If a photographer has control of the darkroom variables, it is much easier to make artistically successful choices in the darkroom.
And if a photographer understands his/her darkroom processes, it can be rewarding to experiment, because the results of the experiments are more likely to be understood, and any "happy accidents" are more likely to be repeatable.
Experimentation ... experimentation... like Thomas B and Matt above have suggested. I can't really suggest anything for that combo, but I've found this photographer who has gotten it right:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zgodzinski/3447881393/ - pushing HP5 to 1600 and developing with R09-rodinal for 24 min, at 20C. I dont know how he did it without lowering Temp.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zgodzinski/3443036818/ -same here.
He looks like a very accomplished photographer, and he latter changed to TriX-Rodinal combo.... exceptional work...
Nothing against the photographer and his abilities, they are in 120 and do not show grain as much. To see what a developer can / can't do use it in 35. It will reveal all it's strengths / weaknesses.
Here is a few 35mm HP5 shot at ei 3200. This would be 1:100 semi stand at room temp. Pretty boring skill wise.
I was developing for acutance.
So earlier in this thread I was trolled over scanning negatives and not printing and somehow that made my opinion of Rodinal irrelevant. Well I ran into a cheap Beseler 23C II yesterday, and after a couple of tests I got this to come out (apologies for the dust bunnies; this really was intended to be nothing more than a test run).
first darkroom print! by magnus919, on Flickr
35mm Tri-X in Rodinal (I don't have notes but I'm about 75% sure this would have been a 1:50 mix, following Massive Dev Chart time/agitation), printed 5x7.
viridari, welcome to the club.
I have to be honest here for a second.
You can't get over the fact (hallucination?) that you got "trolled". The trolling in question was me correcting you from spreading blatant misinformation. You we're actually recomending a very bad technique (stand development) as a magical measure to drastically reduce grain while, in truth, it is comon knowledge that agitation has no effect on grain. Never.
As far as I'm concerned, the trolling was more about you spreading misinformaion then me correcting you.
You now have a darkroom. That's good. That's a nice first step. Now may I suggest that you go out shooting more serious subjects. Ansel Adams didn't get famous and respected by shooting and showing off pics of junk food restaurant interiors and people strobed in their face. That's if you want to be more technical and to sound more knowledgeable when you give advice.
The second step is to start using proper FB paper.
Wow, isn't that an attitude.
I will think of you every time I develop stand with reduced grain.
NB23, I didn't ask you for a critique of my subject matter or of my development techniques. Please go play in traffic.
I'm perfectly happy with my photos, printed, scanned, and otherwise. Your suggestions fall on deaf ears, as your opinions are rude, unwelcome, and fly in the face of results that plenty of us stand developing types are more than happy with.