Originally posted by grispie are you sure you got it right this time? ;-)
I see your point.. choosing background more carefully allows you to use whatever f stop one needs/wants..
Actually, looking at some of my pics, i have done that (albeit a bit unconsciously..)
Coming from a studio training, you actually choose your back ground. There was a rack with about 10 different backgrounds that pull down like blinds and you pick the one most suited to what you're doing today. The first thing I look for is subject isolation through colour , contrast or tonal values. Isolation (in my mind) thought narrow DoF is the fall back position of the desperate. You didn't scout your location and find a place where the background would augment your photos.
Colour contrast -subject is stands out because it's colour is different. This shot also employs the textural difference between the subject and back ground, textural contrast.
Tonal Contrast Subject has different tonal values than the rest of the image.
Shallow DoF is probably the least effective in some ways, because it looks less natural. My eye tends to dart yo different parts of the frame. IN a narrow DoF image the photographer has decide what I'm going to look at and obliterated the details, making choice for me that i may or may not appreciate. Personally, I prefer a more natural rendition.
I would certainly argue an interesting back ground with the subject separated by toal values or colour contrast is more interesting.
The problem with shallow DoF is it destroys all context, and for many images the context is part of the story.
Unloading canoes on Galeairy Lake after an overnight trip.