Boxwood For Real.

[sorce]

The squares on the paper are 1/4in.
Apologies...these are all from the specific silhouette perimeters as indicated on second pic down.

So you see how ramification has less an evident effect than is determined by LOCATION On The tree.


Which makes the ultimate Boxwood for real question for me.......

How do we fool the tree into giving us only Interior silhouette perimeter leaves for our final display?

Cuz what this shows us...
Is no matter what action you take....

Box WILL REVERT BACK TO THESE SIZES.

To be fair an honest...
I looked VERY hard to find leaves on the Swepper with those size differences.

This is more common on over 60% of the tree.



Which makes sense in that it is already much harder to identify the 3 silhouettes on the Swepper.

IT HAS BEEN TREATED MORE PROPERLY.

Left more foliage, more thought out, already further developed from the nursery as far as finding good nursery stock goes.

But after one season just back into box but armed and furious....

I like where this is headed.

This is Boxwood FOR REAL.

This is what boxwood is actually doing.

This is what we can go out and observe after just one season.

That Illustration, the one with the shitty resulting branch structure that makes no mention of the fact that the next of those buds in that line will actually be up and down, not all left and right.

On That English website that makes no mention of Dwarf English Boxwood....
Which I also have found to be predictable as hell...

I don't get it....it's incomplete.

What next?

No no no....

What else?

As in completely ex bullshit and try something based on FOR REAL.

Sorce

 

[StoneCloud]

Cheers bro!! So great that you put all this together in a cohesive way.

I haven't figured out the boxwoods totally yet either, but what I think since:

They always grow hard to get out from the low and interior.....

Possible answers???

Maybe all branches must be regrown from scratch to achieve what you want? But even then no guarantees

Systematic control (as you are starting to do) of the trees energy focus and level on a constant basis until results are achieved.


both have pros and cons.

 

[sorce]

Sorry, I forgot about that pic up there...

Let me explain and further....

Why it is useful in combined with this practice..

Then (a fourth way!) let the tree grow shaggy again, and cut it back to a canopy, removing the growing tips around mid-summer when it's growing strongly. Not necessarily down to two leaves, just wherever makes sense for the canopy. I often use this method in conjunction with the previous way I described, with lots of growing time in between

I am totally with that practice, because it allows for health of tree, and doesn't include defoliation.



This is my proposed PPB or keeping potential problems at bay, for the branch behind where that tip is cut.

Where top and bottom buds are present keep the bottom leaf(energy) and remove the bottom bud(No branch)
Keep the top bud for a branch.
And remove the top leaf to encourage branch.

Same concept for left and right...
Paying attention to where your directions are going, especially where you intend to cut back to in the far future. Alternate, or sometimes don't alternate!
Think! Future vision!

This keeps maximum energy, and minimal problems.

Remember....
Sometimes, for a directional change, you may want to keep a bottom bud if that branch will better fill an area in the future.

Never MINDLESSLY remove bottom foliage.

Also....

I consider a bud nothing more than potential.
The energy it took to create it was minimal.
So removing them before the tree decides to open them is the epitome of energy direction.

Gentle guidance.

All that energy will go into the opposing shoot.

Keeper energy.

If I have to come back and knock a thin opposed that missed....I get pissed!

It's all about that keeper energy.

Why defoliate 6 pairs of leaves when we are only going to go back to two anyway?

Further....

Why waste all that energy in the first place when what we know about energy distribution tells us this Defoliation is what gets us into this death cycle in the first place?

Do I need to take pictures of each of the 100 or so cuts I made this year that resulted in perfect forking?

My kid been playing supermario!

How bout a 1up!

This is my least healthy box.
Baseball Broom thread if you're searching.

I found more than half the soil bone dry at repot. And this was struggling for 2 or 3 weeks prior to that discovery and subsequent fix.

Still...when it showed signs of recovery I gave it hell...
Do or die year!
It's hopping on schedule healthy next year, or dying!



Abused and all within a tiny area, it's hard to tell where this one ends it's silhouettes, save this one runner that is proving this thing healthy enough.


But this area with the old sun burnt leaves from it's unhealthy spring in full sun...

The drop branch left, with the smallest leaves...
Though it struggled...
Even those 2 shoots have proper winter dormant buds set, which tells it will live, though it needs a close eye...
Or I just cut back to what has been propered above it and move on!

Clearly there is No need to defoliate to cut back to something viable and established.

