[Wet Thumb Forum]-The Background, negative space?

[Robert Hudson]

A month or so ago I started a thread about foregrounds and raised the question about bare foregrounds. The focus of this discussion will be on the various ways of handling the background. This time I am not going to put forth any opinion of my own, and this is not a question of which is better, but simply the different approaches to the background, (all relating to plants)

The solid wall of plants
The partially open background
The fully open background

The solid wall approach is basically just that, the entire back of the tank is covered in plants, whether it be a straight line, terraced multi leveled, or cascading plants of different heights.

The partially open background when down right has a strong visual impact. Look at my examples and see if you agree.

The fully open background uses plants with a very low profile which puts a lot of emphasis on the foreground.

Here are some examples:

the solid wall









Partially open







Fully open




Any comments?

[Robert Hudson]

A month or so ago I started a thread about foregrounds and raised the question about bare foregrounds. The focus of this discussion will be on the various ways of handling the background. This time I am not going to put forth any opinion of my own, and this is not a question of which is better, but simply the different approaches to the background, (all relating to plants)

The solid wall of plants
The partially open background
The fully open background

The solid wall approach is basically just that, the entire back of the tank is covered in plants, whether it be a straight line, terraced multi leveled, or cascading plants of different heights.

The partially open background when down right has a strong visual impact. Look at my examples and see if you agree.

The fully open background uses plants with a very low profile which puts a lot of emphasis on the foreground.

Here are some examples:

the solid wall









Partially open







Fully open




Any comments?

[imported_locus]

All three have their place, it depends on the aquascape.

The dutch style seems to be largley dependant on the whole "wall of plants" thing, these tanks are not to my taste at all.

Amano seems to use partially/fully open backgrounds mostly although I have seen some tanks of his where no backdrop/black space is visible. In such cases plants have been used carefully to maintain a sense of depth.

I think that to not have negative space in an aquascape can be very boring and results in a lack of depth.

My favorite of the three is partially open - its like a glimpse through a forest.

[imported_BSS]

I still really like the looks of some of the taller stem plants and keeping a completely open background seems like too much work to me. I like the partially open background. The opening can be in the middle (my current layout) or sloping to either (or both!) side(s). I think it adds some nice height differences and makes things more interesting.

Then again, when I find the next cool plant and need a place to put it, that open middle could get squeezed out .

Still evolving in the aquascaping department...
Brian.

[imported_russell]

i myself use a partially open aquascape, but i really like the fully open. to me, it just looks more natural. the thing that keeps me doing the partially open is the love of growing huge plants. in my opinion, the fully open would be a dull tank to keep.

[lf11]

I personaly like the partially open background. To me it is just apealling to the eye.
Kind of like the the fully open, done the right way it would be nice.
I do not like the solid wall, it does not seem natural.
But then again if something is done really well and it looks good. I might like it more then the partially open.

[Robert Hudson]

Well Dutch aquascapes, which is what the first three are, are not meant to look natural, but visually appealing none the less.

Roger Miller used to talk about using negative space. I don't remember exactly how you define the term and put it to use.

[mrmag]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>

Roger Miller used to talk about using negative space. I don't remember exactly how you define the term and put it to use. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Negative space is commonly used in all mediums of art as a way to attract attention to another, more important element of the composition. This is done by leaving parts of the composition "empty or white"

The full background images are distracting to the eye because they do not give you a focal point in the foreground.

Go back through each photo and pay attention to the natural flow of your eye on the image. This is what Freeman Patterson calls "The Art of Seeing."

http://www.freemanpatterson.com/

All the aquascape photographers should familiarize themselves with this individual.

Mike.

[Robert Hudson]

So would you say any of these pics make good use of negative space?

[imported_Creature]

I would say yes. Any negative space in the background forces your eye to look elsewhere. Now, whether the rest of the display is pleasing to the eye is up to the observer. I really like the use of negative space, but I enjoy a garden setting that keeping many plants, tastefully arranged, really satisfies my creativity. I like the more natural approaches, but sometimes the lack of diversity eclipses my desire to see more color and texture. There is also the choice of fishes, which can either add or distract from the overall appeal of the aquascape. In this area, I totally enjoy the effects of a monotony of fishes in a natural aquascape as opposed to a carnival effect, that, to me, is synonomous with a beginner's tank. Steve Dixon's tank with the school of plain silver hatchetfishes hovering in the negative space in the background has always gained my attention and admiration.