Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 26th, 2012, 9:18 am
Lovely pots, Pat. They would make bonsai trees stand out in any exhibition. 
Page 2 of 2
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 26th, 2012, 10:25 am
I gotta get me a P.K pot
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 26th, 2012, 12:22 pm
Looking real smart Pat, and well presented.
One thing about half moon pots that has always puzzled me. Without feet what is the intended and or effective drainage?
Can anyone answer this? I would love to know the thinking/logic. But really lovely work Pat
Regards, AnneK
One thing about half moon pots that has always puzzled me. Without feet what is the intended and or effective drainage?
Can anyone answer this? I would love to know the thinking/logic. But really lovely work Pat
Regards, AnneK
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 26th, 2012, 10:07 pm
Thanks again guys....
Hi Joel...The Central Coast Bonsai Show is on the 24-25 March at the East Gosford Arts Centre...36 Webb Street, and yes, I'm going to be there with plenty of stock.
Hello Anne...been a long time cuz...
While it's true that my smaller crescent pots don't have a foot-ring or 'feet' as such, I do think that if drainage was indeed a problem, the fault may lie in the potting mix rather than the pot. It would be a simple matter to add three knobs of clay to act as feet but to do so would, (in my mind), detract from the silhouette of the pot/tree arrangement.
My larger crescent pot's do have a foot-ring which is why I added the photo, of the base, of the larger pot.
Just for interest, Ray Nesci recently showed me an old, large, Japanese crescent pot that was completely flat on the bottom. My guess is that the Japanese didn't consider drainage a problem.
What do others think?
Cheers,
Pat
Hi Joel...The Central Coast Bonsai Show is on the 24-25 March at the East Gosford Arts Centre...36 Webb Street, and yes, I'm going to be there with plenty of stock.
Hello Anne...been a long time cuz...
While it's true that my smaller crescent pots don't have a foot-ring or 'feet' as such, I do think that if drainage was indeed a problem, the fault may lie in the potting mix rather than the pot. It would be a simple matter to add three knobs of clay to act as feet but to do so would, (in my mind), detract from the silhouette of the pot/tree arrangement.
My larger crescent pot's do have a foot-ring which is why I added the photo, of the base, of the larger pot.
Just for interest, Ray Nesci recently showed me an old, large, Japanese crescent pot that was completely flat on the bottom. My guess is that the Japanese didn't consider drainage a problem.
What do others think?
Cheers,
Pat
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 27th, 2012, 11:31 am
Pat,No doubt you’ll be at the AABC Convention in Melbourne in May
hope to catch up with you then. Just to make sure I’m getting in in time 
- with your obviously busy schedule for 2012: The YVBS is holding its Show on 20th October 2012 in Montrose, Victoria 
and would like you to join us again!!!BTW guys, this will be the place to visit
- great show, great selection of pots …. and you can talk to the master 
himself on the day!Cheers, Rudi
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 27th, 2012, 10:36 pm
Thanks for the invitation Rudi....If I don't see you in Canberra in March, we'll talk at the Convention.
Cheers, Pat
Cheers, Pat
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 28th, 2012, 8:47 am
Hi Pat,Pat K wrote:Thanks for the invitation Rudi....If I don't see you in Canberra in March, we'll talk at the Convention.
Cheers, Pat
Marlene and I'll be in Canberra for the "9th National Exhibition and Symposium of Australian Native Plants as Bonsai" over the whole weekend - we'll see you then.
Cheers, Rudi
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 29th, 2012, 8:10 am
See you at the Central Coast show, Pat.
Penny.
Penny.
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: February 29th, 2012, 2:12 pm
Pat K wrote:Thanks again guys....
Thanks Pat, I have wondered about the drainage of Crescent pots for so long, and an idle moment prompted me to ask.
I appreciate the aesthetic argument. I'm seeking the practical answer or reason why crescent pots don't require feet and air space under their bums the same as flatter pots?
They spend most of their life on our benches the same as the others, and then when on display often in contact with expensively lacquered tables.
I've bumped this up (I hope) in the further hope of answers or thoughts.
I perhaps should add I have only one excellent crescent and I have applied three small marble sized flattened balls of "Need It" to the underside.
If my mix were any more open, you could drive a bus through it. And yes it is one of my quickest to dry out. That is my experience and I'm not complaining I'm just asking an open question and hoping some intelligent answers transpire.
Regards to you Pat. AnneK
Hello Anne...been a long time cuz...
While it's true that my smaller crescent pots don't have a foot-ring or 'feet' as such, I do think that if drainage was indeed a problem, the fault may lie in the potting mix rather than the pot. It would be a simple matter to add three knobs of clay to act as feet but to do so would, (in my mind), detract from the silhouette of the pot/tree arrangement.
My larger crescent pot's do have a foot-ring which is why I added the photo, of the base, of the larger pot.
Just for interest, Ray Nesci recently showed me an old, large, Japanese crescent pot that was completely flat on the bottom. My guess is that the Japanese didn't consider drainage a problem.
What do others think?
Cheers,
Pat
Re: New pots....from Pat
Posted: March 1st, 2012, 10:22 pm
Penny...looking forward to saying hi...and seeing what's new!
Hi Anne...Perhaps the modern 'flatter pots' don't require feet either?
I've never examined a really old pot but from the evidence of photographs I've seen, I would suggest that, in the main, the old pots are low fired. In this case, the pots would absorb water and lifting the pot from the surface would be necessary for the resultant airflow to dry the base which is wicking moisture from the potting mix. A modern high fired pot would not have this problem as it (generally) doesn't absorb water. The feet in this case are there for aesthetic reasons.....AND to keep the punters happy!!
The crescent pot's curved base will direct water to the drainage hole whereas the flat based pot wont...perhaps this is why your crescent pot is the quickest to dry out!
Have I put the cat amongst the pigeons?....hope so!!
Cheers,
Pat
Hi Anne...Perhaps the modern 'flatter pots' don't require feet either?
I've never examined a really old pot but from the evidence of photographs I've seen, I would suggest that, in the main, the old pots are low fired. In this case, the pots would absorb water and lifting the pot from the surface would be necessary for the resultant airflow to dry the base which is wicking moisture from the potting mix. A modern high fired pot would not have this problem as it (generally) doesn't absorb water. The feet in this case are there for aesthetic reasons.....AND to keep the punters happy!!
The crescent pot's curved base will direct water to the drainage hole whereas the flat based pot wont...perhaps this is why your crescent pot is the quickest to dry out!
Have I put the cat amongst the pigeons?....hope so!!
Cheers,
Pat