Trident Maple

[coh]

I acquired this trident maple from a local club member last spring. The first photo is from what the previous owner was using as the front. The second photo is from the same view, but with the tree tipped to the right a bit. The third photo is from a slightly different angle. The fourth photo shows how the tree looked in leaf in the fall (from the back side, for whatever reason).

I like the graceful slightly curved trunk. I don't like the reverse taper near the apex nor the lack of branches on the upper right. The previous owner designed the tree with one layer of branches below an apex. I figure I can carve taper back into the upper trunk. As for the gap...there is one very small branch growing near the right place to eventually fill in to some degree. I'm also going to let some leads extend for possible future grafting (the smaller branch that extends up to the right, most visible in the 3rd photo). I've also thought about whether it would be a good idea to consider grafting a branch lower on the trunk somewhere, perhaps in the back, to break the symmetry of the lowest branches.

Just wanted to see if anyone had a preference out of the three photos, or any thoughts about how to take this tree forward. I can post other views if desired, but most likely none will work as well as these.

Chris

 

[Poink88]

I like pic 3...but will probably remove the lower left and lower front branch if this is mine. Top branch cluster can use some clean up too.

 

[RegnarBonsai]

I agree with Poink pic 3 appeals to me the most.

 

[coh]

I like pic 3...but will probably remove the lower left and lower front branch if this is mine.

Unless I'm completely misunderstanding your comment...I don't think you would do that. Maybe you can provide a virt of what you mean, because I interpret your comment as basically taking off everything except the apex. Is that what you're suggesting?

 

[Poink88]

Unless I'm completely misunderstanding your comment...I don't think you would do that. Maybe you can provide a virt of what you mean, because I interpret your comment as basically taking off everything except the apex. Is that what you're suggesting?

Nope. As I see it, there are 3 major "bar" branches at the lower clump (maybe more smaller ones) ...as I said remove the left and front only...leaving the right branch.

 

[Poink88]

You know I am a "butcher" so pardon but this is the butchered version I see as a base to build on.

 

[Poink88]

..OR if the lower branch is too thick to bend..................

 

[lordy]

I too like #3, but feel that the removal of the lower lumber would make a poor literati. I would leave the branches until more growth could be coaxed, then make a decision on what to do as a final.

 

[Poink88]

I too like #3, but feel that the removal of the lower lumber would make a poor literati. I would leave the branches until more growth could be coaxed, then make a decision on what to do as a final.

I normally would agree but because they are in a whorl, leaving them for long will cause major bulge in that area. A problem better avoided than addressed later.

 

[iant]

I think this case illustrates the cookie-cutter-bonsai-first-reaction-syndrome. At first glance you see this tree and can identify a couple 'flaws.' It's a normal reaction to recommend fixing those. But then you'd be taking what really is a beautiful tree and trying very hard to make it into a standard form tree. Why not just make that standard form tree from some other tree that isn't so far along or from one that already has branches in the 'correct' positions? Why not just let this tree be the tree that it's already become and let some other tree be the standard tree?
The leafed out photo is beautiful. Nice black background!
Ian

 

[Poink88]

I think this case illustrates the cookie-cutter-bonsai-first-reaction-syndrome. At first glance you see this tree and can identify a couple 'flaws.' It's a normal reaction to recommend fixing those. But then you'd be taking what really is a beautiful tree and trying very hard to make it into a standard form tree. Why not just make that standard form tree from some other tree that isn't so far along or from one that already has branches in the 'correct' positions? Why not just let this tree be the tree that it's already become and let some other tree be the standard tree?
The leafed out photo is beautiful. Nice black background!
Ian

And there is the "let it be the tree it wants to be" syndrome. I see that as an excuse for those who cannot do a the cookie-cutter-bonsai. You see/hear that excuse a lot in the art world too (and everywhere).

If you want to grow potted plants...that is fine, let them be but please do not call them bonsai. You will do the art injustice.

D-trees are usually not judged in leafed state for a reason. If you are happy with hiding flaws that is fine.

Bonsai is NOT a natural tree sorry, but that is the truth. By moving it in a pot alone takes that natural aspect of it. That said, it is a miniature that may portray one.

I indicated my reasons, whether Chris take them or not is up to him.

 

[iant]

Dario,
With other trees I agree. I just think that THIS tree is an example where the approach you suggested really doesn't work. So first you remove the right branch (with it's forward aspect.) Now you're looking at the trunk and thinking... hmmm... it's not tapered enough and has too long of a straight portion at the base. So let's fix that... by the time you add up the work it would take for what you get you would have been better off building what you really wanted (a bonsai that followed all the rules) from scratch.
I'm not trying to make excuses.
Bottom line is answering this question: Does the tree look better having the bottom right branch removed or not?
I think in this particular case at the end of "fixing" everything you'd be left with an apex (which apparently you think is too crowded.)
Ian

 

[Poink88]

Dario,
With other trees I agree. I just think that THIS tree is an example where the approach you suggested really doesn't work. So first you remove the right branch (with it's forward aspect.) Now you're looking at the trunk and thinking... hmmm... it's not tapered enough and has too long of a straight portion at the base. So let's fix that... by the time you add up the work it would take for what you get you would have been better off building what you really wanted (a bonsai that followed all the rules) from scratch.
I'm not trying to make excuses.
Bottom line is answering this question: Does the tree look better having the bottom right branch removed or not?
I think in this particular case at the end of "fixing" everything you'd be left with an apex (which apparently you think is too crowded.)
Ian

I present what I think...not forced on you or Chris.

I actually removed the left branch

Suggesting a sumo chop is a lot worse but you see it recommended a lot here. BUT that is acceptable because of the reason and the end goal. Same here...as I mentioned, it is a base where he can start rebuilding (as I see it).

It was most likely sold because of its problems...Chris inherited those and need to address them as he sees fit.

 

[lordy]

If this is not the "let it be what it is" tree, why just remove the lower branching? Why not advocate the major trunk chop as you many times do? I think leaving a long, nearly taperless trunk and a pom pom at the apex would result in something that would ultimately lead to the chop anyway. Sure, if left alone for the most part this tree is not perfect, but who has perfect trees anyway? There is always something that needs regrowing, repostioning, adding roots, adding branches, etc. Talking from strict theory of perfect design and what is reasonably prudent with respect to health and design of this tree are two different things.

 

[Poink88]

If this is not the "let it be what it is" tree, why just remove the lower branching? Why not advocate the major trunk chop as you many times do? I think leaving a long, nearly taperless trunk and a pom pom at the apex would result in something that would ultimately lead to the chop anyway. Sure, if left alone for the most part this tree is not perfect, but who has perfect trees anyway? There is always something that needs regrowing, repostioning, adding roots, adding branches, etc. Talking from strict theory of perfect design and what is reasonably prudent with respect to health and design of this tree are two different things.

Simple. Because I see beauty on that "long and taperless trunk".

 

[coh]

Interesting comments! Thanks to those who have responded.

Why did the previous owner sell it...because of "flaws"? Maybe. She grows many trees, sells many trees...perhaps she felt she took this one as far as she could or wanted to, or just needed to make room for new stock. I don't really know. All I know is she spent quite a few years developing it from raw nursery stock, and I got it for a very fair price.

I like the tree as is and may very well leave it this way (with minor tinkering). Ideally I'd like the branch on the lower right to be lower...but I don't think there's much chance of lowering it successfully. I could graft a branch below it and develop that and eventually remove the current lower right branch (something like the virt below). Or I can just enjoy the positive aspects of the tree.

Ultimately...I'm not concerned with "doing the art injustice". I have no delusions that what I'm doing in my backyard is going to have any kind of impact on the bonsai world. If it does, then the chips will fall where they may.

Still interested in other opinions, so please speak up if you see something different here!

Chris

 

[Paulsur]

Chris your tree is nice. Your last virt is nice too. Not at all cookie cutter either way. While you could just lower the right branch, it could be removed and one thread grafted where you wanted it. This species is the material to do it with. You could remove the left branch and thread graft one a little higher as another suggestion. Ultimately as you indicate the verdict is up to you. Its your work now. You are the artist. We present our material here and we solicit comments. In that spirit we have lively debate and discussion. if we did not do it, we would not grow from the input our little community is willing to offer. Keep us posted. You have me vested in the tree and your progress with it now.
Paul

 

[lordy]

previous owner P.M.?

 

[drew33998]

Interesting comments! Thanks to those who have responded.

Why did the previous owner sell it...because of "flaws"? Maybe. She grows many trees, sells many trees...perhaps she felt she took this one as far as she could or wanted to, or just needed to make room for new stock. I don't really know. All I know is she spent quite a few years developing it from raw nursery stock, and I got it for a very fair price.

I like the tree as is and may very well leave it this way (with minor tinkering). Ideally I'd like the branch on the lower right to be lower...but I don't think there's much chance of lowering it successfully. I could graft a branch below it and develop that and eventually remove the current lower right branch (something like the virt below). Or I can just enjoy the positive aspects of the tree.

Ultimately...I'm not concerned with "doing the art injustice". I have no delusions that what I'm doing in my backyard is going to have any kind of impact on the bonsai world. If it does, then the chips will fall where they may.

Still interested in other opinions, so please speak up if you see something different here!

Chris

I like maples that are wider than tall. If it were mine I would grow leaders like you said and graft them lower on the trunk.

 

[discusmike]

If it was mine I'd chop, but that's my opinion, the rest is up to you.