i received a pm from Roger about the scoring after i asked him if he could send me my score sheet so i could see how my tree went as i was curious. and dont get me wrong i have no problem with the judging as it is the opinion of other influencial australian artists but i was curious as to the judging mainly on catagory 2 as their were some excellent entries. I feel the judging on cat 1 was pretty good pups trees definantly deserved the places they received. also i beleive deemons acacia was also an appropriate choice, i feel this tree expresses the feminine grace this weeping style should evoke, even if the tree hasnt been in training long it provides a convincing image which will just get better with time, however as this was an open category i feel some of the other trees entered may have been better suited
but the theme that it seemed Roger was saying the guidelines meant the trees entered must emulate an australian tree of the variety of stock used. this is where i disagree (and remember this is my personal opinion) a tree that may have fantastic atributes for bonsai may not always look nice in nature, it may be a small shrub or bush in reality yet if you styled it in this manner you would be wasting your time, who wants to see a bush in a pot. My opinion of great bonsai is emulating a majestic old tree in nature or creating a beautiful tree from my fantasy, the perfect tree, an old tree on a snowy cliff that has survived the elements for thousands of years, an old tree i might see in a haunted style old forrest, something that makes my imagination stir but the key point is it has to express the image of age, something that has surpased the toils and torment of time, a wise majesty. I also find alot of the native trees commended on this site are styled with japan these influence such as grants banksia's etc.
i think why i found the judging of category 2 strange is that the trees selected do emulate an austrlain style yet they look like very young trees you might commonly see around. which is not my idea of bonsai i see bonsai as striving to create something unique. jamies bonsai however does not exhibit australian styling which confuses me as to how it came 2nd. yet if it was up to me out of all the trees entered in catagory 2 i would select this tree of jamie's or one of shannons figs in training to place first as they were some of the few trees of substance submitted, sorry if i missed any others im just going off entries i remember.
so this is where i come to my query on this whole lets recreate the wheel with an australian style. it seems alot of the trees that express this aparent style look like imature trees of less then 100 years in age. if you look on the ANBG site and look at the natives used as bonsai you will find if you examine the trees which provide a superior image they exhibit elements of japanese styling principles, this is because the principles (not rules) have been adopted from visually pleasing aspects of trees in nature in combination with artistic principles, such as odd numbers, odd numbers are used to avoid symetry which provides a static image. has anyone actually looked at why groups have odd numbers of trees or why we use a loosly fitted scalene triangle for the basis of canopy construction. these are artistic principles which have been combined with favourable qualities of natural trees. however if you look at the other trees they just look like imature versions of trees in nature. our native trees do fall into the formal styles of japanese bonsai and if you look at what walter pall is calling broom and informal upright styles you can see these can be very vague outlines, however walter may not be the best example as he is an individual who seems to thrive from pushing buttons
there are three types of bonsai stylists,
those that use these principles as rules to a tee and end up with cookie cutter trees that have left right branching all branches on the outside of uniform curves etc.
those who acknowledge the principles as a guideline for desired atributes yet use an artistic flair of individual creativity to create individual bonsai that still exhibit desirable qualities
and those that choose to make their own path which is sometimes good and sometimes bad. walter pall is an example of a tangent that ended well, this is also true with the works of nick lenz. these are the success stories you hear of however if not done well stearing away from the norm ends badly think of the individuals at the club who will never take pointers to improve their trees, sometimes its good but other times it just results in a bunch of bad trees and twigs in pots
Another point i feel i should raise is the fact that it was never discussed that the trees entered should appear as the tree does in nature, it was only stated that we should use native materials, and as i stated earlier trees we use for bonsai due to the characteristics they exhibit such as bark small leaves etc may not always be able to be trained into a tree form if expected to emulate their natural growth habit. sure im not going to take a decidous tree and style it like a pine but i might take a maple and style it in a beautiful old oak style and maples will exhibit these qualities when they become aged and the use of an oak style just exagerates these qualities so it appears even more ancient and beautiful.
i am not trying to stir the pot here im just raising some points for further discussion, and express my opinion on the matter
kind regards jarryd
Like I said I do not think a tree having very corky bark is an excuse to have negative taper. Bonsai is about illusion so corky bark or not if the illusion is broken it loses something. 
