Dodging and burning

[larfe]

Hello,

in this video of Tim Rudman making a print in his darkroom:



he is filmed while dodging a long narrow strip at the bottom of his print with a small dodge tool going back and forth during the exposure.
While it is not the first time I see a printer doing it this way, it does strike me as a rather 'hit and miss' technique since it is effectively not possible to calculate exactly how much a particular area will be dodged for i.e. the exact opposite of f-stop printing.
I've also seen printers burning through a little tiny hole in a not so dissimilar (guesstimate?) manner...

This in fact probably explains why he brightens this particular area later with bleach, but I just wanted to find out from others if I was missing something here?

Thanks in advance.

 

[scheimfluger_77]

I think what you are seeing is the subtle difference between gross control with a dodging tool and a finer technique using selective bleaching. He spends a fair amount of time on this idea in his book, The Photographers Master Printing Course.

 

[Paul Howell]

With experience it is very possible to obtain fine control by dodging and burning in, but for very fine control, bleaching and masking. i

 

[larfe]

Mind you he also explains f-stop printing in his book.

It's just that what's in the video kinda strikes me as being the opposite of fine control. Say the part he's dodging need 1 stop less exposure, the whole strip in question is never going to receive less than 1 stop if he is wiggling that small dodge tool back and forth during the exposure.
Wouldn't it be better to hold a better shaped tool at a higher position an dodge the whole thing at once for the exact amount of time?

Just asking...

 

[Bob Carnie]

Not really , I think he is dodging back the area with the tool to give detail where he want to see it, then you is bleaching this area to raise any highlight within that area which has the effect of local contrast increase.

It is the exact opposite of burning in a highlight area with the #5 filter to darken any dmin areas within a highlight that then as well creating a local contrast increase.

Though I am not speaking for Tim of course but I suspect this is what is happening here…. Over time the darkroom worker gets use to the tools and I dodge exactly like the video shows.. I would imagine
Tim is counting the main exposure off in his mind and knows exactly what he is laying down in tone… takes a lot of practice.

 

[MattKing]

There is a certain rhythm one gets into when one has done a lot of dodging and burning. The more you do it, the more repeatable your results become.

A moving, small dodging tool will usually result in a more subtle transition than a larger dodging tool that moves less.

 

[RobC]

it's a skill requiring judgement you only get if you print print frequently. That's part of the joy of darkroom work. It isn't done by numbers. well some do it by numbers but it is like saying an painter should apply brush strokes by numbers. It ain't like that, its about intuition and feel for what is required unless you are producing many copies of a print but the first one tells you how to print the subsequent copies.

 

[larfe]

It's got to be Bob's explanation that makes the most sense i.e. dodge so you can see the detail and then to the bleach...

 

[Bob Carnie]

It must be pointed out that bleaching is just one little weapon in a printers arsenal- some use it some do not- there are dozens of ways to lay down tone in various areas- Tim is showing one way he likes to work.

I use bleach more to raise highlights a bit and am very cautious with it as some printers rely on it so much that its very obvious in the print.

 

[larfe]

Sure, I personally don't mind obvious things but I rarely do local bleaching and prefer to bleach the entire print in ferri.

 

[larfe]

As a side note, this would probably not work so well on a lith print since the ferri kills the highlights... unless one wants split tones

 

[Bob Carnie]

/

As a side note, this would probably not work so well on a lith print since the ferri kills the highlights... unless one wants split tones

Not in my experience… one of the worlds greatest printers Mike Spry defined the lith print with Anton Corjbin years of work- he did a lot of bleach…All lith printers in the ninety's looked to Mr Spry and other
London printers for guidance..myself included.

 

[larfe]

Bob I've heard that before and went to check some images on google. Sure the prints are super high contrast but have very little colors, save for few exceptions, which I think supports my theory of 'the bleach kills the highlights'.

I won't mind being proven wrong though...

 

[Maris]

It is possible to be rather precise with dodging. Here's a couple of techniques I use:

By making a dodging tool of a particular size, say 3 inches, and continually gliding it over part of a (say) 8x10 image the result is about a 30% dodge. That's enough to lighten a foreground without causing weak "milky" tonality in shadow areas.

Another way is to divide an exposure time, 15 seconds for example, into three exposures of 5 seconds each. Then do a "hard" dodge with an appropriately shaped card for 5 seconds followed by two 5 second undodged exposures. Net result is again a 30% dodge approx. that's easy to repeat (or modify) if necessary.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello,

in this video of Tim Rudman making a print in his darkroom:



he is filmed while dodging a long narrow strip at the bottom of his print with a small dodge tool going back and forth during the exposure.
While it is not the first time I see a printer doing it this way, it does strike me as a rather 'hit and miss' technique since it is effectively not possible to calculate exactly how much a particular area will be dodged for i.e. the exact opposite of f-stop printing.
I've also seen printers burning through a little tiny hole in a not so dissimilar (guesstimate?) manner...

