Photos Noelanders 2012

jonathan espalin wrote:
looking back at my proposed changes, the tree does lose something, although it also seems to gain something. Maybe the best solution is something else, but I do feel that the tree as presented a Noelanders is almost there, just not all the way, and some changes are needed to get it there.

IMO the changes you showed really set the tree back. The tree probably looked like this about 20 years ago. The basic branch structure is the same, you just cut off a couple decades worth of ramification. I understand that you have issues with the image of the tree, but I'm just saying your virtual makes the tree look much younger.

Here's another lovely deciduous tree from a UK hobbyist ; a Trident Maple in a John Pitt pot......

a2khalid wrote:

jonathan espalin wrote:
looking back at my proposed changes, the tree does lose something, although it also seems to gain something. Maybe the best solution is something else, but I do feel that the tree as presented a Noelanders is almost there, just not all the way, and some changes are needed to get it there.

IMO the changes you showed really set the tree back. The tree probably looked like this about 20 years ago. The basic branch structure is the same, you just cut off a couple decades worth of ramification. I understand that you have issues with the image of the tree, but I'm just saying your virtual makes the tree look much younger.

Thanks for your clear, rational response. It's much more useful than some others i've heard. Yes, I did remove a lot of ramification, and the tree would need to fill out a bit, though I doubt it would take 20 years. The basic branch structure is not the same on my proposal, it is greatly simplified, with most of the straight line sections removed, and the structure is, I think, improved. If lots of ramification were all it took to make good bonsai, then we could do it blindfolded with an electric hedgetrimmer.

I see lots of good trees at shows and online that would be much better if someone were willing to take a step or two back in the interest of moving a tree forward.

jonathan espalin wrote:

Russell Coker wrote:

Pine-like? Really?

Y'all just destroyed a lot of that tree's charm and beauty. (Imho)

Ok. I won't be working on any of your trees then.

Yes, pine-like (horizontal, tiered branching, strong central leader: features of conifers that are far too commonly applied to all bonsai, to make them look like 'bonsai'. I prefer bonsai to look like trees. Maybe you don't like my virtual changes, but it definitely looks more like a natural old deciduous tree and less like a stereotyped bonsai, which I consider an improvement.

Maybe it is styled in a "pine-like" fashion...but your modifications don't seem to really change that. You've just removed some of the horizontal branches and thinned out the canopy...but the structure is still the same. Now it looks like a under-developed "pine-like" bonsai. Seems to me that you'd have to remove most of the branches or cut them way back and then re-train them completely if you wanted a more "deciduous/natural" look - which I assume means some secondary trunk/apex structure and more upright branching?

To me, the tree is beautiful as is...

coh wrote:
Maybe it is styled in a "pine-like" fashion...but your modifications don't seem to really change that. You've just removed some of the horizontal branches and thinned out the canopy...but the structure is still the same. Now it looks like a under-developed "pine-like" bonsai. Seems to me that you'd have to remove most of the branches or cut them way back and then re-train them completely if you wanted a more "deciduous/natural" look - which I assume means some secondary trunk/apex structure and more upright branching?

To me, the tree is beautiful as is...

Yes, the tree is beautiful as is, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved. I think my primary error here, whether i'm right about the changes or not, was to propose changes on a thread about 'finished' show trees. There is a time and place for brainstorming about possible ways to improve trees in progress, but I realize that in the context of show-tree photos, I should just let the trees be appreciated for what they are now.

Thanks to those of you, such as coh, who kept your reactions clear, thoughtful, and logical, and focused on the tree, rather than the person.

I’m sorry Jonathon that my reply was not “reasoned” but I find it difficult to be reasonable to such a ludicrous suggestion. I’ve been lucky enough to have attended the 2 previous events and seeing trees of this standard is a delight. When I walk the exhibition these are the sort of trees that I take more notice of mainly because of the work involved to look so good “naked”. As posted in a previous thread “if it ain’t a big conifer with loads of deadwood they don’t stand a chance” rings true but big shows need trees of this standard. There have been some fantastic deciduous trees on show and to my eye none look like Pines. Where are the snaking branches, wire on the braches, trimmed needles
etc.

Showing a deciduous in Winter takes “balls” and I take my hat of to them.

bonsai monkey wrote:I’m sorry Jonathon that my reply was not “reasoned” but I find it difficult to be reasonable to such a ludicrous suggestion. I’ve been lucky enough to have attended the 2 previous events and seeing trees of this standard is a delight. When I walk the exhibition these are the sort of trees that I take more notice of mainly because of the work involved to look so good “naked”. As posted in a previous thread “if it ain’t a big conifer with loads of deadwood they don’t stand a chance” rings true but big shows need trees of this standard. There have been some fantastic deciduous trees on show and to my eye none look like Pines. Where are the snaking branches, wire on the braches, trimmed needles
etc.

Showing a deciduous in Winter takes “balls” and I take my hat of to them.

Why do you assume that I don't also 'take my hat off' to the owner of this tree? For that matter, to anyone who is furthering the cause of deciduous bonsai. This is the tree that i have seen in photos from this exhibition that i also most admire, which is why i bothered to discuss it. My own humble bonsai work focuses almost entirely on deciduous material, and the poetry of natural forms inherent to deciduous trees really appeals to me. On this nearly perfect tree, and many others, i saw many features that show spillover from the world of conifer bonsai, and I was brainstorming ways to limit that. As pointed out, my virtual prunings did set the tree back in terms of ramification, but they might benefit it in the long run in terms of structure. Maybe you don't like my drawing, or the fact, that I proposed changes at all, but please follow the good example of some others who bothered to explain why they thought i was wrong, rather than engaging in personal attacks.

cosmos wrote:Hi Rob
Thank you for explaining the judging for I was starting to see it from a different perspective. That is why it is always better to question to get answers before making judgements.

Thanks again.

What do you think of the 'taxus supported by an iron rod' without which the naturally hollowed trunk would have snapped? It was really impressive to see how the tree was surviving (or better still thriving judging by its green canopy).

Also I saw a pine whose needles were all cut to minimize their size. Is this allowed in exhibitions?

Cosmos

Hi Cosmos, sorry we missed each other.

Which Taxus had an iron rod - I didn't notice that? Was the iron rod to the rear?

cosmos wrote:
Also I saw a pine whose needles were all cut to minimize their size. Is this allowed in exhibitions?

Cosmos

As for cutting needles on pine trees for an exhibition - for years I thought cutting needles was a major no-no for exhibition. My recent trip to Japan however at ASPAC and Taikanten revealed many pine trees, especially JBP and a few JRP, had cut needles. So astounded was I that I asked two apprentices from Japanese nurseries. They told me that they "regularly cut needles for a show and that if they do it on an angle to the length of the needle immediately prior to the show it's not that noticeable." Personally I prefer to not cut needles on a pine going into an exhibition. If the needles are too long I would rather pluck the long needles. But if one has to cut the needles do it like the apprentices said.

This is a JBP at the recent Noelanders Trophy.
The mistake on the pines at the Noelanders was the needles were cut a while ago and their tips had turned thoroughly brown making it pretty obvious. The shohin JBP pretty much had all cut needles which meant the artist missed the opportunity to get small needles. The red pine that looked very nice also had many cut needles.

I have found that showing a pine tree requires advanced planning to get small needles, especially for me since the JBP needle cycle is considerable different in Florida than in a temperate climate.

[quote="Rob Kempinski"]

cosmos wrote:Hi Rob

What do you think of the 'taxus supported by an iron rod' without which the naturally hollowed trunk would have snapped? It was really impressive to see how the tree was surviving (or better still thriving judging by its green canopy).

Hi Cosmos, sorry we missed each other.

Which Taxus had an iron rod - I didn't notice that? Was the iron rod to the rear?



It was this Picea with the slender trunk. It needs to be held upright with a iron rod. But it also needs some help visually, it's crown is very heavy and with out any open spaces. This makes the tree looking out of balance.



Cheers,
Hans van Meer.

jonathan espalin wrote: Maybe you don't like my drawing, or the fact, that I proposed changes at all, but please follow the good example of some others who bothered to explain why they thought i was wrong, rather than engaging in personal attacks.

