3D printed Bonsai Fusion Support ?

[Gabler]

It doesn't really look like the sort of thing you could get easily without massive trunk fusion.

If Bjorn's tree really took thirty years, then I don't think you could get it easily with trunk fusion, either.

 

[pandacular]

Perhaps I would've said that I don't think you could get it at all without trunk fusion, but I'm not interested in dealing in absolutes.

 

[Gabler]

Perhaps I would've said that I don't think you could get it at all without trunk fusion, but I'm not interested in dealing in absolutes.

You could get it by planting the tree in the ground and letting it grow for ten years, successively chopping over the next ten years to develop taper, and developing the branches and apex over the final ten years.

A disclaimer: I can't say that from personal experience. I haven't even been alive for thirty years myself, let alone growing bonsai for thirty years.

 

[BobbyLane]

For all the successes w/ fusions, there are infinitely more misses...



...just like "traditional" bonsai from meager/starter material. Its not the panacea some make it out to be, but there's no harm in trying if you go in w/ the right expectations. I have a japanese maple fusion project that was started by someone else and given to me a few years ago. Its going to make an ok tree, but not in any less time than it would've taken w/ a single trunk in the ground. (In a pot, MAYBE a little thicker.) Its currently in the grow-out phase for the 2nd or 3rd year since I've had it.

Your native Hornbeam is probably a better candidate, since it already naturally develops a fluted trunk https://nfs.unl.edu/woody-plants/musclewood-hornbeam

 

[rockm]

Yeh well, gaps only pose an issue depending on what style of tree you want to build. Let's not talk people out of creating/attempting different styles of trees, and broadening the mind a bit.
On this experiment the trunks meet higher up from the base...

These examples aren't really what is going on with trunk fused bonsai for the most part, nor with the OP's question. They're nice and everything and certainly expand the mind, buuuut The OP was talking specifically about whether a interior cage that will support all the seedlings for an entirely fused trunk bonsai would work as well as a metal one.

The thought that "there's more than one way to do things" isn't what the OP asked for, nor what is present in any of your examples. They asked about a specific technique, not about alternatives or "mind expansion."

See above---"What are your ideas regarding these supports, and fusing saplings in general ? Also, if anyone has a bonsai fusion success photo you can share, I'd love to put it in the page, with of course attribution to the author."

 

[BobbyLane]

There you go

 

[pandacular]

You could get it by planting the tree in the ground and letting it grow for ten years, successively chopping over the next ten years to develop taper, and developing the branches and apex over the final ten years.

I'm wondering if we were looking at the same tree... the texture and fissures in the bark were not at all like you see with a trunk chop. This is what I mean when I say there is more than one goal, as the goal of that tree was clearly not just big fat trunk.

 

[pandacular]

No don’t do it don’t do anything just argue about it …

I think Shogun nailed the vibe of this thread...anyway, have fun with this one, I look forward to seeing your progress @onlyrey.

 

[rockm]

If you have Facebook, the Indianapolis Bonsai Club has 20 photo series of Doug Philips (who mostly pioneered this technique in the 90's) making a trunk with a wire frame, as well as photos of trees constructed in the same manner 25-30 years ago. The club ran a workshop with Philips back in 2017, using a frame and trident seedlings for $200. They tied all the seedlings at each level of the frame with wire twist ties.

I think the biggest issue with these would be their fragility--and the gaps. You're basically creating a shell around a core, with the interior hollow. Separation of trunks along the weaker callus tissue from movement, snow, or even a heavy rain early on would concern me. If you look at most, if not all, the photos of completed fused trunks, they all have gaps, some significant gaps. There's one on the table of the Indianapolis club's page that mostly resembles a Native American Ti Pi--a cone with an entry slot in it.

And then there's the tanuki question. This IS a tanuki, or "trickster" bonsai, after all. Like a channel grafted juniper.

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

 

[Gabler]

And then there's the tanuki question. This IS a tanuki, or "trickster" bonsai, after all. Like a channel grafted juniper.

This answers my question from another thread. I hate it when growers graft shimpaku foliage onto other varieties of juniper, but I couldn't figure out why I hate it. I thought maybe I was missing something—that maybe if I knew more about it, I would come around to the idea of creating Franken-trees. I still don't like it, but at least now I can explain it in simple terms. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto a different type of juniper is no different than creating a tanuki.

Actually, no. It is different. With a typical tanuki, you're merey using inert driftwood to create a beautiful tree from nothing. When you replace the foliage on a live tree, you're sacrificing a good tree to create a tanuki.

 

[Shogun610]

Grafting shimpaku foliage onto a different type of juniper is no different than creating a tanuki.

Yes it is lol. Scion grafting is 100% different than a tanuki

 

[rockm]

This answers my question from another thread. I hate it when growers graft shimpaku foliage onto other varieties of juniper, but I couldn't figure out why I hate it. I thought maybe I was missing something—that maybe if I knew more about it, I would come around to the idea of creating Franken-trees. I still don't like it, but at least now I can explain it in simple terms. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto a different type of juniper is no different than creating a tanuki.

Actually, no. It is different. With a typical tanuki, you're merey using inert driftwood to create a beautiful tree from nothing. When you replace the foliage on a live tree, you're sacrificing a good tree to create a tanuki.

