Pushing Tri-X to 1600

[summicron1]

I've been doing this for some time, and have spoken about it glowingly here several times, but am I the only one who is still nagged with self-doubt because of the years-ago experience using the old tri-x and getting massive grain/contrast/crud?

So, before a trip to NYC I had to shoot another roll to test, to convince myself, and of course they're fine, as shown by this example, shot at this year's 3-D Con meeting of the National Stereoscopic Association in Salt Lake City.

This is Brian May, lead guitar of "Queen" (yes, tHAT Queen, the Bohemian Rhapsody/We Will Rock You "Queen") who is also a huge fan of stereo photography and always has been. His web site is www.londonstereo.com and he sells a really wonderful viewer for stereo cards.

It wasn't easy but I did get him to stand still long enough to get this, shot a 1/50 at 2.8 (lousy light in that place) with a Stereo Realist, tri-X rated at 1600.

 

[devaljoshi]

Nice. What did you develop with

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[Simonh82]

Glad that it turned out well for you. Tri-X does work well at 1600 in my limited experience.

Brian May clearly has may strings to his bow (or should that be guitar?). Rock star, PhD astronomer and now it turns out he is a stereo photographer too.