I don't like your drawing, and I don't buy your reasoning either. It's not about right or wrong - this is bonsai not math. You are entitled to state your opinion, and I'm entitled to think, and say, you're nuts in my opinion. I certainly don't mean that as a personal attack. That's what happens around here. If what you perceive as "personal attacks" here in this thread upsets you all I can say, friend, is that you're in for a rough ride!

Russell Coker wrote:

jonathan espalin wrote: Maybe you don't like my drawing, or the fact, that I proposed changes at all, but please follow the good example of some others who bothered to explain why they thought i was wrong, rather than engaging in personal attacks.

I don't like your drawing, and I don't buy your reasoning either. It's not about right or wrong - this is bonsai not math. You are entitled to state your opinion, and I'm entitled to think, and say, you're nuts in my opinion. I certainly don't mean that as a personal attack. That's what happens around here. If what you perceive as "personal attacks" here in this thread upsets you all I can say, friend, is that you're in for a rough ride!

I have no problem with people telling me i'm wrong or expressing disagreement. I make mistakes all the time, as do you. Telling people you've never met that they are 'nuts', just because you don't happen to like one bonsai virtual they posted here seems over the top.

My comment about 'personal attacks' was not originally directed at you, but rather at another member or two who felt that ridicule was more appropriate than reasoned disagreement. Other members' responses were perfectly civil, even if they disagreed with me.

Anyway, lets stop clogging up this otherwise fine thread with this mess.

Now about the trees again guys, I did see all the trees and think almost all of them deserved to be there.

Peter

landerloos wrote:Now about the trees again guys, I did see all the trees and think almost all of them deserved to be there.

Peter

haha, spicy thread.....makes it more interesting than most of the other show threads so well done to all...

I have only seen the trees that have been photographed but the pics hosted off site show lots of trees and I was pleased for 2 reasons - I think 10-15% were exeptional examples, most others were good but could be improved (I see this as a positive as it makes for better shows in the future) and some of the trees pictured did surprise me they were there at all, which certainly gives encouragement to would be entrants I guess......

my opinion echos the majority regarding the virt - this tree is an expremely good example of a bare show tree, the ramification is up there with the best and the main branch structure works well with the design (my one adjustment would be to round the crown a little as it does look a littlke too pointed). If the virt was the real tree it would be a very 'average bonsai with great potential' and many people would attempt to 'improve' it with photoshop. Once improved I think we would see images like the real tree is now.

Obviously J e posted his ideas of improvements but I think the backlash came because, for me personally, the post came across a bit arogant and know-it-all. If a J e picture of a superbly ramified show tree of perfect proportion that was his own work were to accompany the virtual critique of this one it would have complemented the post no end. (anyone can rip a tree apart to sound good, but you need to say "there are my trees, this is my ability".....then expect the ball to get hit back ! )

cheers

Marcus

I take the discussed tree as it is - it's someone's vision, taste, work.
There were many ways how to deal with the raw material years ago.
The author chose his one. Obviously not bad one :-)
On the other hand I take J-e's comments too. Especially his "taking a step or two back, to push forward".
This needs balls. J-e, buy this tree, rebuilt it and win Noelanders with that! Just joking :-)

jonathan e wrote: Anyway, lets stop clogging up this otherwise fine thread with this mess.

And that shows a decent level of maturity, or "balls" or whatever you want to call it. Let's leave it at that, eh?

So, getting back to the deciduous exhibits, here's another UK exhibit, a Pomegranate grown from seed by it's owner in an Aspinall pot ......

Mark Cooper wrote:So, getting back to the deciduous exhibits, here's another UK exhibit, a Pomegranate grown from seed by it's owner in an Aspinall pot ......

Hey Mark, great to see you again.

I don't recall seeing this one at the show. Interesting raft style.

Does anyone know the history of the big cascade pine? I keep going back to that picture, what a stunning tree.

Also, the boxwood. Old harland's boxwoods are fairly common around here, but I've never seen one with that kind of potential. We work with Japanese boxwoods most of the time. Anyone know the details of this tree? Was it created from a garden plant or nursery stock, or was it imported? I'm not saying that's a bad thing, just curious.

Rob Kempinski wrote:

Mark Cooper wrote:So, getting back to the deciduous exhibits, here's another UK exhibit, a Pomegranate grown from seed by it's owner in an Aspinall pot ......

Hey Mark, great to see you again.

I don't recall seeing this one at the show. Interesting raft style.

Hi Rob, it was good to see you again too. That Pomegranate is a very "quiet" tree and so easily passed by, but delightful if you take the time to look . As I said, it was it was grown from the seed collected by it's owner (my pal Terry, who is a regular UK exhibitor at Noelanders) .....a remarkable effort.
Hope you had a good trip back to the US.

Russell Coker wrote:

Does anyone know the history of the big cascade pine? I keep going back to that picture, what a stunning tree.

Russell,

The Pinus sylvestris you ask about belongs to my friend David Benavente. For more information about him, check out our article "The Great Flight" on the last Bonsai Focus issue or visit www.davidbenavente.com

Warm regards,

Jose Luis

[quote="jrodriguez"]

Russell Coker wrote:

Does anyone know the history of the big cascade pine? I keep going back to that picture, what a stunning tree.

Hi Russell,
this amazing short needle Sylvestris is way more special in real live than any picture could ever show! It is very mature looking and well balanced with amazing ramification! You have to look realy hard to find any thing wrong with this future master piece. Maybe? the placing in the pot could be improved with a different pot and I would like to see it with out any wire in the future, but for me and many others exhibitors it was the best and most complete Bonsai in the show! It is one of the best I have ever seen!



Cheers,
Hans van Meer.

jrodriguez wrote:

Russell Coker wrote:

Does anyone know the history of the big cascade pine? I keep going back to that picture, what a stunning tree.

Russell,

The Pinus sylvestris you ask about belongs to my friend David Benavente. For more information about him, check out our article "The Great Flight" on the last Bonsai Focus issue or visit www.davidbenavente.com

Warm regards,

Jose Luis

Hey Jose, I agree David Benavente has some serious talent and seems like a nice guy. His vendor area had amazing material.

A Shimpaku Juniper imported from Japan David said he wired right before the show.


David's vending area.


David said he really liked the Japanese Maple over rock shohin. Top bad it wouldn't live in Florida.


The cascade pine was stunning - the branch work superb with really small needles. The sign by the tree said it was a collected tree. I looked at the back and saw the remnants of decent size chop but it was handled well and very non-intrusive. To me, the reason it didn't win was two factors and these are minor but compared to the competition minor distinctions are what you have to use to make the decision on a winning tree. The tree is very close to the left side of the pot making it a bit unbalanced. This would be hard to correct unless a shell pot were used. And second, the tree had much wire on it, including a lot of heavy wire. This seems to indicate that perhaps it needs a few more years to mature into the design.

I was very impressed with the lack of wire on the majority of the trees at the Noelanders. Compared to some other shows I've seen when the amount of wire on the bonsai interfered with cell phone reception, this reflects a maturity of the bonsai at the show and points out the overall quality and maturity of the trees.

Thanks JL, Hans and Rob. Man, those Europeans don't play when it comes to bonsai!

Rob, I understand what you mean about being so far to the left of the pot. I noticed that too but I was so taken with the tree that it just went away. Sometimes that's just what you have to deal with in regards to cascades, and you're right, there isn't much you can do about it.

OK, now for the boxwood... anyone?

Russell Coker wrote:

Thanks JL, Hans and Rob. Man, those Europeans don't play when it comes to bonsai!

OK, now for the boxwood... anyone?

Don't know much about the boxwood other than it was tempting to take it home
The little wispy flowers were amazing and the whole trunk configuration and bark excellent.
The other tree is a Chinese Juniper shimpaki.

I did take a photo of the whole display - can't really read the name tag - think it says Jose Frontier ??? Maybe someone else knows it.

Thanks a lot for sharing the beautiful trees.

Budi