Are you a Parrot?

music~maker

Shohin
Messages
392
Reaction score
704
Location
Boston, MA
USDA Zone
6b
What kind of a bonsai man are you?
You're worthless and weak!
You do nothing, You are nothing, You sit in here all day and play with that stick, repulsive, twig in a pot!
I learned on my own and you, You parrot that, that, that, Ryan O’Neal!
Who are you!?!
Where do you come from!?!
Are you listening to me!?!
What do you want to do with your bonsai!?!
I want it to rock!
 

Dav4

Drop Branch Murphy
Messages
13,017
Reaction score
29,698
Location
SE MI- Bonsai'd for 12 years both MA and N GA
USDA Zone
6a
You are absolutely unreal! This last image of the pine with all the “areas” circled is not the same image that I critiqued! In fact, pretty much all the points I made have been addressed in this new image.

Maybe I do know a bit about bonsai!

And sarcasm? It suits you.
It's pretty much the same tree but with the different lighting and background allowing different aspects of the canopy to either stand out or blend in depending on which photo you're looking at... still could use some wiring.
 

Adair M

Pinus Envy
Messages
14,402
Reaction score
34,874
Location
NEGeorgia
USDA Zone
7a
Adair please take a closer look, for the sake of truth.
This is the same tree.
And it is not a forest, this is a raft Pine tree.
It is the same tree, but the second image is a year or two later, or earlier. The problems I pointed out with the first image are resolved. I would not make the same comments had I been presented with the second image.

Raft style trees are single trees whose trunk has fallen into contact with the soil, and have sprouted new roots. What were limbs are now trunks. And the image they project are as clumps, or small forests. I view BonsaiNut on my iPhone, so the image I see is rather small, but I do zoom in.

I stand by my analysis.
 

JudyB

Queen of the Nuts
Messages
13,751
Reaction score
23,250
Location
South East of Cols. OH
USDA Zone
6a
where those think and experiment, talk to those who would buybonsai.
Once again you seek to offend those who would move forward by spending their resources ($$) on good material, and studying with a professional as if the other things are then excluded. (thinking, experimenting, progressing). I confess! I buy good material. But not just to sit and look at it, I work it and make it better. And of course to cheat time that I can not acquire any more of. (unless someone here knows a loophole for that?)
 
Last edited:

coh

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
5,781
Reaction score
6,822
Location
Rochester, NY
USDA Zone
6
Once again you seek to offend those who would move forward by spending their resources ($$) on good material, as if the other things are then excluded. (thinking, experimenting, progressing). I confess! I buy good material. But not just to sit and look at it, I work it and make it better. And of course to cheat time that I can not acquire any more of. (unless someone here knows a loophole for that?)
I'm sure Anthony has a hack for that!
 

Anthony

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
6,290
Reaction score
8,388
Location
West Indies [ Caribbean ]
USDA Zone
13
@JudyB ,

Ny and I used to be more aggressive to each other.
I suspect presently we are closer to being friends.
Hence the teasing.

I know Owen from before, decent guy, why would I
want to him ?
Say Gmelina to him.

Hmm, by the time you folk are finished with me, I
would be Mr,Pollyanna.
These are just conversations, and I often wax philosophical.
When I am out to hurt you, you would know.
Pax oh owner of beautiful trees.
Good Day
Anthony
 

MichaelS

Masterpiece
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
4,733
Location
Australia
You are absolutely unreal! This last image of the pine with all the “areas” circled is not the same image that I critiqued! In fact, pretty much all the points I made have been addressed in this new image.
.

Your analysis....
''The second tree, is a mess. While you may say it’s naturalistic, it just looks unkempt. It doesn’t look “naturalistic” to my eye! On the right side, the lower branches are very sparse, they’re being shaded by the overly dense canopy above them. Ok, I’m sure you’re going to say that’s natural. Fair enough. But what about the left side? There the lower foliage is very dense, and the upper foliage is thin! You can’t have it both ways! The movement and flow is inconsistent as well. Frankly, this looks like a composition that was well styled at some time in the past but has been neglected for a couple years.''

Ok so all you have said here so far is concerning the left side because the right side is ''fair enough'' according to you.
The left side. The lower left side you talk about has the same density as the left apex. (in the first picture) It is shaded more so it looks more dense. Yes it may be approaching the time of thinning, but that is nit-picking in the extreme.
The movement and flow is exactly the same in both images. I chose the other image because you can see more detail and it is larger.
You really have not said anything here at all. A feeble analysis.
 
Last edited:

MichaelS

Masterpiece
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
4,733
Location
Australia
And as we all know- happily there is much middle ground between these two trees. Why decide to be one or the other? If you do such a thing, then you are making your options so narrow that your trees will likely suffer in the process.
Actually quite the contrary. If you allow your self to let nature guide you instead of a modern Japanese trained professional. Your options will naturally become limitless.
 

MichaelS

Masterpiece
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
4,733
Location
Australia
You can use whatever words you like, but you seem to latch on to very narrow definitions of words that you yourself assign, and then you argue endlessly about why you're right. I've seen you do it with the word "art" and now I've seen you do it with the word "design".

You are entitled to your own words, but you can't make up your own definitions and expect people to just know what you're talking about or see eye to eye with you on anything.

For the record, the word design is defined as:

- 1) a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made.
- 2) purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object.
- 3) decide upon the look and functioning of (a building, garment, or other object), typically by making a detailed drawing of it.

I would argue strongly that all three of these can and do apply to bonsai, whether you are looking at trees like pic 1 or developing trees like pic 2 in your example.
Well number 1 is irrelevant.
Number 2 is the problem. There is often too much artificial purpose, planning and intention. Same with number 3. I'm trying to point out, that the way I see it, too much intentional ''design'' is intruding. You seem to waste to much time with semantics. I chose the word design because I have a limited vocabulary. You need to see past the literal meaning and try to understand my point. Let's use one of these words instead....
control
kənˈtrəʊl/
noun
noun: contro

"the whole operation is under the control of a production manager"
synonyms:jurisdiction, sway, power, authority, command, dominance, domination, government, mastery, leadership, rule, reign, sovereignty, supremacy, ascendancy, predominance, hegemony; More
 

Adair M

Pinus Envy
Messages
14,402
Reaction score
34,874
Location
NEGeorgia
USDA Zone
7a
Your analysis....
''The second tree, is a mess. While you may say it’s naturalistic, it just looks unkempt. It doesn’t look “naturalistic” to my eye! On the right side, the lower branches are very sparse, they’re being shaded by the overly dense canopy above them. Ok, I’m sure you’re going to say that’s natural. Fair enough. But what about the left side? There the lower foliage is very dense, and the upper foliage is thin! You can’t have it both ways! The movement and flow is inconsistent as well. Frankly, this looks like a composition that was well styled at some time in the past but has been neglected for a couple years.''

Ok so all you have said here so far is concerning the left side because the right side is ''fair enough'' according to you.
The left side. The lower left side you talk about has the same density as the left apex. It is shaded more so it looks more dense. Yes it may be approaching the time of thinning, but that is nit-picking in the extreme.
The movement and flow is exactly the same in both images. I chose the other image because you can see more detail and it is larger.
You really have not said anything here at all. A feeble analysis.
I said much more than that. What about the straggly twigs and needles that totally destroy the illusion of it being a big forest?

And why is the second image so different than the first image if the first image is so perfect?
 

MichaelS

Masterpiece
Messages
2,013
Reaction score
4,733
Location
Australia
I said much more than that. What about the straggly twigs and needles that totally destroy the illusion of it being a big forest?
Once again, the image is not of a big forest, it is a near view image. With more distance, fine detail blends into obscurity.
In this case, the ''straggly twigs'' are a vitally important element. The tree/image would be lesser without them.
 

Adair M

Pinus Envy
Messages
14,402
Reaction score
34,874
Location
NEGeorgia
USDA Zone
7a
Once again, the image is not of a big forest, it is a near view image. With more distance, fine detail blends into obscurity.
In this case, the ''straggly twigs'' are a vitally important element. The tree/image would be lesser without them.
Even in an up close view, individual needles in the top of the canopy would not be discernible.

The tree is a raft, right? It’s a way of making a forest composition. In a forest composition, if it’s “near view”, the largest and primary tree is in the front of the composition. The presumption is that in a forest, the largest and oldest trees would be in the center, and younger trees would be on the outer edges of the forest. So, to get a near view, someone would have to be in the middle of the forest standing right in front of the primary trunk. That is the DEFINITION of a near view forest.

A far view forest is the image presented as if someone was in a meadow looking at the forest in front of them. In that case, there would be smaller trunks between them and the primary tree, which is in the center.

Your raft has trunks that arise in front of the primary and tallest trunk. By definition, it’s a “far view” forest.

In forests, trees in the center grow pretty much straight up. They have to, or else they won’t get any sunlight. It’s the trees around the edges of the forest that lean out, at an angle, to reach the light. Your composition has the trunks growing out at quite severe angles trying to reach the light. Again, trunks on the edge of the forest => far view. If a tree tried to grow sideways in the center of the forest, it would get shaded out and die.

You seem very motivated to push an anti Japanese and anti traditionalist agenda. To the point of bigotry. It’s fine to have personal preferences. Everyone has them. But to say that my personal preference is wrong, that I have no eye for art, I have no appreciation for nature, that I don’t “get it”, is simply childish on your part.

And, I am simply tired of your bigotry. I have several friends that apprenticed in Japan, and I have Japanese friends, as well. I have two personal friends who have won Kokofu prizes. I have another friend who exhibited at Kokofu. We discuss styling, and they all can modify their styling to suit the material, and the desires of their clients. There is no right and wrong styling. I think there is good and bad bonsai, but styles can vary.

Like I said, I don’t much care for the pagoda styled tree that Owen worked on, but it was what the customer wanted. Is the customer wrong for wanting a tree like that? I mean, some like their shrubbery shaped in balls. Others like a solid flat top hedge. Which is “right”?

But what really is getting on my nerves is the anti-Japanese bigotry. I couldn’t figure it out what exactly it was in your posts that rubbed me the wrong way, but now I’ve figured it out. Bigotry. Bonsai is a Japanese word. And yet you appear to hate all things Japanese.

That’s uncalled for. I’m kicking myself for not recognizing it earlier. So, I’m afraid I’m done with you. I prefer not to associate with bigots.
 

TN_Jim

Omono
Messages
1,972
Reaction score
2,442
Location
Richmond VA
USDA Zone
7a
The assertion that anyone whom studies with a teacher becomes their teacher, is asinine.

The assertion that anyone who reports something that they have learned, having executed it or not, even repeatedly, metaphysical or extistental repeated learned principals of an art (or parrot$), is asanine if, in no other principle is exhibited other than you do not respect teachers or the ability of those being taught to have a mind of their own, even while being taught...or vision to critique art.

Having been a teacher myself for a minute, I evolved and learned, even as material was mostly the same but it and I changed. I greatly appreciate all of the folks here whom have repeated themselves over time, teaching from the work of their teachers and the good and negative results of their own curiosity and exploration. Thank you, thank you!

You are not parrots. Biology, horticulture, chemistry, physics, botany, psychology, history, ecology, dendrology, and aesthetics...thank you.

I really don’t understand how trees are judged

I may never have one in a competition and I could care less about being a part of an artistic dispute...but the two in question are not ideal to me, the first looks carved up (not natural, or helpful to the living portion aesthetically), and the second doesn’t look like many forests I’ve walked into, and it’s scraggly or busy aestheticly, if my untrained eye had to critique it; both; are amazing honestly, just not where I’d go, having never been judged, or seen bonsai in person. I’ve watched many a critique, and isn’t this the elephant in the room..........

How your trees are judged?

@Smoke, can you provide an example of what you are after in a tree if it exists without any judgement?
 
Top Bottom