Why not bright BG?

[NorthernFocus]

Very often we see comments/critique here on CiC regarding bright BG or bright objects in the BG. Well I recently took a couple of flower shots that I believe demonstrate, to some degree, why it is often recommended to avoid bright BG. As with any rule their are exceptions and I'm not suggesting otherwise. In fact I took the backlit shot specifically because I thought this would be a case when breaking the rule would work. Maybe not.

There are other differences in the lighting other than just the BG. But I thought these two shots are instructive. Click to open in the light box and toggle back and forth for best demonstration.

Nikon D810, 70-200mm f4 @ 200mm


1) dark BG; 1/500, f5.6, ISO400



2) bright BG; 1/1000, f5.6, ISO400

[Wavelength]

Excellent beauties......I think the background strokes in the first images is a bit distracting; so I like the second more...

[Geoff F]

Definitely the first one for me.

[Dave A]

My taste goes for the first image. It really stands out.

Dave

[Manfred M]

The first one for me too Dan. The contrast from the darker background makes the flower stand out a lot better than the lighter background in the second image for me.

[DanK]

I agree. the contrast between subject and background in #1 makes it better in my opinion

[Shadowman]

The second BG is a bit bright but there may be different reasons for doing a capture such as this, if trying to get some bokeh this type of shot might be attempted; thing is, now your lens will be critiqued.

[JBW]

seems to me that it depends upon mood and intent. this morning #2 for the softness is my choice.

[NorthernFocus]

Thanks for commenting, folks. It's always interesting to hear everyone's perspectives. My original interest in the second shot was simply to take a backlit shot. Had it been available I'd have done so against a dark BG. But the BG was a sunlit hillside covered in morning dew. Once I recognized that what I wanted wasn't going to happen I decided to try to take advantage of the star-speckled look of the dew. What is interesting is how the sunlit dew manifested in the bokeh. The large bright spots are actually tiny dewdrops reflecting the morning sunshine. By the time the optics have done with them they turn into huge bright spots on the image.

[rudi]

I prefer nr 1 Dan. Not only for the dark background, but maybe more for the position off the flower, that I find more appealing in nr1.

[Saorsa]

It isn't so much dark vs. light for me as it is cluttered vs uncluttered. In these two the first background seems cleaner with enough texture to complement the flower. The second is cluttered with light.

[IzzieK]

It isn't so much dark vs. light for me as it is cluttered vs uncluttered. In these two the first background seems cleaner with enough texture to complement the flower. The second is cluttered with light.

Exactly!!!!

[NorthernFocus]

It isn't so much dark vs. light for me as it is cluttered vs uncluttered. In these two the first background seems cleaner with enough texture to complement the flower. The second is cluttered with light.

So basically what Brian is saying is rather than avoid bright BG, avoid bright objects in the BG.

Which offers another learning opportunity. I posted the first two photos for comparison because they were shot at the same settings. Here is another backlit shot that was taken at 1/400s and f4. The PP is virtually identical except for lowering exposure by one stop in LR in an attempt to give this one the same starting point in overall lighting. We all know that wider apertures can help isolate a subject via making the BG "cleaner". Check out how much different the lighting looks when the bright spots are diffused into the bokeh.

3) shot at f4


2) again

[IzzieK]

Very interesting experiment, Dan...something to remember.