Nearly two years ago, Harman released their first color negative film: Phoenix 200. This character-rich film was known for its bold colors, strong grain, and distinct color and shadow rendering—along with a bit of uncertainty while shooting. While fun and spontaneous, it was a difficult film to control or necessarily rely on. Today, Harman has announced the second generation of this film: Phoenix II 200.
Harman describes the Phoenix II 200 as “very different from the original,” with a significant redesign for each color layer and component of the film. While Harman concedes the film is “less bold” than the original, they also state it will be more consistent and predictable, making it a film you can rely on; a film you can stock up on and choose to use for specific needs, rather than just for fun.
Looking over some of the technical details quickly, this film is, again, a 200-speed color negative film. The 35mm cartridges are DX coded for ISO 200 and Harman recommends exposing it between EI 100-200. Recommended development is by C-41 chemistry, but ECN-2 and E-6 chemistry can be used for experimental results. The film still lacks an orange mask, meaning you’ll need to relay this information on to your lab for scanning or be aware of it when color-correcting your home scans.
I got a few rolls of the new film—both 35mm and 120—and had a chance to shoot around NYC to see how the film responded to normal, everyday shooting in bright, summer outdoor lighting conditions. As someone who is typically a “Portra-or-bust” user for color films, it was fun to try something new and surprising.
I rated the films at 160 and tended to expose on the over side of correct in most occasions. The negatives had enough density from this, but they are noticeably grainy for the relatively slow speed. In a positive sense, this film feels less clinical than something like Portra; it’s a character film and the colors and dynamic range feel equally crunchy in that sense. The film feels “retro” but in a controlled sense; it’s a genuine aesthetic and I appreciate Harman’s commitment to making this a more consistent and reliable look for generation II of this film. Especially compared to a film like Portra, this film feels like a film you’d choose when you want your photos to look like they were taken on film. As obvious as that sounds, with some of the sleeker and cleaner films, a lot of times the goal is to almost smooth them out to the point of approaching digital clarity—Phoenix II goes in the opposite direction and is very film for film’s sake in appearance.
I don’t have any direct comparisons between this new film and the original, but I appreciate Harman’s commitment to refining the original film that did feel a bit unfinished to rely on. This film still has the character-first look, but considering it’s now providing a consistent look that can be counted on is a huge asset for a film like this. I know how to dial it in and fit it into my shooting style; if I’m looking for a chunkier, punchier look, this would be a go-to option film. It’s especially fitting for summer lighting, too.
Having the chance to shoot both 35mm and 120 versions of this film was great, too—I appreciate the color consistency between the formats, and I think they could be used alongside each other for different effects. I have a bias towards the 120 format since I tend to prefer a cleaner look and this larger format tames the grain a bit without getting rid of the distinct overall aesthetic. That said, the 35mm is a fun film and reminds me of shooting an extra gritty black-and-white negative film.
One of the peculiarities of Phoenix films in general, both the first and second generations, is the use of a purple film base. Or, rather, the lack of an orange mask on the film. This isn’t inherently a problem but may disrupt your workflow a bit if you’re already dialed into scanning or printing any other color negative films. When I brought the film to my local lab, even after telling them this is a Harman Phoenix film, the resulting scans I got were very lackluster and required me to re-scan the film on my own. This is a high-volume NYC lab that still processes hundreds of rolls of film per week, so results might be better at a smaller lab with more latitude to adjust their scanning settings—Harman does have pretty extensive instructions on how to adjust the settings for select scanning scenarios, but whether or not your individual labs have the time to follow this is a different story.
Scanning the film at home on a flatbed Epson 4870 scanner also proved to be trickier than desired since most scanning apps are, similarly, configured to scan color negative films with an orange mask. One of the workarounds I tried (recommended by Harman) was to scan the film as a slide film, invert it, and then pull the curves to reduce the green hues—this felt more manageable than letting the scanning software attempt to overcome the green casts with an automated or profiled negative conversion.
The next time I shoot this film, though, I think camera scanning would prove to be the best method for getting the truest colors and widest range without exaggerating grain or halation effects. Regardless of scanning or digitizing method, this is another step that would only get better with regular use—if Phoenix II is a regular film you shoot, you’ll invariably need to create a dedicated scanning profile and process to handle the unique design of the film.
My main takeaway after shooting a few rolls of Phoenix II 200 is that it’s great to just have a wholly new color film in 2025. Despite it not being a film I’d reach for every shoot, it’s a film that has a distinct look and feels very decisive in that sense. Version II of the film shows a commitment to the grainer, retro color film aesthetic, and it deftly walks the line between serious and fun—it’s a reliable and modern film that also feels nostalgic and warm.
