Anatomy of a Shot: Soap Bubbles, Pebble and a Square

This is the anatomy of the process of creating an image for Utata's Iron Photographer 91 project. The elements to be included were:
1 - soap
2 - stone(s)
3 - square format
I tried to challenge myself to create something that would be outside the realm of obvious compositions - e.g. using pebbles and round bars of soap in some visually appealing composition with soft light. I first decided to get away with the soap bar entirely - and instead to use soap bubbles. No particular reason other than the fact that I had one of those soap bubble producing gizmos around my house. Still fits the theme and it allows me to do something weightless. From weightless, the concept evolved to suspended - I'm going to suspend a pebble (also laying around my house from a previous trip to the beach)- kind of like a stony fish in an aetherial square of bubbles.
Having the concept nailed, I started thinking about the execution. First - I needed the appropriate background. Black was the obvious choice - I wanted the pebble to stand out. So I set up my black muslin background, lit the suspended pebble from both sides with SB-28s and produced a few test shots. The strobes were snooted to prevent spill on the background and lens flare. The pebble had a nice translucence to it - so I wanted the expose it to make that visible. With my D700 on a tripod and outfitted with a cable release, I started blowing the bubbles. The first few shots revealed a disturbing fact: while the pebble was properly exposed, the bubbles were just not showing very well against the black background. They were just catching the reflections from the two strobes - and they looked like eyes of creatures lurking in the dark.
To solve the bubbles problem - I needed some white to be reflected off their edges for definition. So I needed some white just outside the frame - easily accomplished by changing the background muslin from black to white. I still needed the background for the shot to be black, so I placed a sliver of black fabric on top of the white, just for the portion visible through the viewfinder. With the new background arrangement in place, I also needed to change the lighting scheme. To get even edge illumination - I decided to place one of the strobes behind the background - to create that wraparound effect often used to illuminate wine glasses and the like.
After some fine-tuning, the remaining work was to fire enough frames to get a composition I was happy with. I could not control the flight path of the bubbles - although after enough trials I became quite proficient at shooting most of them in focus and close to the pebble.
The post production involved just minor retouching (sharpening, increasing contrast) and of course, the square crop.

High ISO - who needs it

With the release of the Leica M9, I came across some discussion threads debating the performace of the said camera and its nominal weakness in maintaining good image quality when shooting in low light (at least as compared to the Nikon D3/D700 sensor). Someone was making the point that the benefit of low light high IQ is not for everybody. After all, people went a long time shooting comparatively slow film for all these years and still created good images.

My take on this is that everybody needs a camera with the highest low light performance they can afford. Sensor light sensitivity (also know as ISO, after the organization that used to rate film 'speed') is just another lever to pull for a photographer. Everybody will encounter some low light at some point or another. Why? Because that's just the nature of available light. Having good low light performance equipment will make you pull the camera and shoot in situations that you would not have considered suitable for capturing before. Even in 'good' light, long telephoto focal lengths and optimal lens apertures usually require longer exposures, so having the ability to change the ISO to shorten the exposure time with no significant hit to image quality is very desirable.

Digital photography is all about controlling the way the light hits the sensor. The more levers we have at our disposal to accomplish that control, the more artistic freedom we have to do more with our equipment. There are tradeoffs with good low light performance - usually camera bulk, which in itself is a compelling argument for giving up some low light ability. However, with today's technology, a take everywhere, shoot in every light condition camera is not available (pocket cameras just can't gather enough light in less than perfect light). Which side of the tradeoff one takes is a matter of personal preference and shooting habit.

The image attached to this post was shot at ISO 3200 with a Nikon D700 camera. The choice of ISO was part of a decision making process that allowed me to handhold the shot (ultra wide angle of view helped as well). The quality of the image is not perfect (there's some noise, especially in the darker areas), but it is much better than what could have been accomplished by pushing film.