Larch Ramification

your roundabout way of explaining things leaves the matter very ambiguous
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.
 
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.
Every time @sorce posts something I can’t help but think of this scene from jay and silent bob strike back.
 
I think everyone would prefer the leatherback tree, which leads us to want to follow the constant pruning method.

What?!!! Hardly can believe that.... This would be an iconic monumental larch within next 20-33 years. ( or so... )

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.

Whow. I am flattered you appreciate the work done on this larch.
 
leatherback said
Throughout the year I subsequently remove the growing tips as they start to extend. This way I balance extension and ramification. Over the second half of summer growth slows down, and then I allow the tree to do its thing, and I have short young branches to work with in winter, as below.

Over time you will find that your branches get too long and thick, and that is when you make deeper cuts into the canopy to side-branches, creating taper and increasing movement in th
e branches.


Yes, it works OK. The tree looks nice even in development phase. 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.
Thank you for sharing your video
 
Last edited:
What?!!! Hardly can believe that.... This would be an iconic monumental larch within next 20-33 years. ( or so... )
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.

Interesting tree you have there. I do not think I have seen a thread on it. Do you have a thread..? link?

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.
 
Maybe look up manners and appropriate behaviour and continue your educations. Rude Ass Fuck
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.
 
"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.

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
Can you summarise this in plain language please?!!
 
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.
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!).
 
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!).
Sad, but true
 
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.

It's a bit naive to put an image on the internet, and expect to retain complete control of it. You put it out there originally, for better or for worse. It isn't always high fives and back slaps.

Of course he wasn't actually criticizing the tree 🙄
 
Can you summarise this in plain language please?!!
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.
 
I do like Source's posts here in general. He is not giving straightforward recepies like many other experts do. Unfortunately most of us is just looking for something that can be grasped and copied without (too) much thinking. That is the nature of a mankind.
Sorce comments force me to sit there a chew it properly trying to figure out what the message is. Active use of brain makes the whole difference for me. No offence to those who prefer plain labels such as " the only way how to grow larches".

We may use different approches but we are mostly here for the same thing, don't we?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ugo
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.

You know how the monumental larches looks like. Thick gnarled branches are part of it. The challenge with backbudding can be overcome with approach grafting. On the larch mentioned above here there are at least 2 or 3 grafts.
 
A short update on the slightly different technique to develop European larch.

First: This is the update on the larch mentioned above. Just a picture of the tree taken from its pole. No hassle to better define the pads etc.
Just a tree in the refinement stage.
Height: 62 cm


NIK_0582_Larch_Old Pall.jpg

Here is the current right side. As I try to make 360 look it may be a new front to avoid the thick roots that grows directly to the viewer. On the other side - the root is a nice feature ( tickling the tradition a bit ) as it follows the movement of the trunk nicely...

NIK_0589_right side.jpg

Technique in use to develop the tree:
- cutting on buds - no pinching
Rationale:
As the tree gets more "pot matured" it will reduce the size of the leaves/needles and also the length of its internodes naturally. So from chuhin upwards you should get the right size of internodes that fits into the design.
In case the length of a internode is on a specific shoot too long you can cut it away leaving just a small stub - you do not care about the buds in this case - just stub with no buds. Within few weeks you should get new buds right on the border of the last year and this year growth. See below

Actually in the same way you can improve the taper. Just leave the new shoots to elongate and to help to thicken the primary branch and then cut them short without taking account the position of buds.

Please note this is not a cook book recipe - just the technique that I have used to develop this tree. The Mirai method that Jelle has presented here in his great video is for sure a good technique to keep trees healthy with nice ramification right from the scratch while with the technique I have used here it will take time before you start with ramification. During that period your tree doesn't look very nice. So you need your vision and patience to wait for the right time to move further. Worth it?

NIK_0594_larch buds_2.jpg

NIK_0595_Larch_Buds_3.jpg

A new shohin in making...
Getting the girth first
 
Last edited:
Everybody complaining about Sorce then complaining how they're all complaining about Sorce. This is not how you ignore!
 
Came across a 2019 winter image of my larch.

I like the branch structure, taper and thickness distribution across the canopy..
Lower right branch could do with more inner foliage, but that was not available, and I try to go about developing without weaker grafts.

1660129958240.png
 
Back
Top Bottom