Since we're observing....
See this little problem also evident in this tree...

Some of those old buds never got going again.


See them brighter, more round, amidst the old yellow edged leaves.

They should convert and go dormant, which is NOT OPTIMAL...but I'll take it.

Those proper winter terminal buds of a healthy branch, thinner, dark tipped, less noticeable....

That is the optimal end of season.

A safe going into dormancy.

This must be recognized as a setback.
An energy deficit.
A confusion to the tree.

Sorce

 

[sorce]

I hope it is cohesive!

They always grow hard to get out from the low and interior.....

Possible answers???

Armed with these observations....

I think this falls into realizing boxwood prefer life as well maintained bonsai!

Just keep pruning and wiring to put branches where there are none and eventually it will balance itself!

It wants to be uniform!

Systematic control (

I think the post above this one has some answers to this.

The systematic control I seek is to minimize or remove cons all together.

The leaves after just one season on the Swepper lead me to believe that after a few more years on a twice pruned schedule should only further reduce leaves....

But more so...

In constantly reminding the box, with 2 prunings, that it is not going to be allowed to reach its second and third perimeter....
It will eventually in a sense BECOME that inside perimeter with the smaller leaves that we seek.

Of course this is just reading patterns....

I have omitted the knowledge gained from last year's leaves, in heading to the future!

Sorce

 

[StoneCloud]

In constantly reminding the box, with 2 prunings, that it is not going to be allowed to reach its second and third perimeter....
It will eventually in a sense BECOME that inside perimeter with the smaller leaves that we seek.

Of course this is just reading patterns....

Sorce

I think this is spot on. And as the saying goes "old habits die hard" so time is all we need! lol

 

[j evans]

I am going to have to read this numerous more times, it is a lot to take in. Thanks for posting all of this information!

 

[music~maker]

@sorce Ok, this thread turned a bit into a rambling stream of consciousness, so not sure where to even begin now. =)

Here are a few points that occurred to me as I was reading through the various posts:

- You seem to be wanting leaf reduction and ramification to happen simultaneously. In my experience, it just doesn't work that way. Develop finer and finer branches through ramification, and the leaf size gradually and naturally reduces. I have one where I started with raw nursery stock, gave it a good beating, and then for the next 2-3 years in a row I waited until the first full flush of growth came in and hardened off, then pruned back to a canopy. Without doing anything else, the foliage was starting to grow in smaller after a few years. This year I mostly let it grow again because I felt I was slowing it down too much for the amount of canopy I still want to build.

- You're spot on about wiring box. Wiring these can easily yield unsightly bark damage if you're not super careful. I tend to just use guy wires on the more mature branches. I'll either anchor them to the pot, or to other branches.

- Boxwoods take a relatively long time to put on bark, so when you're still developing branch structure, I don't think 2 pruning per year is always appropriate. The trees you've shown in this thread, I would be lightly constraining each season, and then mostly letting them grow. Every 2-3 years I'd do a major reduction. I like to let them scale up slowly and leave open lots of possibilities, then evaluate what looks best once there's a bit more maturity in the branches.

- I will often intentionally prune further out than I ultimately want, just to encourage lower, more inward growth, as well as branch thickening closer to the trunk and an overall strengthening of the tree. But it really depends on what I'm trying to achieve that year. There are definitely some years that I work my trees harder than others. I tend to make my major moves in early spring, but I don't make major moves all that often. Usually one set of major moves, followed by several years of recovery with light ramification work along the way. Then another major move ... that's how I work most of my trees, not just box.

- The trees you showed pics of were in the ballpark of what I'd call "shaggy". I wasn't at all advocating for reverting all the way back to nursery stock. Just let them stretch out before you work on them.

From a really big picture perspective, my philosophy for developing trees is to set them up at a particular scale, and then just let them exist at that scale for a while. I'll let them gradually add wood each year for 2-3 years, but I'm keeping them at least loosely constrained to the scale I want them at. After they've grown for a while (and usually have filled up the pot with roots), I'll then decide if I want to continue to scale up, or if it's time to scale back down for a bit.

If I'm scaling up, I'll lightly comb out the perimeter of the root ball the following spring and put it in a larger pot, and usually prune back a few of the most dominant branches. But very light touch overall. If I'm scaling down (either major re-potting, or very hard pruning), I'll then re-start the process of slowly scaling back up.

