days are numbered. Prior to the acetate the recording media was coated on paper and I have several hundred of those which are still just fine.
It probably would not have made a difference. I’m still firmly convinced that the big new product is a Porta-Loo to go with the Porta-Darkroom. Why else would the reveal party feature a pub crawl?
I just found his post and for the benefit of all here is the full text
"Inside this camera is a brand new film from Harman Photo (the makers of Ilford films). It offers something different to all their existing films. It's due to be launched soon (probably before end of the year) but they have kindly sent me a couple of rolls to test out in the meantime.
As you can see I'm getting ready to shoot a few environmental portraits of a gamekeeper, to see how it handles the tones and textures of the scene.
If you want to guess what you think this new film might be, please comment. I can't deny or confirm any suggestions but it'll be fun to see what you think".
One comment is "Ilford Color" and his reply is "An interesting thought".
In response to a Tri-X equivalent he points out that one could argue HP5 already is a Tri-X equivalent. When asked about a highly saturated, fine grain, ISO50 slide film he says "you should suggest that to Fuji".
This would appear to confirm, if there were any remaining doubt, that the new product is a film.
He has a very impressive photographic background. As a landscape guy it also suggests that a tungsten-balanced film is unlikely.
In addition to modest temperature and humidity and a dark area, the key to storing acetate film is archival and breathable storage. Acid-free archival paper is probably best. Celluloid and acetate films are often stored by people and organizations in closed storage like metal cans or tight plastic sleeves, etc. This traps the acids, which accelerates the aging. You want a low "acid-trapping factor". For example, acid-free archival paper envelopes for film negatives or photographic prints are available from a number of specialist suppliers, which can then be stored in acid-free archival paper boxes. Similar acid-free archival paper storage systems for slides are also available.
Yes, yes! But that's not all - a new film you can develop, stop, fix and wash in pee at normal body temperature. No faffing around out in the field. Photoflo nappies (diapers to you)?
kodak has long recomened "
Kodak Molecular Sieve Acid Scavenger (120 x 12.5g Packets)
"
see https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1481451-REG/kodak_8597684_molecular_sieve_120.htmlI suppose it is easier to store photography negatives, transparencies, slides, and prints in the archival paper than thousands of meters of motion picture film. Although, it would also be fairly easy to make archival paper boxes that could could fit the cores or reels of motion picture film. I wonder how the motion picture film would fare in the archival paper storage compared to sealed up in metal and plastic with the "molecular sieve acid scavenger". Sealing them goes against most good archiving advice, and regardless of how good the "molecular sieve acid scavenger" might be, it will still have a limited life and usefulness. It looks like Kodak recommends replacement every two years at ambient temperatures, and longer intervals for ideal controlled storage conditions.
https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/page/molecular-sieve-acid-scavenger
It seems easier, more natural, and more likely to be maintained long-term to use the breathable acid-free archival paper storage. Especially for photography films and prints, for which there are many existing options in these materials.
https://www.kodak.com/en/motion/page/molecular-sieve-acid-scavenger
It seems easier, more natural, and more likely to be maintained long-term to use the breathable acid-free archival paper storage. Especially for photography films and prints, for which there are many existing options in these materials.
That would legit be amazing. And pretty doable for a company like Harman. But alas very unlikely. Cosmic really.
I would get rid of flashbulbs about every 10 years usually about 5 gallons at a time. Finally don't get them anymore. Well not in the last year
Cress photo both buys and sells them, at a collectable price. https://flashbulbs.comI would get rid of flashbulbs about every 10 years usually about 5 gallons at a time. Finally don't get them anymore. Well not in the last year
I would get rid of flashbulbs about every 10 years usually about 5 gallons at a time. Finally don't get them anymore. Well not in the last year
Get rid of them? Are you mad? It’s a finite resource! They will never be made again, and they do a few things electro-flash don’t.
Send them to me next time. I’ll pay shipping and a little extra for your trouble.
That goes for anyone BTW.
I have a full-time flashbulb broker. Damn things are a fire hazard. Not like cellphone batteries, but still.
Need to get back to Harman.
False color IR film. It's a sure fire hit!
False color IR film. It's a sure fire hit!
Very interesting, thanks
Not if stored properly. It takes quite a high charge of static or a lot of heat to set one off.
Of course if they are touching directly they will cascade. Which is a nice way to get a lot of light in a small package over a few milliseconds.
There is almost no near IR in LED lights either.
Where there is a lot in incandescent.
Which can be a problem if you count on shooting inside with stuff like Aviphot 200. Then you are not using the full of the films sensitivity.
Last edited:
- Status
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |