Hartinez
Masterpiece
I know it! No apology needed!Danny, sorry man, not referring to you.
I know it! No apology needed!Danny, sorry man, not referring to you.
Almost always. I know there is something in these posts of value, but it makes me feel like every step there is more mud clinging to my boots and I just can't get through it.your roundabout way of explaining things leaves the matter very ambiguous
Every time @sorce posts something I can’t help but think of this scene from jay and silent bob strike back.Almost always. I know there is something in these posts of value, but it makes me feel like every step there is more mud clinging to my boots and I just can't get through it.
No offense intended, its just that its not for me.
I think everyone would prefer the leatherback tree, which leads us to want to follow the constant pruning method.
Though people may not prefer the ralf tree, they have to see he is doing excellent work to make use of what that tree is offering.
somehow it feels like someone went out of his way to offend two persons at the same time. From my perspective, "preferring one over the other" is a silly concept anyway. I am perfectly capable of appreciating more than one tree.What?!!! Hardly can believe that.... This would be an iconic monumental larch within next 20-33 years. ( or so... )
True. My perspective here is more: Larch has no trouble fattening up. The bigger challenge over time will be to keep light branches in the tree, particularly because of the near absense of backbudding in larches.On the other hand one have to spend here a lot of time to create ramification that will be removed later on anyway. At least this is my experience.
I put @sorce on ignore years ago and now I don’t have that irritant to spoil my enjoyment of this forum. I found him to be an overflowing fountain of misinformation.Maybe look up manners and appropriate behaviour and continue your educations. Rude Ass Fuck
Can you summarise this in plain language please?!!"ramification" is one of the most coveted (as in sin) and misunderstood concept in bonsai.
We view it as a "must" and that "must" tends to lead us towards ugly, or poorer than could be, design.
It's a concept that is hard to shake as a newb, one that shows it's face in this idea of "doing bonsai the same wrong way for 40 years".
We put the achievement of "backbudding" and "ramification" over what patience provides in terms of GOOD BRANCH STRUCTURE.
From this thread.
When to trim Larch?
Hi All, I am working on a larch I really like, and I have been told development is too slow, and I should not trim it atall during the growing season. I am however inthe habit of trimming once I get 4-6 inches extension on the branches, and the inner foliage starts to get shaded out. I am now...www.bonsainut.com
A @leatherback tree with a couple years between utilizing a constant (stated) "paintbrush"(assumed) pruning.
View attachment 445749
View attachment 445750
And a @ralf pad where growth is not trimmed until buds show so one can choose directionality of new shoots. (May/June).
View attachment 445751
I would appreciate a top down photo of the first, and an update on the second.
This may aid in clearing up some of the differences that make these quite "apples and oranges" still as far as comparing them ......
But I largely prefer the wonderful structure of the ralf branch. TAPER!
I think everyone would prefer the leatherback tree, which leads us to want to follow the constant pruning method.
View attachment 445752
View attachment 445750
That's the devil detail that keeps us foolish.
Though people may not prefer the ralf tree, they have to see he is doing excellent work to make use of what that tree is offering.
That said, I think the leatherback tree would be much better with the ralf branch structure. Which is obviously not full of "long internodes" as is stated he would have by not constantly pruning.
In conclusion.
"Perfect", will likely come from using all the tools and methods available, depending on the state of each branch/section, end goals, etc.
In the beginning of this lil research/figuring, I was thinking these larches, like anything with a recommendation of "constant pruning", are products of impatience. A little weak, and ramified with no taper. Pom pom destiny.
I believe it now.
Can't know for sure unless these owners add more pics, old and new, and speak a bit more of what they are doing. I think both can benefit from combining forces.
I don't understand how we believe removing energy add thickness.
I believe the growth rate, ie; fertilizer, water, general health and growing conditions, is what determines what side of the actual difference a tree lands on of this concept......
If a part is removed, time continues, during that time we lose thickness adding. Then after the new stuff grows, thickening resumes. A fast growing tree may overcome that loss of thickening time. (Sounds like lots of chemical fert)
Slow growing things may not.
It is our absolute inability to perfectly estimate and describe to each other what this growth rate is, that leaves methods working for one and not another. So a description of fert and other practices may help us to figure it out.
As it stands though....the slow game branch structure is superior.
Seems a tree we work a year early out of impatience which slows an excellent design.
Many are like this....people and trees.
Sorce
You got that right brother! I'll try the ignore too!I put @sorce on ignore years ago and now I don’t have that irritant to spoil my enjoyment of this forum. I found him to be an overflowing fountain of misinformation.
Yeah but just because you can't see him doesn't mean he can't derail threads. I subscribed to this thread hoping for tips and it's like 80% sorce-driven drama (thanks to people who actually posted about their larches and larch experience!).I put @sorce on ignore years ago and now I don’t have that irritant to spoil my enjoyment of this forum. I found him to be an overflowing fountain of misinformation.
Sad, but trueYeah but just because you can't see him doesn't mean he can't derail threads. I subscribed to this thread hoping for tips and it's like 80% sorce-driven drama (thanks to people who actually posted about their larches and larch experience!).
Why don't you worry about how YOU grow trees, before you bring in other peoples trees to "show your expertise".
Once again. It is NOT OK to start taking pictures of trees of someone else and then guessing how they manage them, and criticizing.
Uncalled for, and rude.
My take: Ramnification is a consequence of building your tree up properly, and not the final intent. There are multiple roads and a good practicioner has an open mind as to which option is best for his/her tree considering species and phase of development. If we take two different trees and compare them without understanding what is being done or asking the owners of the trees whether it is OK to use their trees as examples, you are in for a shitstorm.Can you summarise this in plain language please?!!
ralf said:
On the other hand one have to spend here a lot of time to create ramification that will be removed later on anyway. At least this is my experience.
True. My perspective here is more: Larch has no trouble fattening up. The bigger challenge over time will be to keep light branches in the tree, particularly because of the near absense of backbudding in larches.