Tri-X at 400... Wow

[Pete B]

Shouldn't make a jot of difference. I often use a Sekonic Digilite F meter too (I'm holding it right now).
So measure the light falling on (so the white cone points at your camera) the emerging detail or the part you want a hint of density (black bag in this case) and then stop down 2 stops so you place the emerging detail in the toe of the curve.

I understood what you did with the reflective Spot meter and why you adjusted to make the black 2 stops under exposed, but I don't understand why you would do the same with an incident meter. Surely there would be no need to underexpose to the same degree? That suggests the reflected meter reading from the black bag is the same value of the incident meter? I'm just trying to understand.
Pete

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Pete,

Under constant lighting, it's very unusual for shadows to be more than 3 stops down from a mid-tone, so 2 stops down gives generous exposure.

Cheers,

R.

 

[grapejohnson]

kandaci by scottkessler, on Flickr

Tri-X in Rodinal
Finally! Thanks for the tips everyone, I've finally nailed the look I wanted. For some reason I thought Tri-X wasn't that good in Rodinal until I saw some of your examples. Less agitation and better metering make a huge difference as well.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Great Scott!
I think from that image you've cracked it, exposure and agitation help the Rodinal/Tri-x combo achieve it's full potential.
The people who think Tri-x in Rodinal equals football sized grains are ones who haven't been on the journey of discovery you've gone through.
If I rate Tri-x at EI250 meter correctly and don't over agitate the results are similar grain wise to D76.