Branch or not branch, that´s the question

I like Wills' idea. Shortening the branch and allowing the upward twigs to fill in the space will balance the tree and also reflect the nature of an elm. The only other thing you can do is to in-arch a sapling on that branch and move it a bit higher after fusion but then you just end up with an "ordinary" tree.

MY opion only !!do not lose the bottom branch !! to me that branch makes balence to the tree.. grow it the way you like it to fill it in but keep the branch..i really like this tree... take care john

Maybe it's more where to stop at the top than what to remove at the bottom...

I woul cut and change the front - looks more balanced to me

In my opinion, the important point is not to cut or not cut because none will be better or worse. Both, if ideally set, will convey different mood, different mimic, different expression, then depends which expression you want to pass on to the viewer.

Style in bonsai is simply a pose, just like how I want to set my body movement for a photograph. Different placement of my hands, my legs and my head will give different pose with different mimic. So on this bonsai, either choice, you just need to re-compose all the physical elements in a hormony formation with good visual balance..then I think both will look as good.

If you don't cut the left branch, then you need to lift up a little bit, lean slightly to the right, re-shape the foliage pads...



But if you cut it, you need to reset the movement by leaning more to the right, reposition to a smaller pot, rearrange the foliage pads, reposition the crown slightly to the left, then I think it looks nice as well with different expression.

Robert Steven wrote:In my opinion, the important point is not to cut or not cut because none will be better or worse. Both, if ideally set, will convey different mood, different mimic, different expression, then depends which expression you want to pass on to the viewer.

Style in bonsai is simply a pose, just like how I want to set my body movement for a photograph. Different placement of my hands, my legs and my head will give different pose with different mimic. So on this bonsai, either choice, you just need to re-compose all the physical elements in a hormony formation with good visual balance..then I think both will look as good.

If you don't cut the left branch, then you need to lift up a little bit, lean slightly to the right, re-shape the foliage pads...



But if you cut it, you need to reset the movement by leaning more to the right, reposition to a smaller pot, rearrange the foliage pads, reposition the crown slightly to the left, then I think it looks nice as well with different expression.

Excellent explanation Robert!!!

Thanks Rob, looking forward to more pictures from your Japan tour, so sad for not coming. Have a good time and give my best regards to our friends...

.

David Cortizas wrote:

This design is unbalanced to the right too, is a good design for a juniper but no for a deciduous tree

Visual balance in bonsai design is not only on the tree position, but the overall composition including the potting position, that's why I pot it to the left to give the achoring effect.

And why not for a deciduous tree ?

.

Thanks Robert.

Your second virt is what I've been trying to say all along. Beautiful and dynamic - and "dances"!

Thanks Russell.

You are welcome David, but I am still wondering when you said this design does not fit deciduous tree...

.

David Cortizas wrote:Ok. Show me from a Japanese exhibition ulmus or maple with your design.

Why should I design following what had been done by the Japanese ? How many deciduous trees available in Japan (nature ?) and how many deciduous bonsai has been done by Japanese artists ?

If you are traveling to different tropical countries, you will see unlimited deciduos tree shape in the nature with their physiological and morphological reasons. One of the most basic differences between connifers and deciduous tree is on the apical meristerm. Connifers are apical dominant and deciduous are not. Apart of that, you can design whatever style with your deciduous tree with logical natural fact.

BTW, I am sorry to say that the most common mistake is that many people design their deciduous bonsai like connifers with the single-line apex/crown..with the references of Japanese bonsai design. Maple and Ulmus are not the only deciduos trees...

Thanks to your thought any way...

.

Got your point David..you don't have to agree...

Threads like this are why I come to the forums - free exchange of ideas from different viewpoints expressed in a civilized manner. Great stuff and very throught-provoking for a beginner like me.

I still prefer the tree with the lowest branch but the changes suggested by Robert (to go along with removing that branch) make a lot of sense. Still, the tree appears a bit unbalanced to me with that branch gone. I'm wondering if extending the next highest major left branch a little would offset that tendency, something like this? Not sure...



Chris

.

Good suggestion Chris. If you follow my initial opinion, my message was that there was not only one way to design bonsai, that's why I said the point was not to cut or not cut, but there was always option to express different idea of the artist.
At the end, it's simply a personal preference and vision...

Still, the tree appears a bit unbalanced to me with that branch gone.

That's easily curable by changing the planting angle in the pot -- like tilting slightly to the left so the bottom segment of the trunk isn't absolutely vertical.

The tree badly needs a base, however. It seems to just pop out of the soil. I wonder what is down below the soil level.

.

very interesting thread

i totally disagree that the design without the branch is not deciduous - it is a very good example of the branch structure of a very balanced beech tree, but with interesting trunk movement. i was part of the minority thinking the low branch is better chopped off by the way. This styling confirms to me the vision that pleases me most. it looks like a mature tall tree now.

i think making the tree shorter does not help the lower branch at all - it is still proportionally too low on the trunk for the design to please the eye, and will appear even lower when in full leaf. this makes the tree appear much smaller, younger and a bit more like a shrub to me.

I think it is not the best way to think of this tree as a japanese maple to justify the bottom branch style - for one it is a chinese elm, so should not be styled in a maple fashion just because they both happen to be deciduous - that is where the similarity begins and ends. I imagine you were very influenced by the maples while you were in japan, but that would be better directed at a maple tree bonsai, while the elm should be allowed to develop its own identity.

both of the large virts worked well, and were an improvement on the material, but trying to bend the branch higher up does unbalance the line of the other branches - it was a solution to improve the image without cutting the branch off though. Therefore, because the branch is not actually in the ideal position it does tend to improve the tree with it off. BUT, if you have some more trunk line buried under the soil and the tree was raised higher above the soil level it could work well with the branch on !!..........

nice thread as the material has got some people looking and thinking

marcus

Believe me..I always learn more from disagreement rather than praising...

.