Initial styling of a procumbens juniper

thomas22

Chumono
Messages
615
Reaction score
1,744
Location
Southern California
USDA Zone
10
Nice job. It will even look better when it fills out a bit more. The lowest right branch is not good IMO. I would lose this branch but wait for other opinions. Its your tree so if you like it then keep it for now. When you get a chance in the next few day, take a pic of the tree with the camera level with the tree. The right branch may look different with different camera angles.
 

WyldStallyn

Seedling
Messages
24
Reaction score
62
IMG_1918.JPG

Spring update on this procumbens. Just letting it fill in this season, hoping for some back budding so I can continue to tighten it up. Still unsure about the bottom right branch, but leaving it for the time being
 
Messages
3,554
Reaction score
4,269
View attachment 141153

Spring update on this procumbens. Just letting it fill in this season, hoping for some back budding so I can continue to tighten it up. Still unsure about the bottom right branch, but leaving it for the time being
I think it looks pretty good.
Definitely remove the right bottom branch.

Moving forward with the tree, and as you begin to refine it... where the issue lies now is with weight. That the weight of the mass of foliage is to heavy for the scale of of the trunk. That when you have a heavy amount of foliage on a small sized trunk... it gives the feeling of tree being a much younger tree.

One option is to try and chase back foliage and thus have shorter branching... the other is to instead have longer branching with minimal foliage, and instead giving the tree tree a much more sparce look.

Both concepts work in obtaining the finial result... which again, is to give the tree's foliage mass... less weight, in order to make the tree feel older and more powerful.

I pretty much never chase back foliage.
I find it is for the most part a waste of time.
It is very rare that I cannot solve this issue without properly figuring out a path forward with just the style of the tree.

Not to mention, not only does it take longer, but is for the most part counterproductive to what the tree naturally wants to do... that being growing out. The more you work against the tree, the more you fight it... and the more unhealthy it becomes.

You should check out some of my videos I have posted up at youtube, and have linked to this site. I deal with these issues quite often, and have just posted up one that demonstrates this process.
 

WyldStallyn

Seedling
Messages
24
Reaction score
62
I think it looks pretty good.
Definitely remove the right bottom branch.

Moving forward with the tree, and as you begin to refine it... where the issue lies now is with weight. That the weight of the mass of foliage is to heavy for the scale of of the trunk. That when you have a heavy amount of foliage on a small sized trunk... it gives the feeling of tree being a much younger tree.

One option is to try and chase back foliage and thus have shorter branching... the other is to instead have longer branching with minimal foliage, and instead giving the tree tree a much more sparce look.

Both concepts work in obtaining the finial result... which again, is to give the tree's foliage mass... less weight, in order to make the tree feel older and more powerful.

I pretty much never chase back foliage.
I find it is for the most part a waste of time.
It is very rare that I cannot solve this issue without properly figuring out a path forward with just the style of the tree.

Not to mention, not only does it take longer, but is for the most part counterproductive to what the tree naturally wants to do... that being growing out. The more you work against the tree, the more you fight it... and the more unhealthy it becomes.

You should check out some of my videos I have posted up at youtube, and have linked to this site. I deal with these issues quite often, and have just posted up one that demonstrates this process.

Thank you for the detailed reply. I agree that the foliage mass is too large for the trunk at this point. Just not sure where to take it stylistically from here.
 
Top Bottom