Harman Photo cryptic announcement/teaser

[Arcadia4]

Presently the most likely option seems for it to be a colour film called Harman Phoenix. One reason for that is the tm registration almost seems to include every other possibility to normalise the inclusion of ‘colour film‘ in that list, which stands out for a b&w specialist.

It seem less likely to be coated by Harman unless the coater has been modified or its non std colour film, but clearly they can do the rest.

There are three suppliers with proven ability to toll coat it for them, as a ‘Harman’ product. Fuji, Kodak or Polaroid films/Filmotec/Inoviscoat*.

Harman have worked with Fuji (acros) and Polaroid films/Inoviscoat the most (e.g bergger 400). However Fuji could easily sell all colour output under their own brand for more profit.

Kodak could supply master rolls for an emulsion from their catalogue, have the capacity and do that for lomo, but no recent involvement with Harman?

Inoviscoat have a new 200 iso colour film (adox color mission being an early run, they sold on) and the inoviscoat /filmotec have some cash flow issues, so likely open to a deal? plus no dedicated conversion capability.

So most likely 1. Inoviscoat, least likely 3. fuji and kodak no 2?

*Polaroid films being the former inoviscoat project with the coater at monnheim , and inoviscoat now part of filmotec with some use arrangement.

 

[MattKing]

Yes but what you describe Matt hardly constitutes a new film does it? If its someone else's master roll then that only leaves being able to offer it at a cheaper price doesn't it as its only attraction

Certainly if there isn't a price advantage then it isn't much of a surprise as it becomes just another "new" film amongst the others we have seen recently

pentaxuser

I haven't seen anything that said the product was some miraculous new, never been seen in the market film.
If it is a different film - a contract coated to specifications film - and it has different features, different pricing, different marketing and different distribution, than it is an addition to the marketplace.
Ilford used to sell at lot more stuff than Harman does now. That may be where the "Phoenix" reference comes from - a re-entry to a wider market.

 

[Xylo]

Or they're going to release a Mission: Impossible type film
Your bad pictures will self destroy in 5 seconds...

 

[sorbrant]

Pack film?

 

[Agulliver]

I don't think buying something contract manufactured from a manufacturer - a master roll of photographic film - and then radically changing its nature - cutting it, cutting sprocket holes where required, edge printing it, either cutting sprocket holes, spooling it and putting it in light tight cassettes and/or adding backing paper and spooling it, constitutes a collaboration.

Otherwise their entire darkroom chemistry line would be a collaboration.
The Harman Titan cameras are a collaboration.

Harman have never denied that the Titan is a collaboration, though.

What you describe regarding production of a film is, to me at least, the very finest example of a collaboration between two companies. And Harman have outright said this product is not such a collaboration.

 

[Agulliver]

Pack film?

I would love more film for my Polaroid 104. B&W, colour, weird, whatever. But everything we were told when Fuji stopped manufacturing it was that it would be nigh on impossible for anyone else to.

Mind you, Impossible Project eventually got there and rebirthed Polaroid. But that took a very long time.

 

[Agulliver]

I think there is a lot in this Certainly Harman has made no secret of its aim at the younger demographic and it has dropped its "affair" with us since it became Pemberstone

Maybe what might underwhelm us on Photrio may well overwhelm those at whom the new product is aimed

pentaxuser

They're still here and will respond if you approach them. But they probably feel they've got us as customers already. The likes of us who post here are fully aware of their line of products and have chosen either to buy or not. The growth in film photography is among the young folk who are following social media, and whatever this new product is....if it is seen as growing their business among younger people, they are absolutely right to be concentrating on social media, "influencers" and dealers like AW who have a considerable customer base with that demographic.

FWIW I asked my local brick & mortar shop and they didn't even know the phoenix existed. But they mostly are older people staffing the shop, trying to engage with the younger clients who are increasingly making up their customer base. They're also a small independent shop with no direct links to any of the manufacturers, so wouldn't have been sent a postcard or product.

