grouper52
Masterpiece
I think my biggest concern with that technique (which I am able to do), is that it's greatest value lies in being able to curve inward (which is typically the problem) to add movement, not take it away. The live areas supporting the tree run along the back of that curve for the most part. Stretching it upward might damage it, as the bark is not going to be of that much inclination to stretch. I bares some thinking on though, it think I would have to further increase the deadwood area to account for the areas where the bark will simply tear apart. And then it's a waiting game to get to the point where the branch could support the weight of it's top again... because there is a lot of heartwood in that area, and it would have to be separated to get the movement required.
Interesting conversation though... as it does get others thinking.
Kindest regards,
Victrinia
I'm well aware that you know the technique, Vic, probably better than I do! That's why I suggested it. But I'm not pushing the idea, Vic, just suggesting. You might just go exploring with the die grinder around there, cutting through some of the rigid heart wood, which will feel much different to your hands than the mushy sap wood, and after you eliminate some then just see if it frees it up. The amount of movement I'm suggesting is quite small in this case, especially compared to the usual inward sharp bend where the outward facing cambium can really get stretched unless the whole structural integrity is loosened substantially.
Anyway, I didn't mean to stir up a hornet's nest, nor to detract from the beauty of the tree as it is now, and the impressive transformative work you put in on it yesterday. It's lovely either way, and I agree with Vance that the trees you've posted in the last few days are really of an impressive quality.
Will