I know I am a novice, but I would not trim or remove any of the jin, until the apex is where I want it first. Get the apex in the right position, and then look at how much of the jin needs to go. Remember, you can always remove it, but in this case, once it's gone, it isn't coming back.

Al

Excellent

andy

Al,
Thank you for this great thread. Not only are you able to eloquently convert your thoughts to words, but you were able to back it up with pictures and examples!

This thread is going to be bookmarked for sure!
Thanks again
Adam

Great thread, Al,

It's interesting to me that everybody seems to like the wide smooth curve of the lower trunk. I don't.
I wish the nebari started a few inches higher, making the curve less symmetrical.

Regards,
Attila

Jim,

Great analysis - thank you. I'm really learning a lot from this thread...

Best wishes,
Carl

Great post Jim,

seems like you are getting better every day.

Regards,
Attila

Al, your posts in this thread are great except that you are mainly talking about design, not artistry. Sure, good design is necessary for good art, and really good design sometimes is art on its own. When you combine good design, ideas, and emotion in a creative and compelling way, you are using your "artistry."
That said, I think learning good design while thinking about the artistic power of your designs will likely result in something artistic without learning any additional ideas about art. I've heard it said that once you understand what makes a perfect design, understanding art in general comes naturally. I think there is evidence for and against that idea on this forum. Design is very, very important, and it is sometimes so creatively original that it says something revolutionary about the way that things can look to us and is thus art. Otherwise, calling design art is like installing a window in the perfect spot on your wall and calling it art. Design is a craft, a science that every artist should be somehow skilled in (all good scientists are creative, believe me).

P.S. A really good design usually has some of that art stuff to it as well. I prefer to say that design and art are so closely related that good design requires a little art and good art requires a lot of design, but many say design is actually just a part of art that we try to seperate and cannot entirely, and you can come up with the other arguments. All in all, this is about semantics and definitions only. My point is that what Al is talking about is a fatally incomplete description of ANY sort of art, but a good and important description of the way in which the basic concepts and elements of design apply to bonsai.

eighten,
Do you consider the tree that Al posted to art? If so could you help the rest of us out a bit and tell us what about the tree and the design of the tree make it art? Or if you don't feel it is art only a very well designed tree, maybe some insight on what aspects of the tree you would alter or change to push it from a nicely designed tree to a work of art? I know for at least me this is where I have trouble making the distinction, and get a little lost.

Thanks for your insight
Adam

Attilla,

I wouldn't consider the curve symmetrical at anything more than a quick glance...

Al,

Great thread in that some folks are finally justifying their decisions rather than simply offering decisions.

In a painting course it was presented that the eye tends to start at the lower right quadrant of a canvas or picture and moves through the composition. I'm not sure that this is universally true or not or to what extent it applies to bonsai- pictures or in real life. I have caught myself initially staring at this exact spot when viewing paintings, typically only for a split second...

I am immediately drawn, regardless of origin, to the large negative space on the left. I deem the shari essential to pull my eye from this infinite pit and rely upon that jin to get it moving again.

One runs the risk with an insignificant crown of having the eye move off to the right into oblivion. Carl offered an excellent solution with which I agree.

To extend the canopy too much would be inconsistent with the tree's "Story" and take us too far away from all the "interest".

As for design and artistry. Artistry is achieved (only) through good design. I think probably only God can achieve artistry in spite of it.

I think this is artistic in the sense that it adopts one of the more common bonsai themes, perhaps not necessarily of any personal significance to Al, one of achievement and triumph over adversity and natural forces; Even with a "typical theme" form a bonsai perspective it attains it's personal imagery through Als' ultimate decision making- branch and pot choice...

I too would like to see 18 offer practical application of his knowledge to this tree rather than generic circular pontifications.

Jim Stone
TX

Well... let's see. Al's examples of triangles, lines to lead the eye, balance, etc., are good ways to begin evaluating the tree as art. If the design did not hold together, it would be hard for the viewer not to focus on ways in which the tree could be improved rather than any sort of artistic power.
So, if Al feels that this tree expresses something to the viewer; if he feels that this tree has some sort of profound beauty, than it is art. Is it good art? I would say no, because I don't find it to be particularly striking or powerful, and I don't find it evoke any particular emotion(s).
Why? As I think carl is pointing out, the placement of the jin on the underside of a bend is a little distracting and prevents the jin from having the emotional weight that it should. The foliage looks good, but is unremarkable. The nebari and potting do not suggest to me that the tree has a location in nature - it looks homeless to me somehow.
I would say that what has happened in the progression of pics is a tree that was not art and not a good bonsai has become (or has been planned to become) a mediocre bonsai and a mediocre work of art.
Now, looking at Al's gallery, the pictures are a little small but it looks like there is some pretty decent art and some real nice bonsai there, IMHO. In general, I would say that there are two basic ways in which a single bonsai can be good art (and when I say "tree" I mean the tree, the planting, the pot, everything together:

1. The tree has nothing that one could call a design flaw, and exemplifies good bonsai technique (which takes care of many issues of design such as uneven proportions, unnatural-looking leaves & scars, etc.). The tree also "feels like art" to a high degree. It is emotionally moving, it feels unique, magical, striking, vibrantly alive, etc.
2. Or, the tree is as described above, except that some rules of design or some rules/techiniques of bonsai have been altered from tradition in such a way as to subtract nothing and possibly add to the aesthetic and emotional beauty of the tree.

As I gain a greater understanding of the traditions and processes of bonsai, I will probably see new ways in which bonsai is artistically valuable. I am confident that the above two "ways" are basic enough to be only expanded and clarified, though.
I (or you) must ask, is there anything that I can see which could be removed, added, or changed about this tree that would make it somehow "better" to me? If not, does it seem unremarkable to me? If not, it is probably good art... to me. If I am a naturally talented artist or if I have studied art and have gained a deep enough understanding of it, it is probably good art to a lot of people, and that is the good art that art critics and museum patrons like.
Does that answer the questions?