Photo #44549 Click to Enlarge

For the most part, the larger and more massive something is the greater its visual weight is. Dense areas have a greater weight than areas that are sparsely populated. Dark areas are generally considered heavier than light areas. A textured area will usually grab the eye quicker than a smooth one.

It can get complicated in that there are really no givens here. What was heavy can become light.

A small white spot in a large black area would be heavy since the eye would pick it up rather quickly. A large void will always attract the eye no matter how dense the areas are around it.

We can use these things to balance our bonsai much in the same way we balance a scale. Forcing the viewer's eyes to see what we want them to see: that all-important focal point.

So now its your turn. Beat me up or explain it better ;o)

Here is a silly question. Did anyone see what might be the focal point in picture 1
BTW If you haven't figured it out yet, I didn't do the drawings. Carl Rosner did!

Attached Images

	pic1.jpg (37.3 KB, 175 views)
	pic2.jpg (9.4 KB, 144 views)

Well obviously the dark hollow in the trunk is a focal point, but to me the larger focal point is the branch that does not seem to fit the rest of the bonsai image. The branch seems out of place with the rest of the lines of the tree. Granted it is a good job of drawing, but maybe a poor job at designing. Of course thats an objective opinion.

nice topic....

Happy New year, Al

Bottom Right Branch then the hollow.

Irene

The hollow is supposed to be the focal point in the illustration. That is, as you said, the obvious.
Just curious though, just exactly what makes that lower left branch such a bad thing.
Why should it be changed. There must be a reason that the design is, as you put it, bad. What design element did it violate.

My eye was immediately drawn to the lower right hand branch. So I guess this could be considered the focal point as I see it. However this view would tend to make the overall composition out of balance.

Nice topic Ron (and nice drawings too Carl)!

You are correct as these are indeed points to ponder. I can't wait to see some of the replies. I'm going to be short and sweet and 'ponder' a while more before I come back and add anything else that comes to mind.

In attachment #1 I can agree that the knot hole may be the focus point. I can't agree that there are hard and fast rules to where this point may be but I can agree that there must be one for things to look right. Back to the knot hole - this may be a bad example for discussion as it's too easy. I can't say I like the idea of viewing such a feature dead on either. Sometimes a 'peek' is better than a full on view. I enjoy leaving thing to the imagination.

Say we have a nice tall bunjin tree with a sparse canopy and a slender slightly contorted trunk - where would the focal point be located? I have attached a photo of a tree by Jim Gremel - I love this tree.

In attachment #2 your point is well illustrated (can you draw a nice buttressed nebari "on" some of my trees Carl?) but I fear again it may not be the best way to do so. Perspective was introduced in this sketch along with the concept of visual weight. Closer things always seem to draw the eye in better than distant things. Foreground or background, downstage or upstage as we say in theatre. The lighter non textured trunk is somewhat in the background and the darker textured trunk is in the foreground. Where do you think my eyes went? I understand why this was done for illustration but I think separate examples may have been better.

Attached Images

dscn2657 copy.jpeg (26.8 KB, 76 views)

It didn't violate any rules that I can see except asthetics. This branch is:

Incongruis
without harmony
unbalanced

But... would replacing the branch with a copy of the left branch bring the subject into harmony? Maybe yes, but to what cost. So... maybe this branch adds:

tension
drama
fluid movement

Maybe thats what moves this tree to an artistic leval and not a cookie cutter? Interesting ehh?

While I won't even try to compare my drawing to Carl, I might like to finish those trunks and ask: now which trunk carries more visual weight?

Attached Images

balance.jpg (58.8 KB, 42 views)

It might be more simple to say that the eye is attracted to areas of constrast. This could be a white spot on a dark background (or visa versa). I think to a lesser extent it could also deal with textures and shape, but in art it usually seems to be contrast in lights and darks.

Please remember in this image the foliage is the same colour as the background, this "lightens" its visual impact. The blank foliage has no texture to entice the eye, very little visual impact at all. The one thing this drawing brings to the forefront is the dis-similarlarity of the lower left branch when compaired to the others. It appears to angle up 25+ degrees while the others appear to have level undersides. The "hollow" could be just a surface scar from a limb removal, but the detail adds contrast and thus "weight". The contrast and detail are what the eye focuses on quickly dismissing the simple (and visually boring) foliage pads.

Tomorroe I will do a virtual to show what I mean.

For me the bottom right branch is distracting. Reason is that it appears too thick at the end and it also has an upward turn at the end which then sits the foliage pad as a waiter carrying a platter.

Very unnatural and distracting to me. I found it was hard to keep my eye off that point.