2023 - Another great year for film users

Millbrook Diner, Kodak Aerocolor.

Here it is, almost the end of December, and it’s a good time to review some events of 2023, both good and bad, that involve film-based photography.  In the digital world, it’s all about mirrorless wonders from Nikon, Canon, Leica, Fuji, etc., but over here in film land, we rarely get new film cameras, so we get excited by new film stocks, right?  Of course, there was the announcement by Ricoh/Pentax about a new film camera project, and we will have to wait to see where that goes. The release of the Polaroid I-2 advanced instant camera was met with enthusiasm by many, and jeers by a few. I’m never going back to any instant cameras, but if I was looking for  one, the I-2 certainly has all the bells and whistles that makes it stand out apart from any others currently on the market.  

I can’t really get excited by any of the simple-use cameras that arrived in 2023.  I get that they are designed to attract a different segment of the market, and anything new and shiny that takes 35mm film is at least better than nothing at all.  The Kodak Ektar H35N doesn’t do it for me, as I’ve had my fling with GOOD half-frame cameras, and I’m not about to use another one.  But if you are looking to maximize your picture-taking on a single roll of film, the H-35N could be a good choice for you.  Take a look at Dave Mihaly’s YouTube videos and make your decision from them.  Yes, I have done a lot of photography with cheap plastic cameras, and I have my favorites.  But, I don’t need to buy any of these “new” plastic cameras currently being sold.  

That brings me to Lomography, which as long been the home of the plastic fantastic (and not necessarily cheap).  Some models that were out of stock are now back in production, such as the Lomo Kino (at $60, a bargain), and the Spinner 360 (less than $50).  Say what you want, but Lomo has been innovative, interesting, and has been a big booster for analog photography.  

I’m sure there have been some interesting introductions of other film cameras this year, and I apologize for not covering some of the boutique offerings in the pinhole and large-format world.  As the saying goes, “if you know, you know.”

FILMS

The year started out with the stock of color films being low, and price hikes had a lot of folks bitching about that. I get it, and for some people, finding that they’d spent over $15 for a roll of film, $30 for processing and prints or scans, it was a bridge too far.  It wasn’t the best for anyone wanting to get started, especially with their $50 simple-use camera, and getting back a bunch of underexposed shots.  For us old-timers (since I’m not a 30-something YouTuber - I’m twice their age, so I’m probably a film dinosaur) film prices haven’t been the limiting factor in the avocation.  But  yes, color film was definitely more expensive in the beginning of the year than at the end, when Kodak and Lomography were discounting their 120 film stocks.  

The rising prices and scarcity of C-41 films definitely drove up the interest in using ECN-2 films, especially from sellers that were removing the remjet so that the films could be developed by any C-41 lab.  That lead us to the Cinestill 800T shit show, and enough has already been said about that on social media, YouTube, and blogs.  My opinion, for what it’s worth, is that Cinestill was improperly granted a license to trademark 800T.  Second, they don’t want competition from sellers like Reflx Labs in China.  Third, we all want a bargain, so vote with your wallet.  Rem-jet removed films such as Amber (from RETO), Reflx Labs, and others are definitely cheaper than the Cinestill versions — and they are the same emulsions. 

Lomography’s introduction of Lomochrome Color ’92 added another unique film stock to an already interesting array of films.  I reviewed that film (https://randomphoto.blogspot.com/2023/08/one-roll-review-lomochrome-color-92.html) in August.  With Metropolis, Turquoise, and Purple, you can do some fun stuff.  Lomochrome Purple in particular, gives results somewhat akin to a color IR film.  

The winner for the least-hyped color film is Kodak Aerocolor, which is being repackaged under various names, such as Elektra 100, Santa Color 100, Reflx Lab Pro 100, and Karmir 160.  Aerocolor is a fine-grained aerial photography film with great latitude, and a lot of people are just discovering it.  If Kodak/Alaris could get their shit together, they’d be offering Aerocolor  as a Kodak product in 35mm and 120.  Instead, they have siloed the different divisions and that’s to their detriment.  

