I have a long way to go...

[Drew Wiley]

Instead, make your squiggles on a piece of frosted mylar, more specifically smudged pencil and neocreosin dye. Do it over a lightbox in register with your original neg as an automatic dodge/burn tool.

[Lenny Eiger]

Or, even better yet, use large format film to dial in exactly the amount of contrast you want in your image and make an amazing print without burning and dodging. I also used a two bath developing system for the darkroom and that helped a great deal... Then I moved over to platinum and burning and dodging got really hard. I had to get the neg right in the first place. I don't think going crazy like this helps.

For the most part, in the History of Photography, people worked with one camera for 10-15 years at a time. There was a lot of natural lighting... Of course, then came Gene Smith and he had all sorts of lighting equipment, multiple cameras and lenses, a boatload of stuff. If you only look at Gene Smith, you can imagine there is a lot to carry around. However, Robert Frank didn't do that, or Caponigro, or Phil Perkis, I could list out dozens more...

I learned all of this stuff. I worked at a b&w lab for commercial photographers, and I printed for Avedon for a short while. The over-burned-and-dodged look is usually more of a commercial look. It isn't my favorite, and it's usually driven by negs which are overdeveloped (like Avedon's). Some people love it... and everyone has a right to their preferences...

If that's your idea of what's great, by all means go for it. However, it's by no means the norm, or what's "required". Everyone has what they want to do in the darkroom, on the computer, whatever. Remember its how well you connect with the stuff in the image that's important.

Lenny

[Mark Sawyer]

Or, even better yet, use large format film to dial in exactly the amount of contrast you want in your image and make an amazing print without burning and dodging.

Having exacting control over the exposure, development, and lighting of a negative isn't about eliminating burning and dodging, it's about having information in the highlights and shadows that you can bring out with burning and dodging while maintaining a nice tonal scale.

...Of course, then came Gene Smith and he had all sorts of lighting equipment, multiple cameras and lenses, a boatload of stuff. If you only look at Gene Smith, you can imagine there is a lot to carry around.

"Available light" is any damn light that's available! ~ W. Eugene Smith

[Cletus]

Also need to consider the possibility that these elaborate printing maps are likely for very large exhibition prints, upwards of 20x24. I've seen an Avedon exhibition before where ALL the prints were 40x60, making it much easier to envision printing in accordance with the "map". I highly doubt such complicated manipulation could realistically be done on a little 8x10 or 11x14 print. IMO.

I also have to agree that taking the time to get it right in the camera and processing very carefully, as many of us strive to do, goes a LONG way toward eliminating excessive work under the enlarger. Pt/pd is a great teacher for this, as has already been said here.

[Drew Wiley]

Maybe we're onto something .... Jackson Pollock might have originally been a darkroom assistant!

[Lenny Eiger]

Having exacting control over the exposure, development, and lighting of a negative isn't about eliminating burning and dodging, it's about having information in the highlights and shadows that you can bring out with burning and dodging while maintaining a nice tonal scale.

It might not be for you. This is all just opinion. My best prints were made without burning and dodging. That is also opinion... It all depends on what you are trying to create.

Lenny

[Jim Noel]

In one of Avedon's books, Evidence, IIRC, that exact photo is shown alongside the finished print (a gentleman and his two sons).
The final print shows that the printer followed his instructions very closely.

A plus of the digital age is that these adjustments can be done quite well in Lightroom, without the intimidating red grease pen notes.

But you still end up with a digital print!

[Ari]

But you still end up with a digital print!

Not if you make a digital negative!

[Mark Sawyer]

It might not be for you. This is all just opinion. My best prints were made without burning and dodging. That is also opinion... It all depends on what you are trying to create.

Indeed, it's all just opinion and approach. I'd point out that that even the photographer most famous for his control over exposure and development of the negative, Ansel Adams, relied heavily on burning and dodging for creative control. (W. Eugene Smith went even further, bleaching back highlights with potassium ferricyanide.) No right or wrong, but my thought is that you're surrendering a great deal of creative control by eschewing burning and dodging.