AusBonsai

Pearcy001 wrote:Can anyone that attended supply a bit better quality photo to the conversation?

Boics wrote:This thread needs / deserves better photo's!

treeman wrote:Ok I'll bite.
Its a nice tree. For me, too tall for the proportions. If it was collected, the grower cannot take credit for the trunk. If atificially shaped then great job. Canopy is well balanced and skillfully aranged but nothing REALLY out of the ordinary.
But I like the tree a lot.

bonsaibuddyman wrote:

treeman wrote:Ok I'll bite.
Its a nice tree. For me, too tall for the proportions. If it was collected, the grower cannot take credit for the trunk. If atificially shaped then great job. Canopy is well balanced and skillfully aranged but nothing REALLY out of the ordinary.
But I like the tree a lot.

Nice tree. I would however reduce the amount of foliage. I do like the height, but it just looks a little bit top-heavy for that much foliage.

I've noticed you mention the words 'too tall' quite often in your posts. I particularly like tall trees, but mainly on Australian natives that are naturally tall and slender in the wild. I'm not taking issue, I'm just actually curious... do you prefer short trees in general, or do you mean for this actual trunk, you feel that the foliage is too highly placed? I noticed in a different thread you mentioned when you were younger that you were told your trees were too tall and you disagreed at first. Then in hindsight you agreed with the critique and reduced the height. Perhaps I am just further behind in my journey than you and I have not acquired a better eye for it, but I am honestly interested in this subject, because I have given many, many years of thought to this issue.

I think this tree works in my eyes because it creates the illusion of an exceptionally tall stand-alone tree with a weathered trunk. However, call me abnormal, but I do naturally prefer feminine and unusual trees, over strong male trees any day. Though you probably gathered that from my butchered recommendation of your Tea Tree, Treeman.

When I first started bonsai I used to try and cut back hard, grow, cut back hard, grow, cut back hard etc etc to gain a very thick base. Then as I got much older, I found my liking changed. I now naturally lean towards longer feminine stock, but it is a personal thing. I know that it kind of goes against the grain of most bonsai enthusiasts. Though I still love a really thick base, but only when combined naturally with a trunk that is eventually grown tall and ragged.

I have been told that I am a natural lover of the chinese style of growing rather than the Japanese. I'm not up to scratch on the official 'rules' of what makes a great bonsai nor do I profess to know much at all about the rules of styling. But for me, a lot of the stock that I am told has perfect traits, or has branch positioning that is second to none or is of show quality.... I often find that this stock looks contrived and doesn't appeal to my eye at all.

Very much interested in others' views on this, and of course opinions on whether it is just a natural stage in ones development. I realized my liking was very much different hether I'm just a naturally different stylist like I have often been told.

MelaQuin wrote: I have been to 7 of the AABC Conventions, seen a lot of bonsai at club shows and the AABC and I cannot say I have seen one equal to this. It just blows my mind.
Full marks to the artist who did get both top awards and they were so well deserved.

IMG_1869.jpg

Graeme wrote: I have to agree with MelaQuin here. The member believes this is the best tree they have seen, one without equal. And so therefore this is a correct statement. Had MelaQuin said this is the best tree Graeme has ever seen. then I would have disagreed, but as this is not what was said, then I agree with the statement.

You know a real good question to ask would be, "Which Bonsai is the best Bonsai in the world?" Know the answer? If not, ask one of the members on here and they will surely tell you, because they would know the answer.

treeman wrote: Hmmm.... Firstly I agree with the calls for a better pic. As I said I like the tree a lot. In fact the bungin types are some of my favorites. Like you I prefer the wild ''romantic'' type styles which also happen to be the most difficult (perhaps apart from good formal upright) to achieve successfully - particularly if you start from scratch as I tend to do.
With this tree however, it strikes me as a little unsettled or at least ''vulnerable'' if that makes sense. Maybe reducing the weight of the canopy would change that. As it stands, I would be more satisfied with it if the apex of the tree was the height of the first main foliage mass on the right.