Can Harman Phoenix 35mm Film Win Dave Back? 

Thanks so much for taking the time to do this. We're stealing 'crunchy' you can expect to see it in future marketing campaigns:) - Just one question, was Dave excited??? I can't tell.

Like the edit. Also thanks for bringing this hybrid workflow film up. 🙂

I have 4 rolls, just waiting for better weather to test it out.

And remember this is their first attempt and it will get better. And really, after all these years of continuing to shoot film alongside digital, have alab process it, but scan yourself...and you don't usually scan in EVERY shot of the 36 exposures. I recommend the excellent Plustek 8200i with Silverfast 9 with multi-exposure to get the best scanning results without breaking the bank. And remember, a modern Nikon or Canon with OS lenses, you can shoot in pretty low light without blur! I personally use a Minolta Maxxum 7 for all my 35mm work. Basically like shooting with a DSLR.

Harman have said this is best used in overcast conditions due to the limited dynamic range in its current form. Lab scanners tend to work on a pixel basis rather than a dpi so 72dpi to 400dpi. We get customers asking for high dpi when it's actually pixel dimension that determines the file size.

I‘m intrigued

This is intriguing. I have four film cameras waiting for something inspiring to come along. Hopefully this is it. :-) Just not clean on the post-processing side of it.

If it's taking you 5 hours to scan a few rolls of film you've got your Epson on the wrong settings. Epson flatbeds can't resolve above 2400 dpi optically so there's no reason to set the dpi higher than that, it will just slow you down. Should be around 10 minutes for 12 frames. But you can get 4800+ dpi using a digital camera macro lens setup with pixel shift, etc (not as user friendly as a scanner of course).

Here you go! A review of a film by two guys who start out by telling you they never shoot film. Only on YT.

I do like shooting film, but mainly in old rangefinders like the Canonet QL17, and I certainly don't do my own developing, so I don't know how much I'd benefit from this film. Generally I like to have greens and blues that really pop, as opposed to reds and oranges, and while I realize that the weather and the season you were shooting in weren't really going to provide that in any case, I still don't think the colour balance is for me. Also I'm kind of surprised at how grainy that look is... They can call it a feature all they like, but to me it just looks like a bug. I'm eager to see what else they come up with, since I also don't print anymore, but I'll give this a miss for now.

Any plans for Harman to release this in 120?

The lack of orange base is probably not for making the film ideal for scanning, but because Harman could not make it for the first color film they made. It would be weird for Ilford to make something which is not suitable for analog process - that is, for young kids only, who like to post their pictures primarily in the social media. There is a standard for C-41 film, and there is no reason for doing anything out of standard. By the way, this film is not impossible to print manually, I have tried it, but is is challenging because of the extreme contrast of this film stock. I hope that the next version will be with normal orange backing, which makes printing a bit easier to get the colors right. I do understand this is a limited edition, first version of a new film, and it should not be treated as a finished product. For scanning, using an old Estonian proverb, you can make a bread out of shit. Meaning that digital editing can nowadays alter the pictures so much, that you can often get acceptable picrures from negatives that are far from acceptable. So, "making film good for scanning" is not really an option, when talking about finished products.

Slide (positive) film would beat this every day. It too was clear