Japanese Red Pine

I've had this tree for 6 years. I wish I had a picture of the tree when I acquired it. Other then a very nice trunk, the tree was really quite ugly. with all the foliage found at the ends of 4 ramrod straight branches. The initial styling involved building the canopy from 2 branches (after putting some severe bends into them) and jinning the remaining two. Here is a picture from a year after the initial styling.

Here is a picture of the tree two years ago. The canopy is filling in nicely, but I'm not too sure about the benefit of the cascading branch to the overall design.

Here is the tree a year ago. The canopy is developing nicely, but there is still something about the design that is bothering me.

Well, this is the tree today. I think this is definite improvement on the old design. I do feel the nebari from the original front, with that nice deadwood and spread, was very nice, but the overall movement of the trunk more then makes up for it. Similarly, that ungainly cascading branch seems to fit into this style in more convincing fashion. Comments are always welcome. Thanks for looking.

I'm a big fan of AKA Matsu, because you just don't find many of them in bonsai form. There is just ONE up at the pacific rim bonsai display. I have two started from seed and nothing I'd photo and post here. I do think th needle length has improved over the time you've had it and you've got a very nice tree coming.

When i studied with Kyoshi Seke to learn japanese garden design, Part of my education was keeping his garden pruned. a masculine garden, I mostly worked on JBP but always appreciated the soft red as something more refined to work with and less abusive on the hands and arms.

Keep up the good work!

I like the new front despite the nebari...agree, trunk movement much nicer Dave. Also like the branch hanging down. Very nice material and styling!

Thanks, guys, I'm glad you like the tree and new front. And yes, I'm glad I didn't cut that branch the other day...I grow more fond of it with each passing day.

I don't know Dave, for me it's kind of hard to tell if like one or the other front better. Please, it is not just because, I wanted to post before but i could not find the right words. I agree you are doing a very good job.

Since there have not been many drastic changes made to the tree you still have all the options.

Keeping the cascading branch is a must in my book. So...the trunk line is nicer on the second front...yes...cascading branch fits better in the composition- to me very much the same. Shaping of the canopy is tidier but could be achived for either side...and than the more appealing base on the first front....

Am I missing something here. Again, not trying to degrade your work, I LOVE the look(s) of the tree and appreciate the detailed work you have put in...you know, to me (just one of the people here) is debatable.

Thank you for showing the tree, it is very nice.

Gašper

Gasper, thanks for your post. Each front, in my estimation, presents the viewer with quite different stories and emotions. The original front, with it's full canopy, broad nebari, and relatively simple trunkline, gives me the impression of stability and vigor. There is nothing wrong with this front, but it seems a bit boring. The new front, with it's reduced canopy, greater trunk movement and flow to the tree as a whole seems to create much more tension and excitement. At least, that's how it makes me feel.

Dave Murphy wrote: Each front, in my estimation, presents the viewer with quite different stories and emotions. The original front, with it's full canopy, broad nebari, and relatively simple trunkline, gives me the impression of stability and vigor. There is nothing wrong with this front, but it seems a bit boring. .... At least, that's how it makes me feel.

Thank you for a very understandable explanation of your vision... and I have thought about a long term effect of your choice... ....but boring
how does that make me feel

I think there seems to be a bit too much foliage for the size of the trunk. You have a crown here that's around 10 times the diameter of the trunk at first branch. I see something more femine and literati in there, with
A serious cutback and reduction of the number of branches and foliage mass. In this case, the "pocket", interior curve branch would be a great feature, and not unnatural.

[img][/img]

Ryan B wrote:I think there seems to be a bit too much foliage for the size of the trunk. You have a crown here that's around 10 times the diameter of the trunk at first branch. I see something more femine and literati in there, with
A serious cutback and reduction of the number of branches and foliage mass. In this case, the "pocket", interior curve branch would be a great feature, and not unnatural.

Ryan, thanks for the post. I agree with your assessment of the trunk and canopy...my goal is to create a much lighter canopy that highlights the trunk with its' nice bark and movement. A few things I've considered here. When I restyled the tree last month, I removed maybe 50% of the foliage and I'd be reluctant to remove more at this point. This tree has grown well in the south SO FAR...its' health is paramount to me so I will be very judicious with any aggressive pruning or bending. Also, the needles are a bit overlong and messy in their appearance. I'm hoping smaller needles will help to tighten up the canopy and reduce its' overall weight in the image.

abcd wrote:[img][/img]

Than you for taking the time to create this virtual. I think it represents a very good option for this tree. Still, I really like the falling branch and will keep it for now.

Dave Murphy wrote:Still, I really like the falling branch will keep it for now.

I agree

The tree will look like it's missing something without the falling branch. Good job so far.

Mike

I'm not advocating for one way or the other, but without the big falling branch the next branch further up could be brought down in a similar fashion for a similar effect. This branch might be a little more in scale with the rest of the tree and would define rather than disrupt the left hand negative space. The tree will be nice either way and it's a decision that can be put off for twenty or thirty more years! I'm just happy to see a Japanese red pine!

i vote remover the brach on the inside curve. its usually never a good idea to have a branch on the inside curve it takes away from the movement of the trunk

Great tree... as far as that main cascading branch, I like it. I actually like both versions, with it and without. However, it is not close enough to me liking it without it that I would remove it. I would take about 10-20 years to think about it.

Rob

I vote you keep the branch.

Thanks to all those who have responded recently. The branch is too important to lose, I've decided, and I have no plans to remove it at this point. The tree has been recently re-potted into a smaller, heavier oval that, I feel, fits the tree quite nicely. I'll be sure to post new pictures shortly.

Update?

It continues to do well in North GA.  It was re-potted into a nice Bigei pot this spring (first picture), and decandled 5 weeks ago, and is currently pushing its second flush of candles.  I apologize for the poor quality pictures.

Really coming along nice. Just need a few years additional ramification to create foliage pads, and you will have a very nice tree.

I love the movement on this one Dave. Looks really good.