Harman Red new film

[Harry Callahan]

Hm... shouldn`t turning the film around produce problems with sharpness, resp. focusing? If the emulsion side is on the pressure plate now, it is further away from the camera lens so plane of sharpness on the negative should move into close-up range. You focus on 30ft, but sharpness is on 25ft for example.

 

[BrianShaw]

Photographic image making isn’t always about sharpness and colour phidelity.

 

[Harry Callahan]

Of course, but i wanted to point out that there could be a problem for those wanting good sharpness...

 

[mshchem]

Maybe a way to extract money. Anything that keeps Harman healthy I'm all for. I am not going to be in the market for this, I'm in the other goofy market I bought 8 rolls of HP5 and FP4 in the retro boxes . At least the RED stuff is actually different, even if it's just wound backwards.

 

[Taylor K Nankervis]

I simply don't find the usefulness of a film that gets scanned anyway. So the very same look can be achieved by modifiyng the scanned inage in PS...

14:04 opssss

No it cannot. That is a myth that belongs in the time of Dr Spock.

Only film looks like film.

 

[koraks]

Of course, but i wanted to point out that there could be a problem for those wanting good sharpness...

It'll affect sharpness a little. Not as much as you may think, though. There's basically just a very limited focus shift that in many cases drops away against effects like depth of field - and user variability. I've tried red-scaling film on occasion; sharpness turned out OK. Keep in mind it's only something like 110um shift on the focal plane.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Photographic image making isn’t always about sharpness and colour phidelity.

Especially when you have spent thousand bucks on a prime...

 

[DeletedAcct1]

No it cannot. That is a myth that belongs in the time of Dr Spock.

Only film looks like film.

That's a myth in itself

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Especially when you have spent thousand bucks on a prime...

Use that on tech film and be happy. There's actually little to no benefit being hurt by another film offer that is 1) probably temporary and 2) is different enough to merit its existence.

This actually can be detrimental as such whining can and does discourage. In this day and age we need nothing but encouragement if we want improved photographic product diversity.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

If, for example, Aviphot 80 and 200 existed without an ahithalation layer, I'd buy that for this reason alone as that'd save me its wash off time, distilled water and isopropyl alcohol, and I wouldn't risk to f something up in my attempts to fake/emulate Kodak HIE.


Actually - if Rollei Analog would do this for me, that'd legitimize Infrared 400 as a different product and would justify that random markup.

 

[koraks]

Moderator note re:

That's a myth in itself

Also @Taylor Nankervis :

FYI - this is not going to be a 'digital vs film' discussion as per rule #4. Further steps into making this such an argument may be deleted without further explanation, so save yourselves the effort of typing.

 

[Romanko]

Of course, but i wanted to point out that there could be a problem for those wanting good sharpness...

You can always compensate for this effect by turning the focus ring a few hundredth of a degree away from infinity. Jokes aside, people who shot red scale rarely care about sharpness. If anything critical sharpness is detrimental to "the look".

 

[Romanko]

Anyone tried red-scaling Aerochrome? It might be a better alternative to Red considering its finer grain and similar speed. Extended sensitivity of Aerochrome to infra-red might be less useful though.
I like Aerochrome and don't want to waste it on red-scale experiments.

 

[pentaxuser]

Maybe a way to extract money. Anything that keeps Harman healthy I'm all for.

I'd perhaps venture a more definite word such as definitely itself in place of "maybe" but perhaps the word "anything" in the next sentence may give Harman a little too much scope

pentaxuser

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Use that on tech film and be happy. There's actually little to no benefit being hurt by another film offer that is 1) probably temporary and 2) is different enough to merit its existence.

This actually can be detrimental as such whining can and does discourage. In this day and age we need nothing but encouragement if we want improved photographic product diversity.

Ivo, I don't agree with you.
Lemme explain.
To develop and produce this film Harman incurred costs that weigh on the coffers, money that could have been invested in other ways. Of course, we don't know the whole story behind it, but producing a film that is actually for hipsters is only because hipsters exist, not for an aesthetic choice.
In fact, in the 60s, 70s, 80s, no manufacturer would have thought of producing such a thing.

 

[Sirius Glass]

An interesting thing to play with, but I am more interested in the Harman color film and whether Harman will made a serious effort into color film.

 

[mshchem]

I'd perhaps venture a more definite word such as definitely itself in place of "maybe" but perhaps the word "anything" in the next sentence may give Harman a little too much scope

pentaxuser

Maybe they (Harman) should include a SASE directed to, Contributions, (minimum £10) .

Seriously I hope Harman can figure out a way to pedal all the first run of Phoenix. It could be that RED is just off spec Phoenix. The marketing/business guys put their heads together and made lemonade out of a lemon.

Seriously, Harman is giving (mostly) young creative types what is going to be a hit. Best Regards to Mobberley!

 

[AnselMortensen]

I find it strange that no ire is directed toward "dubblefilm".

 

[mshchem]

I find it strange that no ire is directed toward "dubblefilm".

The RED, is cheaper at 14 usd vs Dubble Bubble at 17-18 USD.

 

[Don_ih]

Are you people going to debate sleeves on prom dresses next?

 

[MattKing]

Are you people going to debate sleeves on prom dresses next?

If so, the Private Conversation function is perfect for that, as the subject would actually be off topic for Photrio.

 

[mshchem]

Speaking of sleeves. Why do we have 36 exposure film when only 35 exposures will fit a contact sheet from a Printfile. Now that's an important topic.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

To develop and produce this film Harman incurred costs that weigh on the coffers, money that could have been invested in other ways

The additional costs of putting Phoenix 200 in packaging machines with the emulsion side the other way around - that's all that has been done as one might deduce from videos available.

Meaning - no new film was created, no money spent on R&D. Perhaps a little towards market research, a little on new packaging. Probably hardly any additional expenses.

And this move will make Harman some money and hopefully that'll be put towards a new film or fine-tuning Phoenix 200.

 

[mshchem]

The additional costs of putting Phoenix 200 in packaging machines with the emulsion side the other way around - that's all that has been done as one might deduce from videos available.

Meaning - no new film was created, no money spent on R&D. Perhaps a little towards market research, a little on new packaging. Probably hardly any additional expenses.

Trust me the Harman Manufacturing team wouldn't say all that was needed was a new box.

 

[Ivo Stunga]

New box and new Cassette design with different DX Code (125 and that could be sourced from FP4+) than Phoenix 200. Plus marketing.
And who knows how that inversion was performed - manual labor or automatic.

Maybe one day another factory tour/documentary will surface, explaining the additional step.