I'd choose the full backsplash. I like white subway tiles (super cheap at Lowe's!) and beadboard. I wouldn't use beadboard around the stove or sink because of maintenance issues. It looks great elsewhere, especially if you have it as wainscot elsewhere in the kitchen!

Well it depends on the kitchen!

I love a good tile backsplash. A full stone backsplash is sort of modern and can look good (it's certainly easier to maintain).

I do have a 4" backsplash on parts of my kitchen because I had to have SOMEthing there. I have a slab elsewhere. I totally missed the tile on this kitchen somehow.

I prefer a full backsplash. A 4 or 5 inch matching granite one reminds me of prefab bathroom vanities. However, while I have a full tile backsplash around most of my kitchen, I do have a two sections that are only 6 inches of tile with a matching pencil tile. This where the counter and base cabinet extends beyond the upper cabinet - one of those "how do I end the tile" places.

I guess my kitchen is kind of odd. We did a 4 inch laser etched galaxy black granite "liner", topped with a crackle glazed rope deco tile for our backsplash. It ends up being about 5 inches I guess. It is surely different and I like it. That said, we did a tiled full backsplash behind the cooktop with the rope tile as a border and I rather wish we'd gone higher behind the sink too.

In general, a regular 4" backsplash is often considered by many to look dated and cheap. They were a favorite of builders during the boom because they cost much less than a full tile backsplash. Most high end kitchens seem to do one continuous backsplash from counters to cabs, whether in tile, beadboard, slab, or whatever.

Personally, I'm not so entirely sure that a 4" backsplash would shame my home, destroy my social life and reduce me to talking to imaginary friends who would pretend cook with me. Maybe. But I just wanted to let you know what the going perception is.

I would only do full backsplash or none at all. I just don't like the look of a short backsplash. My granite guy offered to give me the 4" backsplash for free and I refused it. It would have been an easier install for them which is why he offered it.

It really depends on your circumstances.

We went with a 3" backsplash of the counter stone, but not without due consideration, given the "dated and cheap" connotations. We don't have any uppers on our one main counter run, so there was no logical place to stop tile short of the ceiling. Tiling half the room and leaving the other half painted seemed off kilter. Tiling the whole room seemed unnecessary. So I have a kitchen with no tile whatsoever.

The 3" splash was chosen for complicated reasons involving walls not quite plumb, changes in floor thickness, and new window trim with slightly varying sill heights.

@Marcolo -- So far it hasn't made us social lepers. I'll let you know if our friends start whispering about it behind their hands and then refusing our invitations.

I'd choose a full backsplash in a natural stone; something less expensive than granite.

I am one of the people that thinks the 4" looks "builder grade". I much prefer the look of full tile. (Something that compliments your countertop) Granite countertop and full granite backsplash can be a bit much.

Ditto to bh401, but I can see a circumstance like Mnerg where you might kinda be forced into a shorty. I prefer a tall man. Oops, I typed that.

From what I can tell, full tile backsplashes in kitchens are a fairly recent trend (with some exceptions -- see the 1928 bungalow thread -- though that was more a tiled room than a backsplash per se). When your corners aren't quite square, it makes countertop installation easier if there is a 1" thick backsplash to cover any gap between the countertop and wall. That said, I agree with the pp's that the short backsplash currently looks a bit dated. That might change in time. After all, I don't know anyone in real life who has put in a new kitchen with no backsplash at all, but I have seen some beautiful no-backsplash kitchens on this forum... maybe that will be the next trend. [grin] I haven't decided about the backsplash for when/if we redo our kitchen. We are old enough and have been in our house long enough to take the long view, so probably we will do something that's either relatively timeless (i.e. white tile) or easily changed.

Thanks everyone! Good points!

I can see both given various circumstances.

Amy

I don't think there is a blanket rule. It would depend on the style you want, the stone being used, your budget, how straight your walls are, etc...
Do you have any specifics, inspiration pix, or drawings?

I think the short little backsplash makes a nice ledge for dust and grease. And when you wipe it, you mess up the paint.
At least I did anyway in the rental house we had ;)

We did both...tiled from the countertop to the upper cabinets, but did a very short (1.5") granite backsplash where there were no uppers. I like the very short granite splash because it blends into the counter so it almost looks like there's no splash, but it still makes me feel like I've done a better job of protecting that back wall from big spills.

I've had the short backsplash for about 20 years and hate it! Collects dust and grease. When we redo, we'll definitely have tile or glass start at the counter and go up to upper cabs.

I hate my awful, tacky 4" backsplash, so I am going with a full natural stone backsplash in the new one. However, due to a complete lack of cabinet and counter space, no one has ever actually SEEN the icky 4" backsplash. Every inch is covered by canisters, a panini maker, two Cuisinarts, a spice rack, a knife block, fat lady cookie jars, and a stand mixer. That must be why dh and I are so popular--our shame is hidden! LOL.

I asked our GC if the leftover 1/2 slab would be enough for backsplashes. He said no, unless we did 4" and painted the walls. Uh, BTDT.