From my experience, photos of unevenly lit scenes are usually the most difficult to print in the darkroom due to the significant differences in the negative’s density between highlights and shadows. In film photography, as opposed to a digital workflow, one needs to preserve shadows instead of highlights. When approaching an unevenly lit scene, it’s better to adjust the exposure for the shadows to make them denser on the negative; otherwise, the shadow areas will be transparent and lack detail.
This metering method, of course, leads to overexposed highlights, which makes the highlights on the negative even denser. A denser negative blocks more light from the enlarger head, so we need to increase the exposure time specifically to ‘burn’ those highlights into the print. However, simply increasing the enlarger’s exposure will overexpose the shadows on the photo paper, causing the print to turn out too dark.
Finding the right technique 🔗
There are multiple solutions for this problem, which suit different situations depending on the particular photograph. I started with a simple dodging technique, where I covered the shadows with my hands for a calculated interval of the exposure. This works fine when shadows are located near the edges of the photo. To dodge shadows in the center of the frame, I improvised a dodging tool by attaching a small circular piece of cardboard to a bicycle spoke. For landscapes with an unobstructed horizon line, it is easy to darken the sky by masking the land with a piece of cardboard. It is important to constantly move your tool of choice slightly to avoid a visible transition line in the print’s tonality.
When printing on multigrade photo paper, it’s possible to adjust the print contrast by filtering out parts of the light spectrum with multigrade filters. By lowering the contrast and increasing the exposure time, one can balance the shadows and highlights more evenly, revealing detail in the highlights without making the shadows too dark. There is also a more advanced split-grade printing technique where the paper is sequentially exposed through two different filters to achieve total control over the tonal range.
I was happily printing photos for an entire year using only my dodging tools and a stack of multigrade filters, for which I designed a carriage system and an under-lens holder. For some reason, I never considered making a burning tool, which is the inverse approach to solving the problem of dense highlights.
The idea is to mask the entire projection except for the highlights. The easiest way to make a burning tool is to cut a small hole in a large piece of cardboard and then shine the light through it for an additional exposure of the highlights. Just as with dodging, the hole’s position should move constantly to avoid distinct tonal separation on the print.
The 3D-printed burning tool 🔗
While a piece of cardboard works just fine, sometimes it’s nice to have different types of masks. Recently, I came across a brilliantly designed model of a burning tool with interchangeable masks and decided to give it a try. Since it makes sense for the base to be as large as possible to cover the projection more easily, the author designed it with their 3D printer’s build plate in mind. I had to scale the base and all the masks to 78% to fit my Bambu Lab A1-mini build plate, and I have shared that printing profile here. While this means you have to keep the burning tool closer to the enlarger head, it isn’t a major issue. This model is brilliant because all the masking tiles securely snap into the base with a locking system, eliminating the need for any external tools to keep them in place. Additionally, if your 3D printer supports multicolor printing, the model is colored in black and white. The white top makes it easier to see the projection, while the black underside reduces potential reflections.
I’ve used it in seven darkroom sessions so far, and it’s an absolute game-changer! It helps me print photos with relatively small, dense highlight areas where dodging wouldn’t make sense because there would simply be too much to cover. I still try to reduce the contrast first, but if that results in a muddy print, I now opt for burning. For the burning process, I use a Grade 00 filter to avoid darkening the areas around the highlight if I accidentally burn over them. Afterward, I swap the filters to the desired grade and complete the full exposure.
The example 🔗
Here is a print I made with a single exposure. When photographing this scene, I exposed for the shadows in the alley. It was sunset, so the sun was only hitting the building at the end of the alley. When doing a test strip, I tried to gauge the exposure for the area where my subject, the policeman on the left, stands. After fixing the print and turning on the lights, I was disappointed by the lack of detail on the far away building. It’s almost invisible. Additionally, some areas on the buildings in the foreground looked slightly brighter than I wanted. I gave it another try, but this time I used the burning tool. I have marked the areas here that received extra exposure. The arrows show direction of the burning tool’s movement. It’s unrelated, but the negative’s placement in the carrier is slightly shifted as well.
The second print looks much better. The distant building is visible now, yet it remains brighter than the alley, which creates an illusion of depth. The foreground buildings are slightly darker, ensuring they don’t distract the viewer from the alley and the policeman.
So if you are like me and for some reason hesitate to cut a hole in cardboard, give it a try; it may reduce your frustration with those tricky negatives.