The problem i have is that the tree is about 14x the base diameter. Sure it is ok to break rules in the interest of indivuality or art, however from my viewing of many trees i rarely find some that feel natural once you go over 10x the base dia. The problem with this tree as it stands is that even if you were to bring the height of the tree down to somewhere betweek 6-10 x dia, the problem you have is that the first branching won't start until about 2/3 up the trunk of the tree.
I do like all the bends in the tree, but unless you can bulk fatten up the trunk without losing taper or get the tree to backbud below the current lowest branches then you may be stuck on where to go with it. The problem is, because you don't have any really low branches you can't use anything for a sacrifice to fatten up the bottom of the tunk... I put some scales on your tree to show what i am talking about. As someone earlier mentioned also, if you were to wire out the branches then that would also completely change the look of the tree and everything i just said may be uselss information
Just another thought, i wonder if you could change the angle of the tree and do some serious bending of the trunk over a period of time. How do elms go with wrapping in raffia (or electrical tape) and then bending? I have branch benders on my elm trunks at the moment but these appear to be only about 1/2 -2/3 the thichness of your trunk. I did a quick sort of vert by doign just as i mentioned. If you werre to also do similar bend furtehr up the trunk it would change things up drastically and also help reduce the overall height whilst still retaining all those great upper branches.
But please take whatever i say from the point of being a newbie myself.....
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."