Contrast filters, dodge, burn. Advice on method for getting a specific result

[cerber0s]

I spent the evening yesterday wasting some more paper trying to achieve a good print. The two prints below are the result. I'm pretty happy with the second one, but would like to see if I can get back some detail in the blown out highlights, and maybe darken the column just a tiny bit. The first one has a pretty nice looking column, but is otherwise way too dark.

For the second one I pulled down the exposure time a bit and dodged the foreground for 4 out of 13 seconds. Both were made without contrast filters on Kentmere variable grade paper.

Now, If I'm happy with the foreground and whatever is behind the window in the second one, but would like to recover some highlights, should I try a split grade print, or a more careful dodge/burn? I have a set of filters that I can hold under the lens, so it's difficult to use the filters and dodge/burn at the same time. I really should practice this on my smaller papers rather than the big expensive ones, but that makes the whole dodge/burn process a bit fiddly.

 

[grain elevator]

Assuming there is actual detail in your negative for the glaring highlight, which is not a given in my limited experience, I believe this is an example where split grade will not change much: even if you burn with the softest filtration, it will affect the surrounding midtones a lot. So you can just as well do it with no filtration or that of the entire print. You can try just burning I'm the whole area above the window glass, that should be easier to do convincingly than doing just the culumn. Pre-flashing might help a bit. But I'm sceptical whether much can be done about the glare that will actually make it look better and not just a gray blob instead of white, because as mentioned, likely no or very low contrast detail there.

 

[koraks]

@cerber0s I agree with @grain elevator that pre-flashing might help in this particular case. Preflash to just below the threshold where density starts to form, and then burn the highlights to taste. The highlights will flatten out considerably due to the burning, without affecting the shadows much at all. The further burning will push the values down on the tonal scale to where you want them. It'll take a couple of test strips to obtain a starting point.

As always, there are several ways to get to an acceptable end point. And what's acceptable will vary across people and over time, so it's a bit of a moving target anyway.

 

[cerber0s]

Thank you @grain elevator and @koraks

I might have another go at it tonight, on smaller paper. I have a whole series of these photos. It was a theme of “lines and diagonals”. I shot it digitally but kept a Konica C35 with Fomapan 400 in my pocket, so I have some of them on film.

 

[koraks]

Sounds like a great exercise in many ways. Have fun!

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Agree with both previous posters. First check on the negative if there is actual detail in the burned-out highlights, and pre-flash to tone-down the glare a little bit. Pre-flashing will somewhat dull the whole thing, so you probably will have to either work with a higher-grade filter or do a little bit of split-grade.

Keep in mind you're dealing with a very difficult negative. In these lighting conditions, you will not be able to get both indoor detail and highlights that aren't overblown—not with the sun hitting a metal structure—if you are not using a polarizing filter.

I wouldn't worry too much about the blown highlights. Photographically speaking, in this case, whatever information they may contain is totally uninteresting, while the sun glare tells us about the circumstances and moment you took the picture. So it would be more a question of taming it a little (it is a bit harsh) than trying to retrieve something that adds nothing to your photo.

Cropping the photo (taking some off the top and a little bit on the bottom) would also help focus on the reflexion in the window, which is what I think might have interested you in the first place.

 

[Rick A]

Is there a reason you're not using contrast filters with multi grade paper? You can get better control if you use them, also slightly longer enlarging times to make B&D easier. Pre flashing paper only goes so far but it can help.

 

[pentaxuser]

Is there a reason you're not using contrast filters with multi grade paper? You can get better control if you use them, also slightly longer enlarging times to make B&D easier. Pre flashing paper only goes so far but it can help.

This would appear to be the reason: " I have a set of filters that I can hold under the lens, so it's difficult to use the filters and dodge/burn at the same time."

However I agree with you that using filters is an important tool It is worthwhile working out a method of placing the filter under the lens so hands are free for any dodging and burning required

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

I do much more split grading than single grade printing. Sometimes I need to dodge & burn in both of the split grades. It depends on the negative and what you want from print.

 

[cerber0s]

Is there a reason you're not using contrast filters with multi grade paper? You can get better control if you use them, also slightly longer enlarging times to make B&D easier. Pre flashing paper only goes so far but it can help.

Yes, what pentaxuser said. I just ordered a set of filters that are large enough for me to cut them down to fit the filter tray in the enlarger, but holding the filter under the lens while trying to create magic shadow figures with the other hand is too tricky.

I’m n this particular case, after seeing the test print, I choose dodge instead of filters. I will try filters tonight though, on the cheaper papers.

This would appear to be the reason: " I have a set of filters that I can hold under the lens, so it's difficult to use the filters and dodge/burn at the same time."

 

[MattKing]

Build a below the lens filter holder out of cardboard and painter's tape. Attach it wherever it works.
It won't be as easy to use or as elegant looking as a proper one, but I bet it will work better than not having one.
You can tell whether there is detail in the highlights and wat contrast to print it with by doing scrap test strips dealing with just them.
Once you have figured that out, you can combine the result with tests done for the rest of the image.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Try exposing the whole print as in the second print and then burning the top of the image as in the first print.

Burning is easier to control than dodging. And I don't see any need to change the contrast between the top and bottom bits of the print.