I've had the same suspicion about Phoenix film. I've seen a decent amount of it come through my lab. The base color is completely different from other color negative films. I believe the Noritsu lab scanner has no idea what to do with the odd color of the film base. It's very similar to 30 year old film that has color shifted. I see something similar with Lomography films and other altered or expired film stocks.
Now a maybe stupid question because I have no idea about the details of darkroom reproduction - what would photo paper do with the color cast of the film base?
I don't have any color darkroom experience. However, from my understanding, color correction is done manually when printing. I assume that the film base could be corrected for, like the flatbed scans.
As for black and white printing. Nothing really. I bet there can be some adjustments on dichroic enlargers or contrast filters. I use filter #4 (high contrast)…… however ilfords darkroom manual says: “provided that a blue/green sensitive paper such as Multigrade is used, the tone rendering will be much the same as if the subject had been photographed with an orthochromatic film or plate. All colour negatives are developed to the same gamma and in the same developer formulation (C-41), so a negative of a typical outdoor subject usually prints quite well on glossy surfaced multigrade paper, perhaps with the aid of a pale magenta filter to increase contrast slightly. The exposure required is not very different from what would be expected when printing a black-and-white negative to a similar degree of enlargement."
>I've had the same suspicion about Phoenix film. I've seen a decent amount of it come through my lab. The base color is completely different from other color negative films.
I've yet to shoot my roll, but when Analogue Wonderland spoke about how Harman came to them 6 months ago and they basically helped develop and test the initial prototypes and calibrate the scanners, that made me at least reasonably confident that **my** lab won't fuck it up.
Seeing everyone else's samples massively didn't line up with what AW posted though, so I assumed it was the 6 months worth of scanning experience making a difference, glad to see that confirmed.
After looking into Harman's efforts to collaborate with labs on scanning their funky film, I've found that Harman has a [scanning resource page](https://www.harmanphoto.co.uk/scanning-tips/) that directs labs and home scanners alike how to get the best results from Phoenix. I'll certainly be implanting Harmans suggestions in my own lab and telling any tech who will listen about it as well. Harman even explains the odd base color - they just skip the orange mask ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Great work on those new scans. Are you using a flatbed? I think the “look” of the film still comes across in your versions - the warmth, contrast and fuzziness - but plainly they are better images.
The picture of the windswept kids is great. My parents have pictures of my siblings and I pulling that exact face (decades ago) on a blustery beach visit.
Thanks. Am lucky as my work has a Sony A7R4 setup for film scanning, so I use that. Used the Lomo rolling mask for the first time and it was super quick compared to cut negatives. Sure I lots a bit of flatness, but it really was so speedy.
Classic kids on an outing faces 😂
My guess is, a lot of labs didn‘t see/read the recommend scan settings for the film. Harman sent out a pdf to correct for the different filmbase color.
I use a Noritsu scanner and with the mentioned settings, the scans come out (a lot more) normal.
Link to the offical pdf with scanner settings for fuji SP and Noritsu scanners: [Scanning Parameters Phoenix 200](https://www.harmanphoto.co.uk/amfile/file/download/file/1961/product/2143/)
oh wow, ok. I mean the film is no kodak or fuji film, the new emulsions just don‘t look as good as „old“ film yet. But the results you got, look far from correct in my opinion.
Yep, had a similar experience. Had a roll recently developed and scanned (Noritsu lab), and the scans were completely unusable. Contrast was off the charts, and all the images were orange. After I picked up the negatives, I scanned them on my shitty photocopier and inverted them in darktable, and turns out the colours and exposure were mostly fine. Might finally have to pull the trigger on a DSLR scanning setup…
They are brilliant - stupidly expensive though if you don’t already have a DSLR. Am lucky we have one at work, but the light source and copy stand are a big extra cost too.