 

[Don_ih]

I don't think buying something contract manufactured from a manufacturer - a master roll of photographic film - and then radically changing its nature - cutting it, cutting sprocket holes where required, edge printing it, either cutting sprocket holes, spooling it and putting it in light tight cassettes and/or adding backing paper and spooling it, constitutes a collaboration.

What you describe regarding production of a film is, to me at least, the very finest example of a collaboration between two companies.

Actually, a collaboration would be shared risk of loss or profit, where both companies retain a stake in the final product. So, if the product bombs, both companies lose.

If Harman buys a roll of film from Kodak for a fixed price, that ends Kodak's involvement. An omelette isn't a collaboration between a cook and a chicken.

 

[koraks]

Actually, a collaboration would be shared risk of loss or profit

It's a matter of definitions. In a business context, 'collaboration' can span the entire gamut of an arm's length buyer-supplier relationship to a strategic alliance. In the case of this Harman message about the new product not being a collaboration, it's really down to whatever the heck the person who said this meant with 'collaboration'. We can argue about this for the next few weeks, but it's not going to chance a thing about the fact that none of us knows exactly how that particular person views a 'collaboration' and what constitutes one.

 

[Agulliver]

It's a matter of definitions. In a business context, 'collaboration' can span the entire gamut of an arm's length buyer-supplier relationship to a strategic alliance. In the case of this Harman message about the new product not being a collaboration, it's really down to whatever the heck the person who said this meant with 'collaboration'. We can argue about this for the next few weeks, but it's not going to chance a thing about the fact that none of us knows exactly how that particular person views a 'collaboration' and what constitutes one.

Harman's "No collabs" and "you're completely wrong" were both in response to someone guessing that the Phoenix product might be a colour film which Harman was producing with some help from FujiFilm.

I would think that having Kodak toll coat colour film for them isn't far off FujiFilm coating colour material and Harman finishing.confectioning it. Though the latter *could* be a joint business venture with FujiFilm taking some of the financial risk.

 

[koraks]

I understand what you're saying. Is it correct? Only Harman knows. Speculating can be fun for a bit, but it tends to get tedious at a certain point.

 

[Ian Grant]

It's a matter of definitions. In a business context, 'collaboration' can span the entire gamut of an arm's length buyer-supplier relationship to a strategic alliance. In the case of this Harman message about the new product not being a collaboration, it's really down to whatever the heck the person who said this meant with 'collaboration'. We can argue about this for the next few weeks, but it's not going to chance a thing about the fact that none of us knows exactly how that particular person views a 'collaboration' and what constitutes one.

You are right. We think of Ford, Alfa Romeo, Volkswagen, etc as car makers, we don't think of them as collaborators, and yet there is a huge cross over in terms of collaborative parts. The floor pan of a Mondeo was the same as a Volkswaen model, some of the running gear is the same, there are plenty more examples. It's been going on for decades. My old early 1980s Afasud had some Ford parts.

In the photographic field Kodak and Ilford outsource their chemistry, but they formulate it, that's subcontract. Collaboration implies a joint project that both companies use ether as part of something else, so one example is the motor industry while parts are shared the end products differ, and we don't realised how much is shared, the other example would be the Hasselblad designed 35mm Panoramic camera made by Fuji and sold under both names.

We need to wait and see what emerges.

Ian

 

[MattKing]

An omelette isn't a collaboration between a cook and a chicken.

Quoted, because it made my day .

 

[pentaxuser]

If it is a different film - a contract coated to specifications film - and it has different features, different pricing, different marketing and different distribution, than it is an addition to the marketplace.

Yes I agree if in fact the speculative announcement from Harman or is that now Harman Phoenix re a colour film is just as you describe. Perhaps I misunderstood part of your reply there but I thought that you were referring to a completed existing film master roll from presumably Kodak where it has no different features except a different name, cassette and the others aspects you mention which does make it a different film in my definition

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Eastman Kodak won't sell any of the current Kodak still films to anyone other than Kodak Alaris.
They will contract coat to customer specifications master rolls of different film - if you have lots of money.

