Yeah, my panties have been wadded up, but it's because I'm asking for simple answers to questions that I firmly believe everyone with some experience developing B&W can give a reasonable answer to. No, I'm not expecting a prophecy on B&W developing, but let me ask it this way:
You have always developed film A, with developer B, for X length of time, with Y agitations for Z period of time, and have been happy with the results.
Now, what will happen if one of the variables (X, Y, or Z) (film and developer are the constants) is altered in some way? If A, B, Y, and Z are left the way you've always done it, but change X, what changes could result? Yes, there is (or can be) more then one answer, but having those answer can help someone figure out a cause for a problem they may be having.
In other words, let's say a roll you developed showed more grain then you usually get, or that is normal/expected with that film and developer. Some variable must have changed to cause the increase in grain. Well, it's the same film we used last week, and it's the same type of developer, so what is the most like culprit(s) that could have caused the increase in grain? I have a feeling that if I called up my old high school photo teacher, he would say something to the effect of "most typically, increased grain is caused by 'variable 1' or 'variable 2'.". Then I would at least have an idea of where the screw up happened.
Doesn't even have to be a screw up. Could just be 'I want more/less contrast/grain/etc. from this roll, what do I alter?'
I think Matt understands what I'm trying to get across, and he presented it in a better format. I just thought a troubleshooting list for developing could be helpful. I guess I was wrong.
Okay, here goes...
Part of your problem getting answers to your questions is that the answers you are looking for are over-simplifications to a very complex system of interrelationships between film, exposure, development, processing techniques, etc., etc. If you Google on "photographic tone reproduction," "sensitometry," or even "Zone System," you'll see just how huge the bodies of literature are for these areas. It just isn't as simple as you want it to be.
Second, your questions are based on premises that are often not accurate or concepts that are fuzzy. An example of the first is "correctly exposed" (Mark addressed this well above). An example of the second is "contrast," which I'll address now:
The term contrast is used commonly to describe a number of different things in photography. Among these are: subject brightness (or luminance) range, the total density range from film-base-plus-fog to the densest part of a negative, the contrast gradient (determined by a couple of different methods) to which a negative has been developed to, the contrast gradient of a photo paper, the density range of a print... You get the idea. To expand a bit, though: You might say "increasing development increases contrast," but a sensitometrist would never be so inaccurate. S/he would say that increasing development increases contrast gradient/gamma. And, I can reduce development from "normal" by 50% or more, to what a Zone System practitioner would consider N-3 or N-4, and still end up with a negative with too much overall contrast to print well on grade 2 paper - because the subject brightness range of the scene was too great. Conversely, I can increase development from "normal" and end up with a flat negative that needs a high-contrast paper grade - again, because the subject brightness range was very small.
Oversimplification is a trap and can prevent one from learning the nuances and complexities needed to masterfully practice your craft. While we all need to start somewhere, I really think that what you are trying to do is actually a detriment to those wishing to learn basic black-and-white development techniques. Much faster progress can be achieved by understanding a few basic interrelationships; exposure range to negative density as a function of development for example...
So, in the spirit of avoiding "oversimplification," here are answers to your questions:
1. Developing for times longer than recommended, results in _________________.
Increasing development generally increases the "contrast" of a negative. More specifically, it increases the contrast gradient. Overall contrast is dependent on the relationship between the exposure range on the film and the amount of development. Since "recommended times" are for average scenes, increasing development by a certain amount may give you a negative that is too contrasty to print easily, or it may give you one that is just right, or even one that is too flat. Keep in mind that development can be increased by other means than increasing time. A higher temperature and increased frequency of agitation also increase the rate of development.
2. Developing for less time than recommend, results in ________________.
Decreasing development generally decreases the "contrast" of a negative. Again, we're talking contrast gradient here, not overall contrast, which is dependent as well on the subject brightness range/range of exposure on the negative.
3. Increased contrast in a negative is achieved by _______________.
Here we're getting into "fuzzy-concept territory." If by "contrast" you mean "contrast gradient," then the answer is, "by increasing the development." However, with the same development I can capture various contrast ranges by photographing scenes with different subject brightness ranges... I think you meant the former, but really, your question is not clear.
4. Decreased contrast in a negative is achieved by _______________.
The opposite of the above answer. The same fuzzy-concept problem applies.
5. You can increase apparent grain by _______________.
A false premise underlies this question: I assume you want us to say that more development results in more grain. This simply is not true and has been proven not to be true. Furthermore, graininess is highly subjective. Finally, graininess is mostly a characteristic of the film, and related to film speed. So, one real answer is: If you want more grain, shoot a faster film and enlarge it more. Still that is an oversimplification. Some developers soften the grain by dissolving and redepositing silver (D-76 straight), others do not.
6. You can decrease apparent grain by ___________________.
Of course, this has the same problem as the question above. Larger film, less enlargement, using a silver-solvent developer instead of a non-solvent developer will all reduce the appearance of grain. Changing development times with the same developer will really not do much in this department.
7. My (properly exposed) negatives were really dense. Next time I should ________ my developing time.
Again, you are presuming a scenario. Yes, IF your negatives were well-exposed and they
consistently end up with too-high a contrast gradient, you may be overdeveloping. If it's just a one-time thing, then maybe it was a subject with a high luminance range that is the culprit. Generally speaking, however, too-dense negs are more often the result of poor (over-)exposure.
8. My (properly exposed) negatives were really thin. Next time I should __________ my developing time.
And, the opposite of the above: If your negatives are consistently too flat, but you have shadow detail, then you need to increase development time.
9. Too vigorous agitation can/will result in _________.
Increasing agitation will increase the rate of development. This is not in itself a bad thing. Finding an agitation scheme that gives you evenly-developed negatives is the key. Too-vigorous agitation can result in surge marks and areas of increased density where the turbulence is greater. If you have these, you should reduce the vigor of your agitation.
10. Too wimpy agitation can/will result in _________.
Less agitation = slower rate of development. The danger with less-vigorous agitation is uneven development (especially bromide drag), which can be remedied by increasing agitation frequency and/or vigor. Again, finding the right combination is often not easy.
11. Agitation at intervals more frequently than recommended would result in ___________.
...a faster rate of development. If you adjust time accordingly, then there would be no problem assuming you had even development. Constant agitation in rotary processors and trays is the norm.
12. Agitation at intervals less frequently than recommended would result in ____________.
...reduced agitation, which in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. There are many who swear by stand or semi-stand development with minimal agitation. Again, time has to be appropriate and finding a scheme that results in even development is not always easy.
Now, change your shorts and get on with things.
Best,
Doremus