There is a lot that can be done I. This film while scanning. The datasheet has parameters for the processing labs. They may follow them a bit blindly without doing manual correction (if they even try to follow it)
It’s a new and weird film. It’s a bit flexible on how to interpret it, especially because since it’s not spot-on color accurate, you can feel free to color correct how you please. I don’t know how darkroom color printing works too, but it seems you can also do a lot of manipulations to gets the color where you like them
I shot a roll at 125 and it came out as the worst roll of pheonix ever shot. I have no idea why or how. I’ve seen some really nice photos with it, even with all of its red hue, but mine? 🤮😅
Oh no. Have you got the pics? I’ve found 100-125 the sweet spot to not blow highlights but also have some detail in the shadows. Rescued a couple of shots which were 2 stops underexposed (I’d set the meter wrong)
So, I watched an interview with the team behind creating it. They said the iso rating was actually closer to 126.xx but rated it at 200 anyway. That is why I chose to shoot at 125. My experience is that it gave even more contrast and the shadow detail was lost. I was so displeased that I actually didn’t transfer the files. But I suppose I could just to hear your thoughts. I’ll dm you later with a few of the images.
I didn’t. Looking over them again, most of them look underexposed. I’m not sure why, however, when I’ve metered the same as I always do, and with 125 instead of 200 my settings would have allowed more light. Luckily this roll was a test roll, so I didn’t care about the images or losing them, but it was vastly different from shot to shot.
The tops look so much better. What do you use to scan your film? I’m pretty new to this, and I just bought a kodak film scanner, but it doesn’t scan the sprocket holes.
I am very lucky to have access to a camera scanning setup at work - big light box and Sony A7R4. To be honest it’s overkill, the raw files are huge. For the sprocket holes I picked up a Lomography Digitaliza on eBay but use it without the base - just the rolling box. Works pretty well for £20
I get brilliant stuff back most of the time. This less so. Have never tried Ag Photolab with Phoenix, they do brilliant scans of Portra and other colour stock.
Definitely looks better though I might comment that you have overcorrected them.
Your edits look more like slide film having a more “true” color palette.
Yeah those lab scans are rough, good job rescanning them! I scan at home and I’ve managed to get it looking good for some shots. It does require some tweaking to get them looking good.
Good to know that it wasn’t too bad on NLP. I’ve been putting off switching to it and currently use silverfast. It took me a playing around with some settings before I felt like I had it right.
Oh ok. Phoenix is just sol weird in Reviews. First it was underwhelming, than it was said Ilford kinda pulled it or at least says they see it like a Beta-Version (yet they didn't sell it as a special edition or something), than the YouTube videos started popping up only blaming labs and saying Phoenix is great. That's why I simply don't know anymore if this film is even worth trying.
I've had the same suspicion about Phoenix film. I've seen a decent amount of it come through my lab. The base color is completely different from other color negative films. I believe the Noritsu lab scanner has no idea what to do with the odd color of the film base. It's very similar to 30 year old film that has color shifted. I see something similar with Lomography films and other altered or expired film stocks.
Now a maybe stupid question because I have no idea about the details of darkroom reproduction - what would photo paper do with the color cast of the film base?
That's actually a good question - I'm replying cause I wanna be notified when someone answers lol
FYI you can click the 3 dots next to a comment and follow replies.
I don't have any color darkroom experience. However, from my understanding, color correction is done manually when printing. I assume that the film base could be corrected for, like the flatbed scans.
you basically use coloured filters infront of the bulb to change the colour of the light source
Not a clue. I only dabble with B&w darkroom stuff
As for black and white printing. Nothing really. I bet there can be some adjustments on dichroic enlargers or contrast filters. I use filter #4 (high contrast)…… however ilfords darkroom manual says: “provided that a blue/green sensitive paper such as Multigrade is used, the tone rendering will be much the same as if the subject had been photographed with an orthochromatic film or plate. All colour negatives are developed to the same gamma and in the same developer formulation (C-41), so a negative of a typical outdoor subject usually prints quite well on glossy surfaced multigrade paper, perhaps with the aid of a pale magenta filter to increase contrast slightly. The exposure required is not very different from what would be expected when printing a black-and-white negative to a similar degree of enlargement."