From my observations, it's the repeated cycle of scaling up and scaling down that yields interesting trees. Hard pruning and wiring locks a tree into a particular state for a while, and growing it out adds wood on top of whatever you just did. Boxwoods especially benefit from being allowed to stretch out since the live veins from the branch to the roots increase in size visible as the branch grows, and can leaves the trunk with a natural, muscular look. After a number of cycles of this, you've built a frame for that tiny foliage to grow onto, and repeatedly doing this over a 5-10 year period is almost guaranteed to create something reasonably interesting.

I've been experimenting with this for quite some time now, and while not the fastest method, it does consistently yield interesting trunks and branches over time. This might all already be obvious to you - just my own observations of what's worked for me in the course of trying to figure out how to build trunks.

Anyway, hope this helps.

Cheers

p.s. Here are a couple of old posts about the boxwood I mentioned above:

- Initial styling: http://imgur.com/a/dMHNS

- Branch work, 1 year later: http://imgur.com/a/53odd

Since those albums, I've only done very light work each year, just letting it shag out and then lightly pruning it back to the canopy. I also got it out of that nursery pot and re-potted into a more shallow training pot this past spring. It's probably due for something more intensive next spring or maybe early summer. If not then, definitely by 2019.

 

[Vin]

An intense read for sure! There's a lot to digest.

 

[sorce]

You seem to be wanting leaf reduction and ramification to happen simultaneously.

I understand how it works.

That's exactly why I can't stand that Defoliation method because it is Temporary at best!

I appreciate all your thoughts!

That tree is shaping up well!

________

An intense read for sure! There's a lot to diges

I tossed you in there because I know you keep these well.

I would love to know what you think about this theory of a longer growing season, and your take on using it to cut back more, or play it safe.

Do you witness more, or no rest points?

How often do you prune?

Can we see that little Jammer or what?

Thanks!

Sorce

 

[music~maker]

I understand how it works.

That's exactly why I can't stand that Defoliation method because it is Temporary at best!

Sorce

Well of course it's temporary, but it seems like a safe, reliable way to generate the branches you want to cut back to. More precise, just a bit slower. If you really want a branch in a particular place, it might be a better path than just cutting back.

Question: have you actually tried the technique?

Would be an interesting experiment to have one tree (or ideally, several trees) where you exclusively use the defoliation technique wherever it's appropriate, and another tree(s) where you exclusively cut back to a leaf pairs, then see which one looks better after 3-5 years.

I'm glad you raised the question, because it's forced me to reconsider why I might use the technique in the first place. I've read the original bonsai4me article a number of times, but that's not how I've worked my boxwoods so far. The more I think about it, though, it does seem to have a number of distinct advantages, and the only real disadvantage I can think of is speed. I'll be doing some experiments next season to confirm.

But rather than declare one technique "right" and another "wrong", how about we just list out the pros/cons of each.

Bonsai4me way:
Pros:

• Allows for precise placement of branches
• Reduces the risk of die back.
• Extra growth along the branch will likely thicken up the base just below the new branch you want, thus increasing taper.

Cons:

• Slower than just pruning back to a leaf pair.

Pruning back to a leaf pair:
Pros:

• Allows for precise placement of branches (with additional risks)
• Allows for increased ramification in a single season (with spring pruning and summer pruning)

Cons:

• If the branch dies back after pruning, you lose it all the way back to the next node.
• Faster, smaller growth will leave less of a mark on the branches and trunk.

Pruning back to a canopy:
Pros:

• Let's the tree build up strength
• Provides lots of options for sacrifice branches that can be used to thicken specific parts of the branches & trunk
• When lightly constrained to a canopy, a strongly growing tree will naturally generate lower growth that you can later cut back to.

Cons:

• Slower
• Tree can look shrub-like while you're doing this

Pruning back to established branches only (ie, pruning back to branches, not buds):
Pros:

• Die back almost entirely eliminated from the equation
• Ramification increases naturally
• Taper is preserved naturally over time

Cons:

• Requires paying attention to the tree throughout the entire growing season
• Overall slower process
• May take a while for branches to develop bark

Anything I missed here? Now that I've written this up, I'll probably throw it on the reddit wiki at some point.

I think all of these technique have merit in different situations. I have used 3 of the 4 (everything but the bonsai4me way), and after this discussion, will definitely experiment with the bonsai4me way next season. I can say this, though - for earlier stage trees, favoring growth over pruning yields faster, more reliable results, especially with boxwood.

