A couple of developers that will give you sharp grain are Rodinal, HC-110, Ilford Ilfosol-3, Tetenal Neofin Blau.
Plus-X reminds more than a little of Tri-X but with finer grain. If you like Rodinal, get some more of it. It's great with Plus-X and will give you a bit of grain. But a 120 neg from Plus-X has to be enlarged quite a bit before it gets obviously grainy no matter what developer you use. Its grain is actually quite fine.
As an ad hoc comment. Try Fomapan 400 and shoot it at EI 100 or EI 160. That enables you to stop down 1.5-2 stops and get the out of focus qualities you like. The film can handle it, and you'll get lovely negs. That film needs more exposure than most other ISO400 films I've tried to get any shadow detail, and plenty of grain. Since you're overexposing the grain will be enhanced a bit too. Looks fantastic in D76.
Plus- then you will be supporting a manufacturer who admits that making film is part of thier business model, unlike the folks who run Kodak, who just wish we would all go away. Foma rules!
I've switched to Plus-X for just about the exact same reasons. Tri-X is my favorite 400 film, but now that the days are brighter I can't open my lenses up. I also don't want to go to an ND filter because I use quite a few different cameras with different lenses; I'd have to buy about 20 of them :rolleyes:
I shoot Plus-X at 100 or 125 (sunny 16) and develop it in HC-110 dil B. I'm very happy with the results I don't pay attention to temp, which I probably should ...
Plus- then you will be supporting a manufacturer who admits that making film is part of thier business model, unlike the folks who run Kodak, who just wish we would all go away.
Would that be the same Kodak that, within the last couple of years, has showed its disdain for its film-buying customers by improving its Portra color negative film line and its T-Max 400 B&W film; by introducing an entirely new and--by all accounts--exceptional 35mm color negative film; and by offering that film in 120 to boot?
This sort of statement is tiresome and, frankly, idiotic. If you like Kodak's products, buy them. If you think Fuji or Ilford makes a superior product, buy that instead. Did Kodak discontinue your pet product? Get over it. It's not about YOU. The marketplace speaks louder than puerile statements on online forums.
Assailing a manufacturer for failing to "support" the [in many cases money-losing] products you like, then boycotting them when they do, is irrational and childish.
Kodak is second to none in my view. Their films and chemistry are top notch with quality control that is incomparable. I don't think I've ever had problems with a Kodak roll of film, and they have, as Mike says, tried to improve existing emulsions and even introducing new films in a declining market. That takes guts.
Foma films look lovely, but when you use them you will run the risk of all sorts of problems. Overly optimistic ISO rating, coarse grain (which I like, but others don't), 120 film that curls like a spring and it's blue in color which can make it deceptive to judge them on a light table, I get pinholes in the emulsion (on rolls that were developed in the same tank as Kodak and Ilford rolls that did not have them)...
But if you like your film to exhibit lots of grain it's the cat's meow, and it does indeed have a wonderful look to it tonality wise.
"Make good art!"
- Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera".
- Yousuf Karsh
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit".