Remember when I said the guidelines can be broken? Well... The movement thing is really important. Breaking that one would disrupt the overall flow, disrupt the harmony, and introduce discord.
(Now, I know that's what some would say Art is...that's great discussion fodder... For another thread. Let's keep this one focused on Classical Shohin display. Which is pretty complex all by itself!)
Thanks for posting this info, and the traditional teachings and thoughts behind them. Let, me first state that I understand them fully and I am well aware of what they are, however there are obviously going to be folks that do not, so I think it is great that this is posted for them to learn from and you have set up and written your post on a way that is very easy to come to terms with and understand.
With that said, I disagree with the traditional approach and do so not on a just because approach or because I think it should be something different. Instead, I am taking into account an actual science, that examines the way in which people observe items, that researchers have spent billions of dollars on studying in an attempt to better sell products in the form of advertisement, in order to reach their targeted audience. Now, I am not saying the traditional approach is wrong... but I do think it worth examining and would love to have a duscussion with the individual you mentioned who explained the set up as you have described it... and pick his brain! Would be interesting to examine the differences and see...
As I have mentioned before, I have spent the good majority of my life working in the Film Industry, in TV, as well as in Animation and adrvertisement. All of which are directly geared at presentation... and how what an audience is shown and how this is shown, can have drastically different outcomes in the way they react to the product.
First rule one learns is that an audiences attention span is often very short.. why because people are busy, they have things to do... In advertisement, it is said that within the first 10 seconds an individual looks at an item, they have already made up their mind over whether or not they like it or not, and if they want to see more. Everything after this is then all geared towards then keeping the individual's attention, and from keeping them moving on...
Which is why I mentioned what I did with my critique. Flow is everything! If something appears odd, breaks the flow, or takes the flow to another product, you have broken the chain of keeping the attention span of the viewer and they move on... which is not what you want to have happen, and thus why I said I disagree with the traditional thought regarding display.
Yes, in a single display of a tiered shelf, where this is the only thing in the display... the top tree is the most important. I would agree for the most part that the trees within it should point to the top tree, but also would add that I think it is important that they also point to the center, so as to form an imaginary circle that keeps a viewer's eye continually focus on and moving within the display. Any tree that points outward... automatically breaks this cycle and sends the viewer's attention onto the next display. Which is not what you want to happen, seeing they stop looking at your work. A break in the cycle, tells a viewer that they have reached the end, seen all they need to see and it is now time to go.
With the addition of the extra tree and accent plant, the rules of the display now need to work with it as well, seeing now all of this is part of the display and is what you want the viewer's attention to be confined within. In the traditional guides as you have written and have been come to understand as being correct... they, as I interpret them... consider really the two, this being the teired shelf and the additional tree/accent plant as two separate entities really and that they should be considered as such. With the teired shelf being more dominate and the additional tree being almost an after thought... I think this is incorrect... it separates the two and almost makes them two totally different displays instead of just one.
Which is why I stated what I did with the critique... I think they should work as a single unit. If one considers them so... then the goal would be to consider how the flow moves the viewer's eye around the whole composition. So, in this instance, I think it is critical then that the trees in the teired shelf are in a direction that ultimately points towards the additional tree, and vice versa with the additional tree, as well as the accent plant which I did not mention in my critique. Really in this instance, it is my view that the accent plant should not conform to the traditional thought of facing the additional tree, but instead should face the teired shelf, and completing the circle of the flow within the overall composition.
Lastly, I stated that I felt the additional tree should hold more weight because of where the tree has been placed within the composition... It is placed in front of the teired shelf within the table. Now, I understand that this goes against the view of traditional teachings, but why I still feel this is incorrect, is due to the logic of how the viewer understands in reality the world around them... this is to say that objects closer to them will always hold more weight than objects further away, in a correct perspective. This is of course if you are asking the viewer to come to terms with the notion that the trees should be of a relatively similar size in comparison. By this I mean, yes an accent plant placed in front is commonly understood that it is smaller in comparison to a tree.
I will give an example of how this works... as well as support to what I am suggesting. In the first picture you posted, the image is taken from a view that really somehow gives the viewer a very flat perspective... this is probably due to lens selection the camera has choosen, and the further distance away from the display at which the picture was taken. The image has been flattened out and really everything appears to be within the same plane. The teired shelf holds more weight mainly because it has more going on and more to look at, so it is the dominate feature.
Now, in the second picture you posted, clearly you were closer to the display and the picture was taken with a wider lens... in this picture the photo has much more depth. One sees a real difference between what is placed in front and what is placed behind, and everything does not appear on the same plane. In this picture the additional tree appears to hold more weight, and appears to be as it should appear, more dominate. Why? Because it is what we would normally expect to happen with an object of being relatively of equal size... being closer to us. For this is how every day objects appear in life to us and how we see in perspective.
Sorry, know this is a long read... and folks who like sound-bytes are probably rolling their eyes... lol! But, thought it worth adding to the conversation. Adair if you get a chance, pass along this to the gentleman you mentioned and ask him his veiws regarding it. Again, not trying to say anyone is wrong, your display is awesome, and look forward to seeing it in Rochester, great work! Just examining and asking the question of why if this is not how we see in life, why the traditional guides are what they are, that all.
Thanks!
