I have John to thank for getting the Barnbaum method of dealing with drydown posted, these modern computer things baffle me!?@*
Ken, surely you did not think that I would post without speaking to Bruce, we had a long chat before I decided to post and he was quite happy to help as we both know.
My method of dealing with drydown involves testing the papers by making a print with the wet higjlights as I want them to be and then making a series of prints with reduced exposures from 8% to 12% in 1% steps and then comparing those prints dried with the original wet print. The dry print that matches the wet print is the % drydown that I use thereafter. The main difference in our respective methods is that I view my wet prints under a 150watt lamp at 4 feet. I don't necessarily think that everyone should do that, it's just the way that I have done it for over 25 years but I do believe that we have to be consistent. If you are happier with less illumination that's fine. No matter whether it's called drydown or wet up it's a known fact that fibre prints do get darker as they dry. Neither Bruce or I am wrong we just do what works for us.
Ken, your comments re burning in using a compensating timer, I think you are geting hung up and being too precise. I use the program mode to carry out the amount of burning in that is required and as I'm keeping the card moving at all times during the process to protect those areas that I don't wish to darken it's clear that the degree of precision you allude to is unlikely to be achieved. You have seen my prints and also the amount of burning in I do and I think you will agree that the tonality is good with highlights that sing. I think that the Stop Clock Pro compensating fStop timer complete with drydown facilities as well, is the best piece of equipment in my darkroom, but I would say that because some of the features were included at my request.