 

[pentaxuser]

Eastman Kodak won't sell any of the current Kodak still films to anyone other than Kodak Alaris.
They will contract coat to customer specifications master rolls of different film - if you have lots of money.

OK, fine. So what were the changes EK made to what I recall to be Kodak Gold that it sold to Fuji for it to become Fuji 200, I think

Gregg Davis was convinced that it was an identical Kodak film, in a short video, wasn't he ?

pentaxuser

 

[retina_restoration]

FWIW I asked my local brick & mortar shop and they didn't even know the phoenix existed. But they mostly are older people staffing the shop, trying to engage with the younger clients who are increasingly making up their customer base. They're also a small independent shop with no direct links to any of the manufacturers, so wouldn't have been sent a postcard or product.

FWIW, the retailers know what the announcement is for, but they are under an NDA, so cannot say anything till Dec. 1

 

[MattKing]

OK, fine. So what were the changes EK made to what I recall to be Kodak Gold that it sold to Fuji for it to become Fuji 200, I think

Whatever changes Fuji contracted for.
Although I doubt that they started with Gold 200. Instead they probably started from a historical emulsion that was closer to what Fuji wanted, did some tests, made some adjustments, and arrived at a customized product.

 

[brbo]

Instead they probably started from a historical emulsion that was closer to what Fuji wanted, did some tests, made some adjustments, and arrived at a customized product...

...indistinguishable from Gold 200?

 

[VinceInMT]

…It's been going on for decades. My old early 1980s Afasud had some Ford parts.…

Exactly. My '59 Volvo, which I am still driving, has an AC/Delco fuel pump, Bosch ignition, and British carburetors.

 

[MattKing]

...indistinguishable from Gold 200?

Sure. They have a few in the library - they have been doing this a while.

 

[brbo]

Which films that is the same as current Gold 200 have they been selling before?

 

[pentaxuser]

Whatever changes Fuji contracted for.
Although I doubt that they started with Gold 200. Instead they probably started from a historical emulsion that was closer to what Fuji wanted, did some tests, made some adjustments, and arrived at a customized product.

OK, Matt. I have seen your answers to my post and to brbo and I can't help but feel these are lawyer-type responses but very good in terms of speed of response

Little point in us continuing the "courtroom joust" in terms of it getting us anywhere. I feel


pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

I have seen your answers to my post and to brbo and I can't help but feel these are lawyer-type responses but very good in terms of speed of response

What do you expect? It's a forum of photographic enthusiasts. It's not a film industry summit. Nobody here knows exactly what emulsion Superia 200 at this point is.
My own take on it is that it's really just Gold 200 without modification. I don't think Fuji requested or desired any modification; they probably just wanted any old 200-speed C41 film with decent performance. If they had wanted something special, they would have just continued making it instead of having an external supplier who's evidently capable of managing themselves jumping through all sorts of hoops. I sometimes get the feeling that people think business relationships involve some kind of freemason-like magic handshake routines etc. It's really just pretty darn straightforward most of the time; picking the low-hanging fruit first and choosing the route of least resistance.

 

[MattKing]

What do you expect? It's a forum of photographic enthusiasts. It's not a film industry summit. Nobody here knows exactly what emulsion Superia 200 at this point is.
My own take on it is that it's really just Gold 200 without modification. I don't think Fuji requested or desired any modification; they probably just wanted any old 200-speed C41 film with decent performance. If they had wanted something special, they would have just continued making it instead of having an external supplier who's evidently capable of managing themselves jumping through all sorts of hoops. I sometimes get the feeling that people think business relationships involve some kind of freemason-like magic handshake routines etc. It's really just pretty darn straightforward most of the time; picking the low-hanging fruit first and choosing the route of least resistance.

I doubt that EK would have considered this - because it would have potentially been bad for Kodak Alaris, and quite likely would have been a breach of the agreement with Kodak Alaris.
But if Fuji was happy with an older, no longer sold version of Kodacolor - sure.