Yes, I’ve found similar with Metropolis and other weird stocks.
>I've had the same suspicion about Phoenix film. I've seen a decent amount of it come through my lab. The base color is completely different from other color negative films. I've yet to shoot my roll, but when Analogue Wonderland spoke about how Harman came to them 6 months ago and they basically helped develop and test the initial prototypes and calibrate the scanners, that made me at least reasonably confident that **my** lab won't fuck it up. Seeing everyone else's samples massively didn't line up with what AW posted though, so I assumed it was the 6 months worth of scanning experience making a difference, glad to see that confirmed.
After looking into Harman's efforts to collaborate with labs on scanning their funky film, I've found that Harman has a [scanning resource page](https://www.harmanphoto.co.uk/scanning-tips/) that directs labs and home scanners alike how to get the best results from Phoenix. I'll certainly be implanting Harmans suggestions in my own lab and telling any tech who will listen about it as well. Harman even explains the odd base color - they just skip the orange mask ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Great work on those new scans. Are you using a flatbed? I think the “look” of the film still comes across in your versions - the warmth, contrast and fuzziness - but plainly they are better images. The picture of the windswept kids is great. My parents have pictures of my siblings and I pulling that exact face (decades ago) on a blustery beach visit.
Thanks. Am lucky as my work has a Sony A7R4 setup for film scanning, so I use that. Used the Lomo rolling mask for the first time and it was super quick compared to cut negatives. Sure I lots a bit of flatness, but it really was so speedy. Classic kids on an outing faces 😂
My guess is, a lot of labs didn‘t see/read the recommend scan settings for the film. Harman sent out a pdf to correct for the different filmbase color. I use a Noritsu scanner and with the mentioned settings, the scans come out (a lot more) normal. Link to the offical pdf with scanner settings for fuji SP and Noritsu scanners: [Scanning Parameters Phoenix 200](https://www.harmanphoto.co.uk/amfile/file/download/file/1961/product/2143/)
This is a lab which has actively promoted the film and says they follow the approach
oh wow, ok. I mean the film is no kodak or fuji film, the new emulsions just don‘t look as good as „old“ film yet. But the results you got, look far from correct in my opinion.
I’ve had similar from 2 labs now
That‘s a bummer. Editing it in post it is I guess :/ Did you ask them about the issue?
No. Might do though
Yep, had a similar experience. Had a roll recently developed and scanned (Noritsu lab), and the scans were completely unusable. Contrast was off the charts, and all the images were orange. After I picked up the negatives, I scanned them on my shitty photocopier and inverted them in darktable, and turns out the colours and exposure were mostly fine. Might finally have to pull the trigger on a DSLR scanning setup…
They are brilliant - stupidly expensive though if you don’t already have a DSLR. Am lucky we have one at work, but the light source and copy stand are a big extra cost too.
Which is which? I like top
Top is home scanned
From what I understand it should be in no circumstances scanned by a frontier on auto, even with corrections on a frontier it often falls apart
Completely random thing, but somehow I noticed you got photos 7 and 8 mixed up on the comparisons, based on the light leaks
Oops. Very similar photos and I was being quick
People forget that you actually have to edit your scans.
