Is the deadwood proportion?

Hi People.

Recently I was honing my deadwood creation skills. In the process, I managed to looked at hundreds of trees with deadwood features (bonsai and the real trees). Along the way of my research I found something odd with bonsai deadwood,,,PROPORTION.

When I looked at the the deadwood on bonsai, they looked nice and some were perfected to the finest details. but something seems odd about it. and I realized the size of the details is not anyway near in proportion in terms of the tree size and its details. the grains are not even near in size if it is compared to the host tree. In some cases holes seems to be huge enough for a car to pass through (if it is in a real tree)., but the trunk of the bonsai tree is no way near the size of a car. In the branch areas, gaps should be created for the cars to pass through,,,In the dead wood holes should be created for cars to pass through (sarcasm here).
Should deadwood details be taken into consideration? I guess so, It would add a more realistic feel to the size of the tree being projected. And not that the tree seems to shrunk, or the deadwood were enlarge a dozen times. But creating finer proportioned deadwood would add another layer of challenge, the smaller the tree gets the finer the details would be.
I am still looking for trees with proportional details to the host bonsai. If you find one that is a good example of proportioned tree and deadwood details. Kindly post it here or the link to it. Thanks!


just observing,
jun

Jun are you saying the holes and lines carved by humans on bonsai deadwood that if scaled up to a full size tree would be too large and unrealistic? If so, there is a truth to such a statement but the concept of selective compression also comes into play. Few bonsai trees if scaled up would make realistic full size trees - just think about leaf size as an example.

i totally agree with you Jun, good question
- i think a lot of 'over carving' goes on , both the size, length and amount done on a tree. my best, most pleasing trees look like small versions of actual trees but the ones that look like 'bonsai' are now a stylised image that bears no resemblance to 99.9% of nature. I like a mixture of both styles in a collection but i think the real tree image is far harder to create properly - the 21st century 'domed top - off to one side, dropping branch or two on a slanting trunk with shari and jin' is getting very over done - I like this style and have formed 2 or 3 trees along those lines but i think many hobbyists are becoming 'one trick ponies' and are unable to make convincing 'real tree' images in favour of relying on heavy carving and too much lime sulphar !


For me carving is only appropriate on a few species for it to be convincing and more trees would look far better had the owner used the patient route of pruning branches properly and allowing the scar to heal over. - in nature for the bulk of us (a few may live up mountains) the dead wood rots rather than petrifies so we dont see a tree dominated by dead wood but actually a tree with hollows.

Also carving is supposed to portray a long hard life battered by wind, sand, ice etc - so for the image to work properly the branches need to match this environment - forming a beautiful lush head of perfect foliage on a heavily carved trunk does not really give a believable image - the two parts contrast each other rather than complement -

I know 2 real full sized mature trees that look like bonsai - i'll take a pic when passing - but both have no lardge areas of dead wood

I don't think that is what Jun was asking. It was more to do with scale of carving to the scale of the tree. If the bonsai is small but has a percieved height of 100 feet, then the carving would have to be proportionate and very small in detail. Whereas a big bonsai with a lower percieved height can have larger detail.

Hi Rob.

That is exactly what I am saying.
...But unlike dead wood, Leaves and branches are still natural to the tree and man cannot do anything about it once it reached its full potential. But deadwoods are entirely different, it is basically man made and can be rectified up to the smallest finest details.
I don't want to offend any body by giving example of a particular tree that belongs to someone,,,So, I hope you won't mind me giving example (in a good way) of One of the forest you have posted here. It got a very nice convincing ground cover, one of the finest ground cover I have seen, it can fool lots of eyes. but imagine if a deadwood would be added as a feature and proportion would not be taken into consideration. I doubt if it can still fool the eyes.
One of the best proportion of deadwood feature is the "Goshin" by the late John Naka.

regards,
jun

will baddeley wrote:I don't think that is what Jun was asking. It was more to do with scale of carving to the scale of the tree. If the bonsai is small but has a percieved height of 100 feet, then the carving would have to be proportionate and very small in detail. Whereas a big bonsai with a lower percieved height can have larger detail.

Right!