This in fact probably explains why he brightens this particular area later with bleach, but I just wanted to find out from others if I was missing something here?

Thanks in advance.

OMG I've never seen master printer such as Tim wipe wet print with a paper towel.I'd be scared to scratch the surface.

 

[bvy]

Very enjoyable and educational to watch a master at work. I hope, however, he never has to call an ambulance for me.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Hello, in this video of Tim Rudman making a print in his darkroom:
he is filmed while dodging a long narrow strip at the bottom of his print with a small dodge tool going back and forth during the exposure.
While it is not the first time I have seen a printer doing it this way, it does strike me as a rather 'hit and miss' technique since it is effectively not possible to calculate exactly how much a particular area will be dodged for i.e. the exact opposite of f-stop printing.
I've also seen printers burning through a little tiny hole in a not so dissimilar (guesstimate?) manner...

This in fact probably explains why he brightens this particular area later with bleach, but I just wanted to find out from others if I was missing something here?

Thanks in advance.

Well, in my not-so-humble opinion, there's a lot you are missing here.

First, whether one uses f-stop timing or percentage timing or simply works out the time for whatever print one is working on at the time, the accuracy is no different from method to method.

When making a run of one print, I work out dodging and burning (I use percentages of total print exposure since I find that easier than f-stop timing) and then am able to repeat it fairly exactly and consistently from print to print. I use little wands and holes plus cards, stencils and cutouts in a range of sizes. My metronome is counting seconds for me (as is Tim Rudman's) and I know exactly how long to hold my dodger/burner over my print. In fact, the "moving wand" dodging technique gives me more creative choices since I can hover a little longer over specific areas. The whole process then becomes much more like a dance; a performance with expressive possibilities, than just adding or subtracting light. And, I would submit, I can better calculate exactly how much a particular area is dodged or burned working this way.

Bleach is a different animal than dodging or burning. Sometimes I'll dodge an area and then bleach the highlights in it up a bit. Sometimes I'll burn an area and then bleach back some of it. In other words, bleaching is not a "fix" for inadequate dodging, rather an expressive tool of its own.

While the print shown in the video is not my favorite Rudman print, his methods are refined, time-tested and precise. And I'll bet they are repeatable too, to the extent any "performance" of a print is repeatable.

OMG I've never seen master printer such as Tim wipe wet print with a paper towel.I'd be scared to scratch the surface.

Ralph,

I've used paper towels, cotton balls, swabs and soft cotton cloths to apply bleach, etc. to prints as well as for blotting excess moisture away before bleaching. In my experience, these things tend to scratch less than the Japanese calligraphy brushes I use for bleaching. These can leave minuscule scratches if one doesn't make sure the bristles are bent a bit touching the paper.

Best,

Doremus

 

[larfe]

Very eloquent explanation again but it does mystify me.

I'm gonna have to try this for myself.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

... my theory of 'the bleach kills the highlights'. I won't mind being proven wrong though...

I don't know about lith prints, but bleaching judiciously on normal silver gelatin papers is a great tool. Bleaching can be done to extreme, sure, but with a weak bleach and a practiced hand, bleaching can do things other methods just can't. That little extra zip in the clouds or snow, brightening the white letters on a sign, whitening teeth and eyes, all while not appreciably affecting the other tonalities. As with all manipulations, bleaching is best when it cannot be recognized as such. You don't have to bleach to blank paper-base white at all.

Doremus

 

[larfe]

tried earlier without too much success. I think I would be able to manage with proof prints though...

 

[Old_Dick]

Doremus

Just curious. How much time (on average) do you spend on a new print? It just appears you must have a ton a patience.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Dick,

When I print a new negative, I already have a "proper proof" contact print. I make them for cataloging purposes, but they also give me an indication of starting contrast. If I'm lucky, I get the contrast right the first time and the dodging, burning, bleaching isn't so difficult. In that case, making a run of prints, from start to finish would likely be about 3 hours or a bit more. If the print is difficult, I could be back at it for two or three 6+ hour darkroom sessions. It just depends. Most prints fall in between somewhere.

I'm making art, not records, so spending 4-5 hours making a print is insignificant. I'm not in a hurry. To be honest, however, most of the time I spend making a print is time evaluating what I've just done and deciding what to do next. Two prints in a 7+ hour darkroom session is good for me.

@larfe,

Practice makes perfect. Bleaching, along with dodging and burning, takes time to learn, especially if you're using trial and error to teach yourself.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Sirius Glass]

This is not something one can learn by reading; one must learn by doing.

 

[MattKing]

This is not something one can learn by reading; one must learn by doing.

I'm going to disagree.

This is something that one can learn best by reading and then doing, and then re-reading, and then doing some more, and then .....

 

[Sirius Glass]

I mean that you can generally learn about dodging and burning by reading, but one must actually do it and have successes and failures to really learn it. The doing gets one to the point that they can reproduce consistent results. I find that when I read something new, I have to go into the darkroom work with it for a while. Then go back and read more, and back into the darkroom.