|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
| Forum | Gallery | Weather | Journals | Links | Webring | Wiki | NEW:Shop |
| Articles | Opinion | T.O.D. | NEW:Radio | Contests | Humor | NEW: Auctions! | Donate |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes | ||
|
| ||||
27-May-2007
|
#1 |
|
bonsaiTALK Craftsman
Join Date: Aug-2006
Location: west coast
Country: US
Posts: 67
|
progress of cotoneaster, mapl group, cascade cedar and a new maple
pics are of one of my very first trees every styled, cotoneaster. its under a year in training, original larger nursery stock. it's a varigated cascade variety. im thinking of wiring the main branch into a lower position, but would greatly appreciate comments on restyling options.
the deodor cedar is also one of my very first attempts at styling. i've increased the vertical drop of the apex within the last 8 months or so. i originally was goingt o make it into an informal upright, and again any styling options or virts would be great. the maple is new, waiting for trunk size to increase, which shoudl be relatively quick for this variety ( 3 more years or so) , and branching seems of good size. im assuming that the best route woudl be to simply just let everything grow out., and worry about structure later after trunk size... but should i start selecting out at least some of the branches? thanks again for any suggestions |
|
|
|
Sponsor Message
|
progress of cotoneaster, mapl group, cascade cedar and a new maple |
|
Forum Sponsor
|
|
|
27-May-2007
|
#2 |
|
bonsaiTALK Master Craftsman
|
The cottoneaster has to be in a taller deeper pot. it should have root stability and this will only be achieved by letting the roots grow downwards a bit which they cant do in a shallow bonsai pot.They need to grip more soil.
The maple i would start thinking about the branching now it cant hurt. they tend to grow very straight and if left you might have several branches gowing straight up which will make your life more difficult later on when it come to wiring. Just my thoughts! Andy |
|
|
|
|
27-May-2007
|
#3 |
|
Bonsai Barry
 
Join Date: Dec-2004
Location: Santa Maria, CA
Country: USA
USDA Zone: 9
AHS Heat Zone: 3,4
Posts: 1,195
|
The cottoneaster would be more interesting with more variety of branch sizes and with more movemente in the branches.
If the grove were mine, I'd bunch the trees into two groups. There is a lot of information available about tree placement is group plantings. I like the maple. If it were mine, I would worry about branch placement if I were trying to add more girth. I'd plant it in the ground or a grow box to speed up the process.
__________________
Bonsai Barry "Our talent lies in our choices." |
|
|
|
|
27-May-2007
|
#4 |
|
bonsaiTALK ArchMaster
|
The maple grove needs a bigger pot, (ALOT bigger--like three times the size of the current one) not only to insure good root growth, but to uncrowd the composition and give it some space to work visually.
|
|
|
|
|
31-May-2007
|
#5 |
|
bonsaiTALK Craftsman
Join Date: Aug-2006
Location: west coast
Country: US
Posts: 67
|
Andy, the cottoneaster is actually very stable in that pot, it was very very rootbound in a 1gal nursery conatiner and went straight to that little one with no problems. Every single millimeter of the container is filled with roots, and the plant is plenty stable… so stable I didn’t even need to wire it into the pot. Later on, I eventually want to move the trunk to the far left of the container, and possibly into a round, more shallow container. And uh… if I get what you are saying “which they cant do in a shallow bonsai pot.” Is wrong… the plant is stable because of its dense root structure, and if what you are saying is true then it wouldn’t be possible to keep plants in bonsai containers at all… or am I missing what you are saying?
