Another BIG American Hornbeam thread.

[ForrestW]

That’s an awesome hornbeam, going to be a sweet tree. I need to find me a friend who field grows, have you made a pot for it yet?

Thanks-- No pot yet, but probably next winter I will.

She’s a Beauty. Great call on the upper trunk removal and letting the other stuff fill that area in. As the boys above said I do like the hollows on the front they like, but I also like the movement and one large hollow on the other side. Now you’re going to have to go through the grueling process of sourcing a large American handmade glazed pot….

Thanks-- I think I know a guy who likes to make big pots

I’m a fan of the second as a front. Even though the features (hollows) on the first is a draw, the second front carries a much stronger primary line. It also removes the opposing lower branches and allows the pair to instead provide a strong lower branch while the other adds depth. Adds a stronger assymetry that further ages the tree as well. Just my 2 cents.

I appreciate your thoughts.

Definitely the front with the hollows .. looks much older and shows age and reminds me of old trees I see along streams and farms

Noted-- thanks for the feedback.

I’m in the bag for the first front, specifically because of the lower branches. A big thick trunk should have big thick branches which is another way to demonstrate age.

The second front makes the tiny left new branch the key branch, and it’s going to be a very long time before it’s believable, if it ever is

@ForrestW is the trunk leaning forward/backward meaningfully in either position?

So there is a clear movement front to back on this tree in the middle. In slide 31 with the two similar hight branches the center of the tree leans back slightly, then I am growing the upper branches to come back over the center so the apex is back over the base/in front a little. On the opposite side is more traditional with a little front and back but mostly bows to you.

I am going to buck public opinion and say I would choose the second front... It eliminates the problem with the two lower branches coming out at the same level. The hollows aren't interesting enough (yet) to out weigh the lower branch problems... Much better movement in the lower trunk...

Thanks for your thoughts-- interestingly, when you were here a while ago you quick view you liked the more natural side with the holes. It was just a quick look, but for now its pretty easy to design both sides as an in the round piece, but I may try to make a pot the shows both as the are about 1/3 rotation from each other. Not sure if that would work but I may be pondering it over the next year...

 

[BobbyLane]

Yes I would style it with both fronts in mind. So when you edit either side, you flip the tree around to see how it impacts the opposing side.

Also, I would re do the wiring. I think you can negate the two primary branches at the same level with styling, a little. I have seen Ryan neil styling like this, to gain more asymmetry. Since the tree is moving towards the right, start at the first primary on the left and have everything coming off that sub trunk rising upwards, by the time you get to the sub on the right, the branch movement will be moving downwards. I think that will help to get the two subs off the same plane, somewhat. So the first left branch will set the tone, Ascending branches from the left that begin to dip on the other side.

I would also work on obscuring the main trunk and begin training growth to cover it, both sides.

 

[Shogun610]

after reading everyone’s input I still like front 1 , I just think the 2nd front the top branch is very heavy and thicker and throws off my viewpoint of weight at the base it looks like it’s going to tip over .. I like the sound weighted centering of the second front .. you can easily hinder one of the two lower branches to off set

 

[BobbyLane]

With material like this you can change your mind over time, tastes can change when you look at the tree everyday, which is why i'd style it with both sides in mind.

 

[BobbyLane]

Slight tweak with left and right side. The primarys on the same plane dont bother me much btw, but you could try a couple tweaks and look again. I do still prefer this side. I think these tweaks could add more movement and drama. When I look at the tree my eyes are drawn straight to the canopy, I think its great. Still juvenile, but I love the overall shape. The tweaks will give you asymmetry, uniqueness, mystery etc

 

[Orion_metalhead]

This is my hang up with this as a front. The symmetry and branches being at the same height and almost same thickness. The other still feels very natural and wild, while presenting more of a sense of order and hierarchy
View attachment 574001

I could see this argument but because there is no reverse taper, Im not as worried about the "V".

 

[ForrestW]

Slight tweak with left and right side. The primarys on the same plane dont bother me much btw, but you could try a couple tweaks and look again. I do still prefer this side. I think these tweaks could add more movement and drama. When I look at the tree my eyes are drawn straight to the canopy, I think its great. Still juvenile, but I love the overall shape. The tweaks will give you asymmetry, uniqueness, mystery etc

View attachment 574025

Thank you very much for the time and feedback. I agree, that continuing with both fronts is a good plan for now-- and I am considering what kind of pot I can make that may show off both fronts-- something 5 sided, or roundish with multiple faces. The two fronts are between 1/3 to 2/5 apart-- not opposite.

I could see this argument but because there is no reverse taper, Im not as worried about the "V".

I am not too bothered by it at the moment for the same reasons-- but its only a few years out of the field so my views may change with another year or two of development.
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

 

[johng]

Thanks for your thoughts-- interestingly, when you were here a while ago you quick view you liked the more natural side with the holes. It was just a quick look, but for now its pretty easy to design both sides as an in the round piece, but I may try to make a pot the shows both as the are about 1/3 rotation from each other. Not sure if that would work but I may be pondering it over the next year

I remember looking at this one and really liking it...but I could not remember what I had said about it. I guess it might be the difference between 2d and 3d. Either way it is a great piece of material that soon going to be a fabulous tree under your guidance.

 

[ForrestW]

Fall update-- about 1/2 to 2/3 of the leaves had fallen off and the rest were yellow so I defoliated and did the first round of cut backs. I may go farther in the spring when I see what buds are swelling. This tree is still pretty young in its development but I am happy with the progress. A few of my thoughts. The bottom left branch will probably run for 1 more year than I think I will reduce it back to the earlier branching for better taper and movement. But I think if I can thicken it up just a bit more first that would be better. Also, I cut a lot more in the apex region as it certainly grows the strongest. I am planning on using the short front branch to build more of the apex and will let it grow and put a little wire movement into it this spring. But the long growth from this year was all very strait and I cut it back pretty short. So right now the apex is week and more to the right than I think it will be in the end. But... all these ideas can change with a few more years development. I am going to try and make a pot for it this winter and move it into a bonsai pot with good soil as it has now had 3 years in this box. Also, I think I am sticking with this front for now as the other side has filled in I feel like this if the natural opening...

 

[ForrestW]

One question I have for some of our seasoned deciduous folks @Maros in studying the branch development process (and more specifically to hornbeam) it looks like in work by Maros, and Marija Hajdic, Walter Pall etc have branches were grown longer and wired for movement, others were clip and grow. I recently listened to the Mirai podcast from Dennis Vojtilla and he talked about his rule of thumb and not allowing any growth or internode distance more than about 3/4 of an in on the interior, and as you get to the fine ramifications no more than a 1/2 inch. His process also comes from developing the branches and trunk together while in a pot. This tree was field grown but I am still unsure of how much of the tree I should grow long and wire as I did last season. Does anyone have thoughts on the difference between those two approaches and how you may approach using them on works like this and in the large scale.

 

[BobbyLane]

One question I have for some of our seasoned deciduous folks @Maros in studying the branch development process (and more specifically to hornbeam) it looks like in work by Maros, and Marija Hajdic, Walter Pall etc have branches were grown longer and wired for movement, others were clip and grow. I recently listened to the Mirai podcast from Dennis Vojtilla and he talked about his rule of thumb and not allowing any growth or internode distance more than about 3/4 of an in on the interior, and as you get to the fine ramifications no more than a 1/2 inch. His process also comes from developing the branches and trunk together while in a pot. This tree was field grown but I am still unsure of how much of the tree I should grow long and wire as I did last season. Does anyone have thoughts on the difference between those two approaches and how you may approach using them on works like this and in the large scale.

I have read this too, and I tend to follow it in regards to straight sections of branch. Occasionally I may opt for a bend instead if possible. On feature branches, as I think your first left one is, I tend to leave them a little longer and I think the guideline applies less to those feature branches. Ive seen long, spreading branches on Kokofu maples too.

Sometimes though, you just need to go with your instincts , as long as it looks good to your eye.

Also, during the season, when the tree is in full leaf, that first left will be getting shaded out. So maybe I would loosely wire it upwards while its thickening up and partially defoliating the apex/crown so it gets plenty light still.

 

[Maros]

One question I have for some of our seasoned deciduous folks @Maros in studying the branch development process (and more specifically to hornbeam) it looks like in work by Maros, and Marija Hajdic, Walter Pall etc have branches were grown longer and wired for movement, others were clip and grow. I recently listened to the Mirai podcast from Dennis Vojtilla and he talked about his rule of thumb and not allowing any growth or internode distance more than about 3/4 of an in on the interior, and as you get to the fine ramifications no more than a 1/2 inch. His process also comes from developing the branches and trunk together while in a pot. This tree was field grown but I am still unsure of how much of the tree I should grow long and wire as I did last season. Does anyone have thoughts on the difference between those two approaches and how you may approach using them on works like this and in the large scale.

I'm not sure if I understand your question correctly. But from my perspective, generally, more movement is better than no movement in branching. And tapering in branches is very hard to build subsequently when the branch is already too long. You can change the initial diameter of the branch with sacrifice branches, but it is not an easy path. Looking at the last picture, the current size of the crown is more or less future final size of the crown of the finished bonsai. So, any additional ramifications must be built on that footprint. The problem is, cutting those branches as they are now will result in bifurcation on the ends. This will create an additional few inches of growth outside of the desired footprint. This will lead to shading of the internal parts of the crown, with a possible result in dieback of weaker branches. Regarding the wiring or not, it is optional. I like the direction of branching; it looks very natural, very pleasing to my taste. The material is impressive and promising to be a fantastic bonsai in a couple of seasons. I quickly looked at the picture and marked, few branches which IMHO will need improvement of taper and shortening of internodes. Especially apex on the left. In case I'm not clear enough or not specific, shoot additional questions.

 

[ForrestW]

I'm not sure if I understand your question correctly. But from my perspective, generally, more movement is better than no movement in branching. And tapering in branches is very hard to build subsequently when the branch is already too long. You can change the initial diameter of the branch with sacrifice branches, but it is not an easy path. Looking at the last picture, the current size of the crown is more or less future final size of the crown of the finished bonsai. So, any additional ramifications must be built on that footprint. The problem is, cutting those branches as they are now will result in bifurcation on the ends. This will create an additional few inches of growth outside of the desired footprint. This will lead to shading of the internal parts of the crown, with a possible result in dieback of weaker branches. Regarding the wiring or not, it is optional. I like the direction of branching; it looks very natural, very pleasing to my taste. The material is impressive and promising to be a fantastic bonsai in a couple of seasons. I quickly looked at the picture and marked, few branches which IMHO will need improvement of taper and shortening of internodes. Especially apex on the left. In case I'm not clear enough or not specific, shoot additional questions.
View attachment 618666

Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. The two on the left I was going to grow long this season for thickness then cut back much harder, but I was on the fence about how far down to go on the top one. I shortened it a fair bit already but agree, that it and probably quite a few on the right can come back in tighter for more interior bifurcation. Thanks.