Brevard Show 09/25/2011

Rob Kempinski wrote:

jun wrote: And I am with you and Russell regarding the ramification of trees, that will always be the bottom line no matter what design you wanted or where ever in the planet you are.

I agree fully ramification is one sign of a refined tree; seven , ten, 15 levels of ramifiaction. But have you seen the Chinese style where they cut off most of the ramification?





Or this?


Saw similar trees all over southern China.
Pretty sure China is on planet Earth.

Yes Rob.
last time I checked china is in planet earth. Just visited it 3 months ago last stop is Guangdong province, and around twenty times (official and not official business AKA bonsai trips hehehe) before that and I have visited Chinese bonsai gardens many times there.

Southern style or Lingnan penjing still requires a good ramification to become a good lingnan style. just added info (maybe not for you)...the southern style of China is very different from that of the northern part which is much colder or in the upper part of the equator (most of the trees from your other thread-flat top- is in this style), and it is in this climate difference that causes the difference in style. Warmer weather-faster growth rate, trees can be formed well with clip and grow and the zigzag style of branches typical to what you have posted can be achieved in a faster period. Northern style, is the opposite, and the specie is quite different too, mostly conifers like the one most people used in western country and needs to be wired to achieved design objective. There most of the foliage pads are divided into pads, still chinese style but quite different from Lingnan penjing style.

Let get back to ramification: It is defined as splitting of branches and twigs into smaller ones, but not necessarily All of the foliage area or the whole top of the tree is covered by twigs. by definition, Lingnan style needs ramification or splitting of branches and twigs and transition of the branch size is a must, but kept in an sparse manner. reason for this is that Lingnan style is focused more on the drama and emotion portrayed by the tree and its major concern is the transition of the branch sizes from main big branch to the smallest part which reaches most of the time (but not limited to) the tertiary branch only. reason- If the ramification is extended further the focus would shift from the trunk and branch drama to the twigs, like the approach of the western bonsai which the main concern were based on a Japanese principle of bonsai- full canopy many many twigs arrange in bonsai form. This is the reason why Lingnan style evokes so much emotion, it is more of the outlet of the artist in expressing his character rather than creating tree - bonsai. It is more like a written poem or artist's poetic drawing if you may.

Bottom line any Bonsai needs ramification. designs may vary from place to place but still well formed ramification will play a major role no matter where you are in planet earth.


regards,
jun

It's these types of threads that really disappoint and frustrate me about internet forums. With the exception of Rob, Billy and Jun... nobody here is contributing anything constructive, it's just a bunch of fanatics with their own opinions and preferences. The preferences part is fine, THAT'S WHAT AN ART FORM IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT, the opinions... also an unfortunate part of any art form (and the part about art and "artists" that I despise). There's no reason to put down any forum members, or talk negatively about trees posted in the opening of the thread. The trees probably belong to people like me (and probably like you too)... back yard bonsai admirers. I won't say artist specifically, because when you start calling (so and so) an artist, the gloves really come off, the critics really get their panties in a bunch and are quick to break out their OPINIONS and notions about what THEY consider their notion about how the art form, or how (insert style here) HAS TO LOOK.

This probably makes no logical sense, and without a long post I probably couldn't logically express my OPINION. Basically it comes down to this... 99.9% of us are not bonsai masters (nor will we ever become one), we don't make a living doing it and we don't have thousands of dollars (or even hundreds of dollars) to drop on a tree. We find the best material we can afford and try to make it into something that we PERSONALLY enjoy. I like visiting these forums and learning a thing or two about horticulture and bonsai technique, being inspired by what I see others create is also a great thing. I take the horticultural and technical wealth and use it to try to come up with something that I find appealing and ENJOYABLE. It's frustrating and discouraging to come to forums and find these pissing matches between the fanatics and internet critics... it's just not necessary or welcoming.

I'm sorry you found nothing constructive in the points I was trying to make.

carlos wrote:

landerloos wrote:To keep the discusion going Rob, I dont see chinese trees as bonsai (I know that they are)
For me a bonsai is a tree shaped in a more japanese aproach, I do like some of the chinese trees.Peter

Well, that may be so for you......Chinese bonsai, has only recently begun to gain the notoriety it deserves. Not all Chinese bonsai adhere to the 'tree image' aesthetics you usually associate with pre-concieved notion of what a good tree is, but not all Chinese bonsai schools circumscribe themselves to the same principles. To make a statement to the effects of not considering a Chinese bonsai a bonsai, denotes lack of knowledge and overall generalization of what Chinese bonsai is. There are over seven (7) bonsai schools in China, all of them with distinct characteristics, being the Lignan school the most similar to what modern Japanese bonsai is.



snip.....


In sum, bonsai history and back-ground are important factors whenever making judgement of facts. There is a world of misinformation out there that has given all things Chinese a bad reputation. Remember, whenever learning about an art or trade, it might be a good idea to study its birthplace, in this case China.

Carlos

Very well put Carlos. We should save this post for future referencee.

this has proved to be a very interesting topic - i agree 100% with the observations that a pretty canopy supported by a mess of crossed branches or multiple twigs hidden underneath makes for a poor bonsai tree, and often it is a substitute for true skill or patience - there are artists that seem to think this is an acceptable way to style trees these days - and the problem stems from trying to make a tree look very good from one narrow viewing angle and it is made worse when branches are placed just for photography or to create a 'finished' image in one sitting. Some trees that look nice from the 'front' are totally bald at the back when branches are stolen to make a pleasant forward image, and its amazing that internet viewers are so wowed and amazed by some of these trees - the stylers never shows pics from all angles and underneath looking up though, as the tangled mess would be revealed !

styles of tree are a cultural thing - there are no wrong styles really - japanese styles are very ordered and very pleasing to the eye, they also tend to use excelent tecnique. Chinese styles have developed their own distinct direction and need to be appreciated for their independant merits rather than compared to other styles I feel. A flat style to me personally conjours images of africa but this doesnt mean all other flat topped trees are wrong, in the same way that european styles are neither right or wrong - they are often poorly imitations of japanese styles !

excelent topic, glad it is running its course unadulterated

marcus watts wrote:...Some trees that look nice from the 'front' are totally bald at the back when branches are stolen to make a pleasant forward image, and its amazing that internet viewers are so wowed and amazed by some of these trees - the stylers never shows pics from all angles and underneath looking up though, as the tangled mess would be revealed !

I agree with you but it's easy to see why people are wowed by some of the trees - usually you're only presented that single front view, and usually the tree does look really good from that view. Plus, depending on how the photo is taken (and possibly edited), it can be difficult or impossible to see all the underlying mess.

As you hint at, I think some of the problem is the "now, now, now" aspect of modern society, as manifested in the 1 (or 2) hour demo where a piece of raw material is turned into a "stunning" bonsai. I try to remember that what I should be getting out of these types of demos are ideas on how trees should look (foliage placement, in particular, trunk lines, major branch placement) - not necessarily how to best achieve that look.

In all fairness, though, I should note that I have seen some really good demos, where the tree is taken as far as it should be at one sitting, and the artist explains what would then need to be done subsequently, over a period of years. These trees usually don't have the same "wow" factor at the end of the demo, but they are more educational.

Chris