Elm Forest

This is another forest project with C Elms that i have going, i started putting together this forest 2 months ago, ive just removed some dead moss and replaced with new, all of the trees have been growing well these past couple weeks. there were many cuttings that didnt take, which is why you can see some even gaps at the back, those will be filled with more cuttings, im happy with how its progressing for now..the landscape slab is by China mist

From beginning to now:












The two main trees have been in my care a while now and they form the focal point of this forest



Ive learnt a great deal from this site in regards to forest plantings and have a bunch of great forest threads bookmarked, still a lot to learn though

This looks incredibly awesome man!
The only point I got is the tree with the fattest trunk. It draws away the attention away of the main tree in a really nice way, but on the other side it is aesthetically not as pleasing as it could've been.
On the little 'step' in front of the main tree there is space for another small tree, which would make the forest look more like a real one in my opinion.

Really love the way you show the progression of the forest.

Can I ask how old these trees are?

Thanks,

Tentakelaertje

Tentakelaertje wrote:This looks incredibly awesome man!
The only point I got is the tree with the fattest trunk. It draws away the attention away of the main tree in a really nice way, but on the other side it is aesthetically not as pleasing as it could've been.
On the little 'step' in front of the main tree there is space for another small tree, which would make the forest look more like a real one in my opinion.

Really love the way you show the progression of the forest.

Can I ask how old these trees are?

Thanks,

Tentakelaertje

Hi Tentakelaertje thanks for your comments and input, its not really necessary to have aesthetically pleasing trunk lines in a forest setting, just that you try to get a blend of differing trunk girths, in this forest i view those two at the front as the focal point and all the others follow. I do plan to get some more trees in, i agree there is a space at the front for a small tree, a cutting maybe..
Wish i could tell you how old they are, but i have no idea buddy, i just try to make them look older

I took an early morning walk through the forest today..






Its become somewhat overgrown since my last visit, i like it even more now

Tentakelaertje wrote:This looks incredibly awesome man!

Yes, excellent overall sight, but:

The only point I got is the tree with the fattest trunk. It draws away the attention away of the main tree in a really nice way, but on the other side it is aesthetically not as pleasing as it could've been.

To me, it draws away the attention away of the main tree in not a really nice way. Too fat and short compared to the others in my opinion, I think it breaks the harmony with the rest of the composition, as if the two main trees were competing to steal the show.

Hi Alain, i think the trees harmonize well, but everyone sees differently. there are no rules in this forest and there is no main tree, but there are two primary trees, the setting is in fact built around THREE primary trees and these set the tone for the rest of the forest.

this image is from the beginning of the thread, shows what i mean by the three primary trees, although the two right sided ones are more dominant



Im always drawn to the tree in the middle, the the heavy trunk on the right seems to bother some people, but i dont mind it one bit.

Hi again Bobby,

BobbyLane wrote:Hi Alain, (...) everyone sees differently.

Of course, and I hope you don't take my point of view too badly. I repeat that to me, the overall sight is excellent.

In fact, I almost added in my first post that since the forest looks like a grove growing on a hill, and because of the path which is more apparent in the first picture, there's a visual logic in the first, fat tree looking shorter than what I consider to be the main tree.

So, not only everyone sees differently, but one can also consider things from a different point of view, can't they?

Myself wrote:...I almost added in my first post that...

But de "gustibus et coloribus non disputandum", and I don't want to start an endless thread like "another one". I like your work (when it's not 90% carving ), but like many small enthusiats, I am of course "culturally" biased, or at least, influenced by what shaped my vision of bonsai.

In a natural forest the forces of nature would result in the trees leaning, bending, and branching in the same direction. Your go in all directions giving an uncomfortable feeling. I am curious as to why you chose to place your trees in this manner.

DougB wrote:In a natural forest the forces of nature would result in the trees leaning, bending, and branching in the same direction.  Your go in all directions giving an uncomfortable feeling.  I am curious as to why you chose to place your trees in this manner.

That's why I'm not so keen on the first fat tree:

If the main tree is the straight taller one, it can be logical: the other ones are searchng the light from under this one's canopy, but in my opinion, the first fat tree looks like an added piece.

I may be wrong...