There's some subtlety to grafting foliage, as opposed to grafting an entire trunk. Technically, foliage grafting is not really a tanuki, as the trunk it is attached to is still living. It's long been used to take advantage of a really nice trunk that comes with crummy foliage for bonsai purposes. It's quite common and can be mostly unnoticeable.

Grafting a sapling juniper to a completely dead trunk, however, is another thing. It is creating a fake tree while the other is enhancing a living one. Not that I'm a huge fan of grafting shimpaku foliage to a Rocky Mountain juniper or other completely alien species. I think that kind of defeats the purpose of using decent collected native trees.

 

[Gabler]

Yes it is lol. Scion grafting is 100% different than a tanuki

It's technically different—that is to say the horticultural technique is different—but that's not what I'm talking about.

Tanuki trees are less valuable than "real" trees, but there's no logical reason for it. If a tanuki graft is performed well, the tanuki tree can easily look better than a "real" yamadori specimen, yet the tanuki would be less valuable. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto another variety, even though the understock is living, is creating a fake tree. It crosses the threshold from legitimate bonsai technique to forgery. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto shimpaku understock, just to add some new branches, is sort of approaching the line between impressive technique and fake tree, but I would place it on the side of impressive technique, since it's the same genetic material, and trees in nature can sometimes self-graft.

 

[Shogun610]

It's technically different—that is to say the horticultural technique is different—but that's not what I'm talking about.

Tanuki trees are less valuable than "real" trees, but there's no logical reason for it. If a tanuki graft is performed well, the tanuki tree can easily look better than a "real" yamadori specimen, yet the tanuki would be less valuable. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto another variety, even though the understock is living, is creating a fake tree. It crosses the threshold from legitimate bonsai technique to forgery. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto shimpaku understock, just to add some new branches, is sort of approaching the line between impressive technique and fake tree, but I would place it on the side of impressive technique, since it's the same genetic material, and trees in nature can sometimes self-graft.

I don’t like tanuki either.. but I don’t think using a scion graft when warranted makes it a fake tree , nor using thread/scion grafting of same foliage to add branching. That is my opinion and that is your opinion. Why are you on a rampage about scion grafting

 

[pandacular]

Grafting shimpaku foliage onto another variety, even though the understock is living, is creating a fake tree. It crosses the threshold from legitimate bonsai technique to forgery.

You present as evidence that tanukis cost less because they are "fake". Why then, in your opinion, are shimpaku grafted native junipers more expensive than raw ones?

Nothing we do in bonsai is "natural"; holding onto an ideal of naturalism for it's own sake gets you very little. This is probably a topic for your other thread though, not sure why it has spilled out over to this one.

 

[Gabler]

Why are you on a rampage about scion grafting?

I wouldn't call it a rampage. I'm not storming into your garden and crushing your trees with a sledgehammer. I'm eliciting a conversation about a topic I find important.

 

[Gabler]

You present as evidence that tanukis cost less because they are "fake". Why then, in your opinion, are shimpaku grafted native junipers more expensive than raw ones?

Nothing we do in bonsai is "natural"; holding onto an ideal of naturalism for it's own sake gets you very little. This is probably a topic for your other thread though, not sure why it has spilled out over to this one.

After a prior comment from rockm in this thread, I realized there is a spectrum from wholly natural to wholly artificial, and I value grafted trees less than ungrafted trees for the same reason most value tanuki less than natural deadwood. It's obvious that for some of you, scion grafting is not too unnatural for your taste, but tanuki is too unnatural for your taste. I draw the line a bit sooner.

I should put this in the other thread, though.

 

[Shogun610]

I wouldn't call it a rampage. I'm not storming into your garden and crushing your trees with a sledgehammer. I'm eliciting a conversation about a topic I find important.

What have you done on your own trees ? Did you scion graft Shimpaku itoigawa on native juniper stock? Or used graft techniques to enhance your tree ?

 

[rockm]

It's technically different—that is to say the horticultural technique is different—but that's not what I'm talking about.

Tanuki trees are less valuable than "real" trees, but there's no logical reason for it. If a tanuki graft is performed well, the tanuki tree can easily look better than a "real" yamadori specimen, yet the tanuki would be less valuable. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto another variety, even though the understock is living, is creating a fake tree. It crosses the threshold from legitimate bonsai technique to forgery. Grafting shimpaku foliage onto shimpaku understock, just to add some new branches, is sort of approaching the line between impressive technique and fake tree, but I would place it on the side of impressive technique, since it's the same genetic material, and trees in nature can sometimes self-graft.

I don't get your reasoning. I would think the opposite is true (and is in Japan=Original trunks are more valuable than original foliage. An "honest" trunk takes longer to develop, so a short cut trunk is a more severe reduction in value)...

 

[Gabler]

I don't get your reasoning. I would think the opposite is true (and is in Japan=Original trunks are more valuable than original foliage. An "honest" trunk takes longer to develop, so a short cut trunk is a more severe reduction in value)...

It's not reasoning. It's an attempt to explain a visceral negative reaction to chopping off a tree's foliage and replacing it with something different.