And on the maple, I was thinking of starting to select some.. but this variety doesn’t grow straight up, its more of a bushy spreading fashion, though it does get vertical growth, its not straight up like a regular palmatum. With that said.. still think I should start selecting ? and if you do… which ones? ( which was kind of the point in me asking if I should select some… to get the answer of which I shoudl select…) thanks again for you comments and suggestions. Barry, could you elaborate on yoru suggestions for my cotoneaster? Which branches to make smaller, where to add curves, maybe a virt or just a general description on what you think needs to be done.. its hard to get the point of what you think a good progression would be with you being so vague. And hmm.. didn’t know it was a rule they had to be bunched in groups… I suppose I could see more of a grouping if I had more trees in the planting, but with only five, I still kind fo did loosly group them, (two in front, three in back, not exactly though). I wanted more depth to the planting. Rather than simply a set of trees on the right and set on the left or whatever…. If you get my point. And im confused on your recommendation on my single maple.. you are saying that I DON’T need to worry about branching placement at all until I am satisfied with the trunk? That’s kind of the standard, and I was asking though if I should start selecting branches now because one, this plant has lots side branches almost as thick as the trunk, of course I’ll step the container size up next repotting to a larger container with a light fluffy organic soil to speed up the trunk thickening. ( as per recommendations for the fastest growth by the maple nursery owner) Rockm, it may look like a small container, but its not. These trees were just planted right from nursery stock last winter. So bare in mind to take into account some possible height reduction to the canopy and overall leaf size reduction along with better ramification. Again, whats with this root growth people think they need… there is more than enough from what I planted them to grow new roots and root hairs. If there wasn’t, they wouldn’t have budded out this spring and grown 6 inches each since. I can see, looking on at the upper areas of the plants where it seems they may be crowed, but really it’s just the large leaves of the truncatum that are throwing off your eye. Once they are reduced over a number of years, and the plants possibly shortened a little, I doubt a larger container for only 5 trees would make a better composition, though elaborate some more with a virt if you can. I would think a laregr container would simply make the trunks look out of scale. I chose that container because of the small trunk sizes on the trees. Though again, further elaboration and examples would help me see what you are getting at, Thanks again for the comments and suggestions Appreciate it guys |
|
|
|
|
31-May-2007
|
#6 |
|
bonsaiTALK Artisan
|
I think what Mark is saying about the maple group planting needing a bigger pot is true. Forests/groves are usually in longer, wider shallow pots to give the impression of "landscape". My caffeine hasn't kicked in yet so hopefully that makes sense. I've attached a quick virtual to show what I'm trying to say.
Bill |
|
|
|
|
31-May-2007
|
#7 |
|
Registered FedEx Sender
 
|
Mark wasn't stating a "rule." The problem with the composition is that it is too evenly spaced to look natural. If you placed three on the left or right, slightly closer together, and two opposite, also closer together, you would find a much more natural look. Of course, we aren't suggesting the two groupings be a long way apart, just a little gap.
|
|
|
|
|
31-May-2007
|
#8 |
|
bonsaiTALK Master Craftsman
|
Dude, what i am saying is that i have never seen a cascade (which i believe you said you were planning) in a pot like that. If the roots take up the whole pot then where is the soil(joke by the way)! Anyways cascade rules is where i was going. i never seen a decent cascade in a 'regular' bonsai pot (which it appears to be in now), not saying it hasn't been done or cant be done, just that i have never seen it. If you reread what i wrote it says that cascades are in deep pots for a reason, to develop the roots in the method that i explained... Im not saying that a plant cant be stable, all of mine are and they are in regual pots.
Last edited by AndyWilson : 31-May-2007 at 01:07 PM. |
|
|
|
|
2-Jun-2007
|
#9 |
|
bonsaiTALK ArchMaster
|
"Rockm, it may look like a small container, but its not. These trees were just planted right from nursery stock last winter. So bare in mind to take into account some possible height reduction to the canopy and overall leaf size reduction along with better ramification. Again, whats with this root growth people think they need… there is more than enough from what I planted them to grow new roots and root hairs. If there wasn’t, they wouldn’t have budded out this spring and grown 6 inches each since. I can see, looking on at the upper areas of the plants where it seems they may be crowed, but really it’s just the large leaves of the truncatum that are throwing off your eye. Once they are reduced over a number of years, and the plants possibly shortened a little, I doubt a larger container for only 5 trees would make a better composition, though elaborate some more with a virt if you can. I would think a laregr container would simply make the trunks look out of scale. I chose that container because of the small trunk sizes on the trees. Though again, further elaboration and examples would help me see what you are getting at, "
Yeah, it is a small container. Too small to adequately display a forest, even if the heights of the trees were reduced by half. Negative space is just as important in a forest composition than the space occupied by the trees. Without space for the trees to "breathe" the composition simply looks like a bunch of trees in a pot, not a forest. The clunky pot is also too deep for such thin trunks. Also if you're set to develop the apex and trunks, such a small container will lengthen that development time by years. You've also got to work on the spacing between the trees. It's much to uniform and none of the trunks stands out. Forest plantings have to have focal poin trees, or they wind up looking like a tangled mess. Here are some examples of the use of negative space in forest plantings Second photo from the bottom--trident maple: http://www.bonsaihunk.us/pic/nat/nat10.html Ficus forest: http://www.fukubonsai.com/5a3a.html European Beech forest: http://www.ncarboretum.org/Horticul...ages/lo2562.jpg Trident maple forest with diagram: http://www.gnobs.org/ |
|
|
|
Linear Mode