 

The winner for the most-hyped color film is obviously Harman Phoenix.  I’ve never seen a film rollout like this one, and love it or hate it, Phoenix is a unique emulsion. Lens caps off to Harman for their foray into the world of color.  I’ve shot one roll so far, and I’ll wait for a day with light clouds and no bright sun for the next one.   

I believe that the Kentmere Pan 100 and 400 are two of the least-expensive b&w films out there, and in my experience, give outstanding results.  I’ve used them for years, when they were only sold as Ultrafine Extreme by Photo Warehouse, in California. Now, in their own branding, the Kentmere films are an excellent value in 35mm and 120.

Reflx Lab in China has been doing a great job with their branding and selling of various film stocks, and their recent introductions of several ECN-2 films with the remjet removed so that they can be developed as C-41 is a great thing.  In my local camera store - Ball Photo, in Asheville, I’m seeing more variety of films than ever before.  Sure, some of them are just rebranded stocks, but if that gets someone to try one out, all the better.

The Film Photography Project just keeps rolling along with their films for still and cine cameras.  Their catalogue of FPP-branded film stocks is impressive, and while it’s the place to go for the unusual, they also sell the major brands at the best prices.  

Another very positive development (the photo puns write themselves) is the production of Kodak-branded photochemistry coming back to the USA.  Photo Systems, Inc. in Dexter, MI which used to be known as Unicolor, will be producing Kodak-branded photo chemistry.  I toured that facility a number of years ago, and it looks like Dexter, MI will be seeing ever more semi-trucks coming and going from that factory.  In case anyone forgets, Kingsport, TN is the home of Eastman Chemical, which used to make photo chemistry there.  That’s about an hour from my home.

Deaths (certainly not comprehensive)

The permanence of great photography is exemplified by Elliot Erwitt, who died at the age of 95. His images have appeared in various books and monographs.  He left us with many indelible images of the every-day that were never ordinary.  https://www.elliotterwitt.com/

John Fielder, a well-known photographer of the natural scenes in Colorado, died at 73. 

https://www.cpr.org/2023/08/13/john-fielder-photographer-colorado-outdoors-died-at-73-years-old/

Frank Borman, astronaut, died in November, at the age of  95 - took the first photograph on the Apollo 8 mission of the earth from the moon - that image is lesser known than the one taken by William Anders - Earth Rise- which inspired a consciousness  of Earth being our home, alone in the cosmos.  Those Hasselblad cameras were instrumental in the Apollo program, and the quality of the images from them are unsurpassed, especially when you consider the environment in which they were used.

Frank Borman's photo

Larry Fink, well-known for his photography in Greenwich Village, and chronicling the Beat generation, died at 72.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt9M2aQAFT0

Lawrence McFarland, photographer and educator, died at 81.  Known for his landscapes, he was a respected professor of photography at the University of Texas, Austin. https://www.lawrencemcfarlandphoto.com/home

John Benton-Harris, photographer/visual sociologist, died at 83.  An American in the UK, he was renowned for his photo essays of the British people. https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/oct/23/john-benton-harris-obituary

Helen Marcus, a noted photographer of the famous in New York, died at 97. Her career started late - at age 50.  Her black and white portraits of famous writers such as Tom Wolfe and Toni Morrison are iconic.  https://www.shelf-awareness.com/issue.html?issue=4601#m61893

Georgia M. Coxe, died at 92.  She was known both for her poetry and her photography, which in my mind, is an ideal combination. https://provincetownindependent.org/obituaries/2023/09/20/poet-and-photographer-georgia-coxe-dies-at-92/

North Carolinian photographer, Bruce Roberts, died at 93.  He pioneered the use of 35mm in newspaper reportage, and photographed a LOT of North Carolina for Southern Living and Our State magazines.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Roberts_(photographer)

Cary Wolinsky, who often photographed for National Geographic magazine, died at 75. He was an astute photographer whose creativity with the camera is well-known. https://thephotosociety.org/cary-wolinsky-1948-2023/

Lisl Steiner, a photojournalist, documentarian, and film-maker, died t 95.  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/18/arts/lisl-steiner-dead.html

There are a lot of photographers that have lived into their 90s, so I guess there’s hope for me yet.

