Harman have released another colour film. Between version I & II there was a redscale effort, but frankly, who’s interested in that? Obviously they had some version I to shift! Version II however seems to be a good step forward.
Let me start by saying that I support Harman’s attempt at a colour film. It’s not an easy thing to do, even if you have years of film manufacture in black and white behind you! They do however seem to be hell bent on using a “clear” (purple) base rather than the traditional “orange” that we are used to. The result of this is that the post processing needed is huge! V2 is rated at 200 iso. I have no idea why. In my testing I doubt it’s 100! So if you are going to give a roll a try, treat it as a 100 iso, at best, is my advice. Correctly exposed (for 200 iso) I got thin negs. The problem with that is then in the scanning.
I mostly use an Epson V600 scanner. With Phoenix becasue of it’s colour shift, I utilise the colour restoration facility, and with “thicker” negs, it works pretty well, as you can see from the images here. When the negs are thin I got the horrible “orange” scans, as shown to the right. This is almost impossible to get rid of in Photoshop.
When I could get decent colour, it’s not too bad, and it’s true that it does seem to favour greens. It reminds me a bit of the old Kodak VR film, if you are old enough to remember that! I’ve found that with highlights it does flare. I suspect there is no “anti-halide-backing”.
The question is – why try and re-invent the wheel? Kodak Gold gives better colour and it’s cheaper, and an awful lot less problematic to scan. In my humble opinion if Harman keep going and produce a V3 (and I hope they do), I hope they sort out the base, and use a regular orange tone that everyone is set up for! If they insist on using the clear (purple) one, then why not get on with it and make an E6 reversal film that would be better suited to the base. I suspect it’s also what many are hoping for, a real choice to Ektachrome. Once again I support Harman’s endeavour, but…. there are limits!
If Version 3 is more of the same, will I buy it – no. If it’s reversal or an orange base, I will. Not that Harman will care one way or the other what I do!! 🙂
S.H.O.U.T. 
So you expose it to 100 and develop it 100 as well ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Victor! I exposed my roll at 200 iso, but it needs more exposure for sure. If I ever used another roll I’d certainly expose it for 100 maybe even 80 iso. It’s a C41 film, so in theory that’s a fixed process. In practice it can be pushed and pulled but I wouldn’t get involved with that myself! Colour shifts and all sorts of things arise with that “can of worms”! So yes I’d go for 100 iso. Hope you are keeping well and safe! Cheers and best wishes Andy
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the explanation Andy !
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Andy,
I think you are bang on with ‘why reinvent the wheel’. There seems little point in trying to manufacture another Kodak Gold. I’m guessing this film is aimed at the ‘Lomography’ type enthusiasts who see film as something weird, quirky and unpredictable – in which case maybe Harman are going in the right direction!
🙂
I must confess I haven’t tried it myself, yet. I really should, just to support Harman.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Steve! That’s exactly why I tried it, just to support Harman. I have little interest in a “quirky” colour film, most of my film photography is b/w – I guess I can support them just as well by buying more Delta 100 in the end – and that I do like!! Cheers Andy
LikeLike
I have only used the original Phoenix and I found that exposing at 100 works but for scanning I scan as a positive; the invert in Photoshop, at that point auto levels and auto contrast does a fairly decent job!!! I will try Phoenix II when I get a chancce!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello! Oh that’s an interesting way of scanning it. I may try that just out of curiosity! Couldn’t be any more trouble than it was!! 🙂 Cheers Andy
LikeLike