DougB wrote:In a natural forest the forces of nature would result in the trees leaning, bending, and branching in the same direction.  Your go in all directions giving an uncomfortable feeling.  I am curious as to why you chose to place your trees in this manner.

Hi Doug, i think you are wrong here buddy....if they were all leaning, bending and growing in one direction, that would more indicate a windblown setting, a group of trees growing in close proximity of each other and in harmony, will grow in search of light and they will try not to block the others trees light. in this setting the smaller trees bend away in search of light, the primary tree grows tall while the second primary to the right only has a subtle lean.

I should also point out that this is a 'distant view' forest, meaning that  

A. The taller and heavier trees in the central area.

b. The smallest trees in both the foreground and in
the background.

c. The medium size trees between the shortest and
the tallest trees.

id like to put a couple small trees in the foreground but dont have much space, the cuttings ive planted have died off.

ps i used a few articles when putting together this forest/grove, there were the main inspirations

https://ibonsaiclub.forumotion.com/t8375-reborn-forest-murraya-sp

http://www.absbonsai.org/forest-plantings

http://www.bonsaimalta.org/resources/lectures/10_ch.pdf

AlainK wrote:

DougB wrote:In a natural forest the forces of nature would result in the trees leaning, bending, and branching in the same direction.  Your go in all directions giving an uncomfortable feeling.  I am curious as to why you chose to place your trees in this manner.

That's why I'm not so keen on the first fat tree:

If the main tree is the straight taller one, it can be logical: the other ones are searchng the light from under this one's canopy, but in my opinion, the first fat tree looks like an added piece.

I may be wrong...

A focal point can be one tree or a group of trees, in my design the three primary trees are the focal point. its just too bad i dont have a garden because, my ideal forest would be two or three times as big with maybe two or tree points of focus or canopies.

Also, in a distant view forest its the overall silhouette which is most important. anyone who has the time can read the links i posted....in depth, only then will you get an idea behind my design.
of course there is scope for improvement, but im happy with it for now.
a hill top grove is probably a more accurate description though, i agree...

BobbyLane wrote:

(...) I agree...

Cool, that's what I mean : there is no truth, only bits of truth here and there, but you can't come close to "your" truth if you don't pick up the scattered bits from others and try to make them match with your own picture...

I learn from what people here post, we all learn from others, even we don't have the same eye colours

I was actually planning to break this up, to make room for other projects, but it just looked so good today in the sun after a good drenching of water. so it remains for now and in the future, rather than break it up, i would just plant the whole thing in the ground as one being. i actually have some elms in the ground that could easily take the place of the fat trunk, but why bother

i'd much sooner run a shari down the full length of it, visually break it up...a wise man once said, "if something appears ugly to some, then just make it even uglier"

BobbyLane wrote:
i'd much sooner run a shari down the full length of it, visually break it up...a wise man once said, "if something appears ugly to some, then just make it even uglier"

Oh no, don't, don't! PLEASE D0N'T!

I mean, this is your thing, all right, but my feeling is that a lot of Brits nowadays tend to indulge into deep carving to skip other options. OK, maybe the "venerable trees" you can see around are damaged, crippled, almost dead trees, but to me a venerable tree is healthy and still strong in spite of the years.

This must be cultural : as a Frenchman of the Republic of the first generation, I perhaps can't see the beauty of the deliquescence of what some, as serfs can see in a monarchy  

If I were a tree, I wouldn't like to be kept up with poles and stitches and lime-sulfur. I'd rather leave room for young strong healthy trees, mature ones that still stand straight up, and I would hate someone trying to maitain me alive as a pitiful shadow of what I used to be when it's my time to go.

Bonsai enthusiasts the world over use carving to disguise, trunk chops, scars, rotten wood, decaying wood, saw cuts, chainsaw cuts etc etc on some occasions carving is used by many just because they like it or want to add some interest to an otherwise bland trunk, maybe you're using carving to divert the viewers eye from an imperfection on a trunk or an image. maybe they saw something in nature they wish to emulate, maybe they've used carving to enhance natural dead wood that was already present on a tree.
So its not just a UK thing, its all over the world.
You have no idea what you keep waffling on about.
Beginning to sound like a broken record and not really making any sense, because what you're bemoaning as a 'brit thing' is actually practiced all over the globe, for the same reasons i mentioned.

