Is there any actual use for background images?

Question

I'm having trouble with some background images. Basically, I'm of a different opinion than another contributor as to whether certain background images enhance the profile. Eventually, profile manager just told me to go away. But that's not what this post is about.

It got me thinking - is there any actual USE for background images (something other than just preference)?

I have read many things on background images, and it's almost always about some problem: "how do I disable background image", "example of poor ... background image", "how to suppress ... when printing", "poorly tiled ... image", "too busy...", "too dark...", "gives me headache...".

In some instances, the same image provokes one person to say it makes the text pop out, where that image provokes a different person to say it's very distracting from the information or has some other problem.

So I'm looking for any more objective reason to use a background image that adds value to the profile beyond someone's preference for flashy colors or filling blank space (as it's clear that such preference is a bit polarizing). I'd like to be able to embrace a good reason.

I didn't find an answer to this from reading the numerous prior questions about these.

Comments

I find them to be a distraction.

Answer 1

When I first joined WikiTree, I thought background images were a creative adornment to the profile, but after 6 years of seeing all sorts of things as you pointed out (blurry, badly tiled, distracting or visually busy, etc) I have changed my mind. A subtle background color or image seems fine, but a gigantic, blurry airplane that's mostly blocked out by the profile contents looks ridiculous and adds nothing to the profile appearance. I use them very sparingly now and have removed many from my earlier profile creations.

(I also have a pet peeve about people leaving the PDF swirly thing image as the profile image, but that's another story)

Answer 2

Hello Jef, there have been posts in the past about background images that are multidimensional, wildly patterned and colorful for WikiTreers who have visual issues. For the most part since this was written up about 3 years ago, I have noticed a reduction in the use of background images. There were recommendations for background patterns that weren't visually distracting and did heighten the information in the biography.

Personally, I hope to find 'something' relevant to the profile to add as a profile picture, a headstone, a photo, or some such thing to enhance the biography. On occasion, in addition to finding a photo, I come across a headstone for the person. Both are relevant to the profile. In this case, I will use the profile picture, then use the headstone for the background. There is a 'however' though. If the headstone or image is so large that one cannot even understand or appreciate it, I skip using that image for the background and just leave it blank. Some headstones, though, are small and clear enough that they actually do enhance the profile and fit well with the photo of the person...kind of a visual life to death photo story.

Answer 3

Hello Jef. I would not suggest the use of background images on every profile by any means but I do believe there are instances where they can add something to the overall effect.

I use a shamrock background for the leaders of the Easter Rising as I feel that is particularly appropriate in that case and to me at least make those profiles stand out from others in their family tree.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Collins-1984

I hope that background does not cause anyone any vision problems!

Comments

I don't think that particular background would cause any vision problems.  If you had had a cartoon shamrock repeated (tiled) over and over and over - that might cause problems.  I have a similar use on Tom Haywood https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Haywood-1619 - he was a cricketer, so I have used grass.  And another: Olivier Levasseur, the 17th century pirate - https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Levasseur-786 which has dark blue water.

---

Wow, I was tempted to chime in how much I can't stand background images, until I saw these, David and Ros. You've both changed my mind!

Answer 4

I use background images for my ancestors and other relatives on the profiles I manage. I do like the way I think they enhance the way the profile looks visually. I use different colors of solid or patterned backgrounds for different family lines. That being said, the policy says that while background images are allowed, if another descendant of the person profiled were to object to the background, I would have to remove the background. Help: Profile Aesthetics 

Comments

Please keep in mind that there are probably people who object but are not saying anything. I tried to object to one, and the profile manager got horribly defensive. Now I probably won't say anything any more.

A little bit the same with unsourced images where it's not clear if the uploader has permission/license to post, and the original can't be found. There's how it's supposed to happen, then there's how it actually happens. After some bad experiences, I'm less inclined to even say anything.

Answer 5

I appreciate the thoughts. I have, as I mentioned, read many prior posts and questions on background images, and I was hoping to discover some use more objective than someone's preference, not just recap those preferences. I haven't found examples in my quest that look like the value added by the background image could be assessed objectively.

The closest answer seems to be applying a style to some set of profiles that are logically grouped together, so they stand out better at a glance. That seems like an objective measure. For it to work, there would have to be a logical grouping of profiles, and a similar style would have to be applied to all profiles of the grouping.

Otherwise, I think any value in the examples I've seen is subjective. I personally don't think that a relevant photo (picture of a document, picture of a headstone, portrait, etc) really adds value to the profile as a background image. There is almost always a different way to present the photo within the profile that doesn't drive possible contributors into their corners.

Comments

The problem with using a background for a group of profiles is that all profiles can be grouped in multiple ways, so reasonable people can disagree as to whether it makes sense to use one particular grouping as the determinant for the background.

---

That's a great point.

Answer 6

Backgrounds are like stickers and are decorative not functional. The guideline for adding/removing them should be the same as for stickers - ie, "[they] should not be included if [anyone who has contributed to the profile] does not want them there." Rules on Adding and Removing Stickers