Scots Pine Progression

This tree has been worked on for about 15 years. Somewhere I have a phot of when I tried to style it as a much taller tree but it just had too many flaws. The photo series starts after it was reduced from about 24" to around 8". It's about 11"-12" now.
2010 before styling:

2010 after styling:

Fall 2011:

Fall 2012:

Photoshop removal of bottom branch:

very nice little tree. A question pops to mind though: Were you just lucky to have a side branch at that spot, or did you manage to get one there somehow? The tree seems quite old, looking at the bark, which is why I am surprised to see such young branchlet there..

I love the bark and movement of the trunk on this. Great branch development so far.

Nice little tree. I'd vote to keep that bottom branch though.

Very nice development of raw stock. The results are excellent and exemplary of the kind of work you are capable of.

And if you are asking for opinions I would definitely not keep the branch in question. I think that is clear. It is a lovely little tree with a very calming quality.
Mike

Those who think the branch needs removing, WHY ???
This is not a right or wrong thing... Just curious ???

See to me I understand why one might want to remove it...
Seeing that it is an inside branch, which kinda feels odd.
But, I gotta say... with it removed... It doesn't do any favors either
It looses it character, at least for me... Personal opinion, I would
sleep on it...

Nice tree !!!

leatherback wrote:very nice little tree. A question pops to mind though: Were you just lucky to have a side branch at that spot, or did you manage to get one there somehow? The tree seems quite old, looking at the bark, which is why I am surprised to see such young branchlet there..

Not sure which branch you refer to, but all of the foliage and crown came from one side branch that I used to created the new crown after a drastic pruning about 3-4 years ago.

stacy allen muse wrote:Those who think the branch needs removing, WHY ???
This is not a right or wrong thing... Just curious ???

See to me I understand why one might want to remove it...
Seeing that it is an inside branch, which kinda feels odd.
But, I gotta say... with it removed... It doesn't do any favors either
It looses it character, at least for me... Personal opinion, I would
sleep on it...

Nice tree !!!

I would remove it because it is an inside branch. Doing that I would also let the canopy gain a few more inches in height. Doing so would, as you say, make it lose some of its charm. Maybe a few more years of though and contemplation are required.

It seems to be a dispute artistically between keeping the beauty of a tree for the sake of it's beauty in-spite of an unthinking adherence to an established rule stating that you should not have a branch occupying the inside of a curve. The question you have to answer is whether the "rule" ( remove the inside branch) will improve the tree, or will it's removal diminish the tree---- just for a rule's sake? It was your vision that created this tree so in my way of thinking it is your decision to change it or not, answerable only to you.

Personally I would seriously think about it's removal because with it, you cannot see clearly or appreciate fully the beautiful curve in the trunk. With the branch gone this wonderful movement is revealed and the next branch up from it can have foliage wired down to kind of make up the foliage balance you lose by the branch's removal.

Vance Wood wrote:It seems to be a dispute artistically between keeping the beauty of a tree for the sake of it's beauty in-spite of an unthinking adherence to an established rule stating that you should not have a branch occupying the inside of a curve. The question you have to answer is whether the "rule" ( remove the inside branch) will improve the tree, or will it's removal diminish the tree---- just for a rule's sake? It was your vision that created this tree so in my way of thinking it is your decision to change it or not, answerable only to you.

Personally I would seriously think about it's removal because with it, you cannot or appreciate the beautiful curve in the trunk. With the branch gone the wonderful movement of the trunk is revealed and the next branch up from it can have foliage wired down to kind of make up the foliage balance you lose by the branch's removal.

While generally I look at rules as a point of departure rules are established for some pretty good reasons. These reasons are based on experience, accepted norms, and common sense among others.

A reason I would keep that branch, for now, is that it's thickness makes for a nice transition from the fatter trunk to the thinner crown material. It also gives some more defined areas and creates open space in the foliage mass. This spring I'm considering potting it and then beginning a neddle reduction strategy the following year which will allow for more foliage pad definition. Until then???I only remove branches after careful deliberation...they are hard to glue back on and have them survive. Gotta love Photoshop!

Twisted Trees wrote:

Vance Wood wrote:It seems to be a dispute artistically between keeping the beauty of a tree for the sake of it's beauty in-spite of an unthinking adherence to an established rule stating that you should not have a branch occupying the inside of a curve. The question you have to answer is whether the "rule" ( remove the inside branch) will improve the tree, or will it's removal diminish the tree---- just for a rule's sake? It was your vision that created this tree so in my way of thinking it is your decision to change it or not, answerable only to you.

Personally I would seriously think about it's removal because with it, you cannot or appreciate the beautiful curve in the trunk. With the branch gone the wonderful movement of the trunk is revealed and the next branch up from it can have foliage wired down to kind of make up the foliage balance you lose by the branch's removal.

While generally I look at rules as a point of departure rules are established for some pretty good reasons. These reasons are based on experience, accepted norms, and common sense among others.

A reason I would keep that branch, for now, is that it's thickness makes for a nice transition from the fatter trunk to the thinner crown material. It also gives some more defined areas and creates open space in the foliage mass. This spring I'm considering potting it and then beginning a neddle reduction strategy the following year which will allow for more foliage pad definition. Until then???I only remove branches after careful deliberation...they are hard to glue back on and have them survive. Gotta love Photoshop!

Absolutely; your tree your decision and you back up your decision with logic and reason. I think you will come to this decision down the road, till then I look forward to see future development and progressions of this tree.

Very nice little tree. As far that branch.. At this stage, even though the branch comes from an inside curve. That branch is enhancing the silhouette. Let me repeat, at this stage. However, when the bottom branch on the left is allowed to extend and the second branch up on the right is pulled down a bit. I think that the branch in question should be removed eventually. Nice tree!

Rob

--is that the only choice for the front?

Because of how it was reduced from 2 feet to 11 inches there is a rather large cut wound and the side branch which was moved up to create the new crown this is the best front. The jin seen below is gone now.

This is a great progression. Personally I think I'd keep that side branch that others have suggested removing. Just curious though, why is it out of it's pot in all of the pictures?

KennedyMarx wrote:This is a great progression. Personally I think I'd keep that side branch that others have suggested removing. Just curious though, why is it out of it's pot in all of the pictures?

It's growing in a nursery pot. I take it out to photograph so the base can be seen. Probably pot it this spring.

I found this picture of the treefrom about 12 years ago. It is a view from the right side as seen in the first photo. Look down at the base and you can see the curve that is prominent now. The first branch from the base is the branch in question now. the crown was made from a branch in the back.

Twisted Trees wrote:I found this picture of the treefrom about 12 years ago. It is a view from the right side as seen in the first photo. Look down at the base and you can see the curve that is prominent now. The first branch from the base is the branch in question now. the crown was made from a branch in the back.

This is good to see. Examples like this show people how things can be developed. So often we are treated to these wonderful images of really old and or collected trees, some are left with the impression that you cannot make a good bonsai unless the tree came from the mountains or at great cost.