The fat trunk looks out of place. Another tree thats thinner and curvier would look better. I agree with all of y'all. Maybe ignoring everyone is the brit thing? Whatever the case, that fat one should go into another project. Its too heavy or somehow not in harmony with the others. But it is possible that trees grow that way. The fat one could just be older. But it would be cooler if changed.

No Eric, im just stubborn, i might wake up one day and want to change it, but for now it doesnt bother me

I do it my way too! Lots of folks dont care for my strangler figs. I dont know why. But there bonsai in training at my house. There yamadori so they wont ever be "perfect", whatever perfect is. My friends all like them and me too so Im happy with them. They think the trees are cool now. In two more tears they will be very cool I hope. At least there free, big bad weeds to most folks here. So I get them from coffee plants or from fruit trees, not the jungle. Its too hard in the jungle! Anyway I respect "I did it my way" more than most. I thought it was posted for comments. And btw, Ive always gotten aling with the Britts! Im decendent from Richard the lion heart and the kings of old Europe. Youd never guess that if you saw my place. Cheap and all about my way! Its made of tires. Talk about not caring what the people say.

man bobby, i hate to say it, but i gotta agree with the gang-up on fatty-fatty-boom-boom...
it just looks (to me) like it was growing for many decades before it decided to propagate the neighboring off-spring...

but i gotta respect stubborn as i can be the exact same way... for better or worse and usually the latter

[quote="BobbyLane"]

DougB wrote:...a group of trees growing in close proximity of each other and in harmony, will grow in search of light and they will try not to block the others trees light.

actually trees are consistently competing for light... i believe "harmony" exists with-in every single tree, but in a group setting i dont believe there is much consideration for their neighbors... natural selection and all that.

and btw, i feel bad offering a dissenting opinion of someone's work that i usually really really dig...

I believe two or more trees in a forest growing in close proximity can live in harmony, especially if they're of the same species....

i was reading this article the other day, which gives more insight into this, so i believe this to be true. the next time im out in the woods ill be looking for signs of this myself.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/30/world/europe/german-forest-ranger-finds-that-trees-have-social-networks-too.html?_r=0

HÜMMEL, Germany — IN the deep stillness of a forest in winter, the sound of footsteps on a carpet of leaves died away. Peter Wohlleben had found what he was looking for: a pair of towering beeches. “These trees are friends,” he said, craning his neck to look at the leafless crowns, black against a gray sky. “You see how the thick branches point away from each other? That’s so they don’t block their buddy’s light.”

Before moving on to an elderly beech to show how trees, like people, wrinkle as they age, he added, “Sometimes, pairs like this are so interconnected at the roots that when one tree dies, the other one dies, too.”

Thank you for pointing out the article about "The Hidden Life of Trees".That book will probably reiterate and expand some of the ideas in "The Secret Life of Plants".

I pre ordered a copy myself off amazon, but the english version of the book The Hidden Life of Trees: What They Feel, How They Communicate--Discoveries from a Secret World won't be out until sept.

BobbyLane wrote: (quoted from the article) “These trees are friends,” he said, craning his neck to look at the leafless crowns, black against a gray sky. “You see how the thick branches point away from each other? That’s so they don’t block their buddy’s light.”

man, the romantic in me would love to believe that to be true, but the realist in me says that large branches dont grow close proximity to a neighbor due to lack of light, preferring instead to expend the energy in a less competitive direction for better return on its investment.

but this is one of those cases where i would rather be wrong than right

It would be cruel to say these two aren't buddies

I like that nobody has noticed this forest/grove has an 'even' number of trees, 8 to be precise, its said in the rule book that an even number looks awkward, but since nobody has mentioned it i guess it works, however.. the big tree seems to have diverted every ones attention away from this small detail.

Can i just say, virtually anything is possible in nature....its amazing what different minds see, because each time i look at the image, im drawn to the central tree, no its not thickest, but i think the fact its at the highest point its where i look first. the big tree also is helping to provide depth because its closer to the front than the central tree, that is a feature of the planting. you take it out and you also lose some depth. from above the three primary trees are forming a scaline triangle with the far left tree further in the background than the main two. maybe if you can forget the concept of just one primary tree or focal point which is bigger and badder than the rest and take on that two or three trees together can be a point of interest, maybe thats why i think the big tree fits and others are seeing differently, sorry if im waffling