What else to say about 2023?  I published 4 zines, which was pretty good. All of them were well-received.  I shot well over 100 rolls of film, developed most of it myself.  The nascent Asheville Camera Club published a zine, and is now meeting monthly. For once, I am just a participant, not an organizer.   I didn’t go on any lengthy road trips, which I hope to make up for in 2024.  However, I did pretty well with trips to Michigan, Ohio, New York, and South Carolina.

I hope 2024 goes well for everyone (well, almost everyone - democracy has to survive). 

How did 2023 work out for you?

Twenty Years of Holgas

 

Yes, this is a pitch for my latest issue of Monochrome Mania!  First of all, when I started Monochrome Mania in 2020, I had no idea that I would be publishing a 12th issue just a few years later.  Yes, for me, it's my creative outlet, and more importantly, I'm able to reach many more people with a zine than with a gallery showing.  

Twenty Years of Holgas actually started in about 2001, when I got my first Holga.  But, it really was not until 2003 that I was using one to create memorable images.  I don't care what camera that you use, but it takes some time before you are really proficient with it. With a Holga, that means accepting its limitations, but also knowing when you can push it beyond the "snapshot" with technique, choice of film, and subject choice.

In preparing this issue, I reviewed many hundreds of negatives from my Holgas. Luckily, I had almost all of them scanned in previously when I was working on the medium format toy cameras for MM No. 3, which is now out of print.  Still, reducing 20+ years of photos down to less than 50 images is a feat.   It's not like I have shot with a Holga every day every year, either. I was most prolific with the Holga between 2007-2010, and there are a few years that I hardly shot with it.  Nevertheless, the Holga  is still a camera that gives me wonderful results in certain situations, and I continue to use it.   Could this be a prelude to a larger work?  Maybe.  I still have many stories to tell with toy cameras, and the Holga hasn't been the only instrument for that.

Here are a few samples from this latest issue.

Twenty Years of  Holgas is 48 pages, including the covers, and measures 8,5 x 8.5 inches. It's a quality print publication, done by Mixam.  

I have changed my shipping to USA-only.  International shipping now costs almost as much as the zine, and to be honest, it's a pain in the butt to ship internationally, as Etsy does not handle that aspect very well.  

  Here are a few images that did not make the zine issue.

  

Harman Phoenix 200 - One Roll Review

 

Like a lot of people, I’ve been curious about Harman’s release of an experimental color film, and like a lot of people, I really had no advance information about it.  No, I’m not a YouTube influencer, getting a preview at the Harman factory, nor did they send me an advance info packet.  Mike Raso of the FPP sent me a package with two rolls of the Phoenix film, along with the promotional info packet from Harman just a day after it was officially released.  I’ve been reviewing various film stocks on RCB for many years, and I’d like to think that my thoughts on various films have been helpful.  Most of the time, I have purchased the films that I review.  

Initial thoughts

First and foremost, I am thrilled that another manufacturer is taking a stab at doing color emulsions.  Yes, there are a bunch of different C-41 and ECN-2 films available, and some films supposedly from Europe are almost likely to be old stock, or repackaged Kodak Aerocolor film.  So, the idea that Harman would even attempt to produce a C-41 color film is pretty amazing. Yes, it’s touted as “experimental” even on the film box, but it’s a start.  

Second, this experimental film has already been YouTubed to death.  I wasn’t even sure that I was going to review it, but getting two rolls from the FPP definitely encouraged me to test it.  I live in Western North Carolina, so December might not be the optimum time for a film test, but I am giving it a go anyways.  