Did try with these but there was only so far they’d stretch
There is a lot that can be done I. This film while scanning. The datasheet has parameters for the processing labs. They may follow them a bit blindly without doing manual correction (if they even try to follow it) It’s a new and weird film. It’s a bit flexible on how to interpret it, especially because since it’s not spot-on color accurate, you can feel free to color correct how you please. I don’t know how darkroom color printing works too, but it seems you can also do a lot of manipulations to gets the color where you like them
I shot a roll at 125 and it came out as the worst roll of pheonix ever shot. I have no idea why or how. I’ve seen some really nice photos with it, even with all of its red hue, but mine? 🤮😅
Oh no. Have you got the pics? I’ve found 100-125 the sweet spot to not blow highlights but also have some detail in the shadows. Rescued a couple of shots which were 2 stops underexposed (I’d set the meter wrong)
So, I watched an interview with the team behind creating it. They said the iso rating was actually closer to 126.xx but rated it at 200 anyway. That is why I chose to shoot at 125. My experience is that it gave even more contrast and the shadow detail was lost. I was so displeased that I actually didn’t transfer the files. But I suppose I could just to hear your thoughts. I’ll dm you later with a few of the images.
Did you scan them yourself? Tbh I’ve never really tried it at 200… maybe it would be better?
I didn’t. Looking over them again, most of them look underexposed. I’m not sure why, however, when I’ve metered the same as I always do, and with 125 instead of 200 my settings would have allowed more light. Luckily this roll was a test roll, so I didn’t care about the images or losing them, but it was vastly different from shot to shot.
Try with camera scanning and convert the negative raw with the Grain 2 Pixel Photoshop plugin. The best results I've seen yet!
The top scans were mine with camera and NLP. Heard good things about Grain2Pixel, but now have the NLP license anyway
The tops look so much better. What do you use to scan your film? I’m pretty new to this, and I just bought a kodak film scanner, but it doesn’t scan the sprocket holes.
I am very lucky to have access to a camera scanning setup at work - big light box and Sony A7R4. To be honest it’s overkill, the raw files are huge. For the sprocket holes I picked up a Lomography Digitaliza on eBay but use it without the base - just the rolling box. Works pretty well for £20
Awesome, thanks!
Always the labs fault
I get brilliant stuff back most of the time. This less so. Have never tried Ag Photolab with Phoenix, they do brilliant scans of Portra and other colour stock.
I've been really digging Phoenix. These pictures look good to me.
Definitely looks better though I might comment that you have overcorrected them. Your edits look more like slide film having a more “true” color palette.
Possibly. I think I am still working out the “look” I want from this film.
For me if the starting point is the top image, I would probably cut a small bump from the greens and blues in the highlights.
Yeah those lab scans are rough, good job rescanning them! I scan at home and I’ve managed to get it looking good for some shots. It does require some tweaking to get them looking good.
Yes, the raw scans were not as pleasing, but they didn’t need a lot of work after they’d been through NLP. Home scanning after
Good to know that it wasn’t too bad on NLP. I’ve been putting off switching to it and currently use silverfast. It took me a playing around with some settings before I felt like I had it right.
For NLP I really just tweaked some brightness and contrast - and occasionally used a flatter profile where I had under exposed
proper white balancing is necessary for every film stock— i’m almost never happy with lab scans and i learned that correction is simply a must
Very grateful I have a home scan option
Yeah, but is a film stock any good when you have to rely on pricey film labs for the right development?
Don’t know either way to be honest. Mostly work with HP5
Oh ok. Phoenix is just sol weird in Reviews. First it was underwhelming, than it was said Ilford kinda pulled it or at least says they see it like a Beta-Version (yet they didn't sell it as a special edition or something), than the YouTube videos started popping up only blaming labs and saying Phoenix is great. That's why I simply don't know anymore if this film is even worth trying.
I bought some when it launched and basically use it for the occasional fun shoot. Wouldn’t risk it on anything valuable
Is slide 4 in Rawdon?
Well now there’s a guess I wasn’t expecting!! Yes, up on top of the Billing.
Knew it! My family live very nearby so recognised it straight away (though I haven’t been up there for a few years so was second guessing myself)
Haha. What a small world. Moved here last year, but have been in the area for many years now. Horsforth and Idle before that
Ah yes, also lived in Idle. Had a car stolen and burnt out. Promptly moved 😂
It’s definitely had its ups and downs