Harman updates Phoenix 200 (II) with finer grain, improved colour accuracy, and wider dynamic range.
Ilford/Harman’s first colour film since the 1960s, this emulsion is a significant departure from the portfolio of black-and-white films, papers, and development chemicals at the UK factory plant.
Here’s how the reformulated Harman Phoenix II 200 compares to the original emulsion (reviewed here analog.cafe/r/harman-phoen…), according to their datasheet:
“Compared to the original Phoenix film, Phoenix II has a more normal contrast, colour balance and finer grain. It also has a wider exposure latitude and is more flexible and less radical than original Phoenix, yet still offers a different look and feel to mainstream colour films and should still be considered a creative, experimental film.”
This new film still renders halos (which appear to be a deliberate choice). The negatives are still purple, although, according to the characteristic curves, they should be less dense (possibly easier to scan).
Samples and discussion about grain, colour accuracy, and dynamic range up next.
***
New on Analog.Cafe: Develop Phoenix 200 as a positive (slides), no E-6 chemistry needed! Just add Rodinal: analog.cafe/r/harman-phoen…
A halation is the result of relatively bright points of light projecting through the semi-transparent film and then bouncing off a film pressure plate through the layers. Halation occurs to some degree on all films, which is why manufacturers usually include an anti-halation layer with their film (famously, Kodak Vision 3’s remjet: analog.cafe/r/how-to-remov…). Most films don’t use remjet; instead, their anti-halation layer is either dissolvable or integrated deep into the emulsion.
Halations can occur on black-and-white and colour films. Colour films without the remjet layer, like CineStill 800T (analog.cafe/r/cinestill-80…), and, notably, Harman Phoenix.
Harman must have experience with anti-halation layers (since they produce all Ilford-branded black-and-white films, which use anti-halation), which suggests that excluding this feature is a deliberate choice.
The halation effect has been a hallmark of all CineStill’s colour-negative products, and it now appears to be a permanent feature of Phoenix films.
Curiously, the halos on Phoenix films are somewhat orange, whereas CineStill’s are red. This may have something to do with the colour of the film base (CS is orange, Phoenix is purple).
One of the key upgrades to Harman Phoenix is the contrast control and dynamic range extension.
Dynamic range is roughly the ability of film to simultaneously show detail in shadows and highlights. Films with low dynamic range may struggle to display details in both shadows and highlights in high-contrast scenes, even when the exposure is spot on. (More about dynamic range: analog.cafe/r/dynamic-rang…).
Low dynamic range isn’t necessarily a bad thing. For example, slide films are known for their low DR; while that does make shooting such films more difficult, they produce striking high contrast without the need to make any adjustments after scanning.
But when it comes to colour-negative films, traditional films like Kodak Portra 800 can have up to 12.5 stops of DR (analog.cafe/r/kodak-portra…), which would yield lower contrast but greater flexibility and ease of use.
Phoenix II, according to the datasheet, improves this piece of their emulsion by extending the dynamic range slightly, potentially making it an easier film to shoot.
Seeing sample photos alone may not reveal the changes Harman had implemented. Side-by-side comparisons can be helpful, but we don’t have those either.
Thankfully, I have spec sheets with film characteristic curves from both versions of this film, which reveal quite a bit of info about the changes the company made to Phoenix II.
The pink lines that illustrate the dynamic range of Phoenix II (drawn in colour), whereas the black lines are Phoenix I. The new film appears to have an extra stop of DR, which may result in slightly more detail in the highlights and shadows of high-contrast scenes. Though not as wide as that of Kodak Gold, a budget emulsion that offers 8 stops of dynamic range (analog.cafe/r/kodak-gold-f…), Phoenix II shows a significant improvement.
Another thing that those graphs reveal is the density of the negatives. On the right, the numbers indicate the level of opacity the film may exhibit once developed; note how the new film, Phoenix II, displays significantly less overall density. This can make scanning this film easier on some devices. Which is nice!
Unfortunately, the datasheets for either Phoenix films don’t share RMS or PGI numbers (both measure how “grainy” the film may appear. I suppose we’ll have to take Harman’s word when they say that Phoenix II has finer grain.
Of course, in medium format, it looks to have very fine grain.
In 35mm, Phoenix II still appears fairly grainy in high-resolution scans, yet it’s significantly smoother than other new small-batch film stocks (like Lomography Color’92, analog.cafe/r/lomochrome-c…).
Other than shooting the newer emulsion, there’s one more way to dramatically reduce grain on Harman Phoenix films: develop it as a slide film!
To celebrate the release of this new emulsion, I spent weeks preparing an article about processing Phoenix films into slides using the most common chemicals in a photographer’s bathroom: Rodinal and a regular C-41 kit.
Expect unusual results and budget at least an extra 30 minutes of development time. This is an experimental technique for an experimental film; your results may vary. I’ve published a few starting times, temperatures, and dilutions that should yield decent results; I’ve also mentioned a few techniques in this article for improving your odds.
Good luck, enjoy the new film, and let me know what you think :)
Dmitri Jul 16, ‘25
Dmitri Jul 16, ‘25
Dmitri Jul 16, ‘25
Dmitri Jul 16, ‘25
Dmitri Jul 16, ‘25
Dmitri Jul 16, ‘25
Dmitri Jul 16, ‘25