Third, I’m a sucker for oddball films.  Since I don’t usually have high expectations, I like it when a film favorably surprises me. It’s not always about color fidelity, either.  That’s the beauty of film vs digital.  If I want real color fidelity, I can always shoot with one of my DSLRs. Odd color shifts like we see in some of the Lomography films are something that digital just can’t do without a LOT of post-processing. The serendipitous nature of these oddball films means I’ll probably get at least a few shots that convince me to keep using them for special projects.  

Phoenix 200

Harman had been sending out teasers on social media for several weeks before Phoenix 200 was actually released.  Yes, I think almost everyone thought it was going to be a color film, but that’s all most of us knew.  Coming from a factory that does b&w, it seemed quite the challenge.   

My way of working with any film for the first time is to shoot it at the box speed listed by the manufacturer.  So, I knew that I was going to shoot roll number 1 at ISO 200 before I even put it in my camera.  I used my Nikon FM3A and my 50mm f/2 Nikkor-H that I have already raved about in this blog.

Over the course of two days, I shot it in later afternoon sun, and midday sun/slight overcast.  After shooting the roll, I dropped it off at Ball Photo in Asheville to get it developed only. No prints or scans.  I picked it up today, and the staff was very curious about this film.  No orange mask! I figured that since Harman/Ilford has a C-41 chromogenic XP-2, the film base may be the same as the XP-2. However, that’s just my opinion.  No orange mask is not a big deal, as the Kodak Aerocolor and all the rebrands of it, also do not have an orange mask.

I like that the film has “Experimental” as a descriptor.  It’s certainly a step in the direction of making a good color film, but as you will see, it has a ways to go.  

The negatives on my light table, taken with iphone

Inverted, just as they are - not too bad.

I scanned the film on my Epson V700, and after previewing the thumbnails, I went and adjusted the curves for every exposure, except for a few. Then, I worked with the files in Corel Paint Shop Pro (no damn Adobe subscription for me), which I have used since 2008.  In most cases, I corrected for faded colors to get what I thought was a better image than straight out of the scanner.  As others have noted, the film has noticeable grain.  The shadow detail is like shooting underexposed slide film on a sunny day.  Very contrasty.   This is all at the box speed, of course.  Now that I have shot that initial roll, I’ll probably shoot the film at ISO 80 or 100 on the next one.  

In Epson Scan, I had to adjust the levels for every image.

However, it definitely improved the result

Anyhow, here are some examples from this first roll.  I chose colorful subjects to test out the color rendition of Phoenix 200.  

Surprisingly, this last shot on the roll was fine the way it was!

As you can see, the results are not bad after tweaking nearly every image to my liking.  It almost reminds me of shooting some of the FPP Retrochrome.  The film definitely has a different look than the run-of-the-mill Kodak Gold 200.  Things that can mess up an exposure - too much contrast between light and dark areas, and shooting into the sun.  Shooting at highly reflective objects with specular highlight will show that their is no antihalation layer on the film.  

Is this a film that I would buy?  Well, it's experimental, so I would hope that Harman will improve version 2, and I'd definitely give that a try.  One thing I noticed was that inverting the iPhone shot of the negatives gave me a pretty good result, so maybe this is an instance where DSLR "scanning" would produce better results than my flatbed scanner.  

As it is, this is a film that in its current state, requires more than the usual post-processing to get an image that is appealing to me.  Other photographers may find it suits them just fine -- or not! I would not expect perfect results right out of the box, so that might be a non-starter for a lot of folks.  BUT -- I greatly appreciate what Harman is doing and hope that they continue to improve their film.  

JUNE 29 UPDATE

My second roll, shot with my Nikon FM3A, in late May- early June 2024, was scanned as a positive (transparency) and then in Paint Shop Pro, changed to a negative, giving me a much better result than the first try.

Here are some results