 

[sorce]

Question: have you actually tried the technique?

Hell No!

And I wasn't trying to convert you!

All those other things have merit, I'm really only concerned with the defolition being assanine.

If I have to make a quick argument...

I would say the ONLY PRO to the defoliation is the Slower growth.

It fits well into my Stradivarius bonsai theory.

Allows for precise placement of branches

How do you feel this is so?

I can prove it actually works against nice looking precise placement of branches.
(i went out and made some more observations, gotta get pics)

Reduces the risk of die back

Has not photographic evidence of a tree in serious distress, still able to put out safely winter dormant buds on the next two back on its weakest shoot evidence enough that this is an uneccessary precaution?

Even Harry states, "a healthy tree will respond well to defoliation"

A healthy tree will respond just as well to cutting back.

This is of course evident in that they are used extensively and for thousands of years to create topiaries, by the English!

likely

Penalty box!

Boxwood for Real!

No likleys allowed!



Sorce

 

[music~maker]

Hell No!

And I wasn't trying to convert you!

All those other things have merit, I'm really only concerned with the defolition being assanine.

But you've never actually tried it. Why so up in arms over something that you have no practical experience with? Other than purely theory, how can you know that it's assanine?

> Allows for precise placement of branches

How do you feel this is so?

Simple. The answer is in the diagrams right from the original article. Six leaves are removed below the growing tip. Six new branches grow back to replace them. You now get a precise choice of which of these six branches gets to stay or go. How is that anything but precise??

If you prune back, you're pretty likely to get two new branches, but there's always the chance that it might now work out. I get that boxwood is pretty reliable, but we're talking about a living thing here. The buds could be damaged or weak, etc. Letting the new branches grow in first lets you know for sure that you will get branches there. There will always be some degree of uncertainty with just cutting back, albeit a smaller degree with boxwood. It's not as likely, but I've definitely had things die back on a boxwood before.

Also, you may find after the branches grow, that you like one more than you thought you would, and that the one you were rooting for just isn't the best one. But now you have six branches to choose from, so you have more choices. I'm all about cultivating possibilities when working on my trees, so this technique actually seems right up my alley.

Obviously not trying to convince you of anything here other than to be open-minded to other techniques. At least try it before declaring it wrong! lol

Penalty box!
Boxwood for Real!
No likleys allowed!

Sorce

I've been doing this long enough that I'm allowed to express things in terms of degree of certainty/uncertainty. Nothing in life is black & white, and the older I get, the more clear that becomes. If I say something is likely, chances are pretty good that I have more than a few data points to back that statement up. =)

In this case, my statement was:

• Extra growth along the branch will likely thicken up the base just below the new branch you want, thus increasing taper.

This one is just logical, and it is likely. Let a branch grow more sub-branches before pruning it back, and it probably will thicken up below the new branch prior to pruning. I may not have used the exact bonsai4me technique before, but waiting and growing something a bit more before pruning it back? I've probably done that hundreds, if not thousands, of times. That's kind of my MO for developing trunks & major branches. But I haven't tried this specific technique yet, so I am unwilling to say absolutely that it will happen that way, only that it is likely.

But now that you've gotten me riled up about it, by this time next year I will be able to say for sure one way or the other because I'm actually going to go try it and find out for sure. Who knows? Maybe you're right and it's 100% a waste of time. But I don't think that's likely. =)

 

[sorce]

you've never actually tried it

Either!

I'm not up in arms!
Smoke yes, thought yes....

If I was, you are defending it just the same without practicing it! yes!?

No worries!

This thread is way more about OBSERVATION THAN ANYTHING.

The point is, most of this stuff I'm reporting on is simply things I went out and observed to be true, mostly true, or at least helpful as far as understanding boxwood.
After one season, inside a couple hours.

Stuff that @anynewb at #newbie bait can go out and study on their trees, or any tree, and teach themselves potentially more than a book.

It's about asking the right questions.

Anywho....

Before I get into this Angles Study...

I'm going to leave you'se with a series of pictures, which became a video.



I figured what better time to test this.


Going for a fully...




Managed it with one hand.


Something to be said about fish fert.
Just as the camera moves away, it breaks with the other sound.

Angles next.

Sorce

 

[sorce]

This is about Defoliation leading to what seems to be LESS precise control of branches.

A prelude to these trident areas and angles....

A master will hide a trident area on a pine until it can be removed, or graft and then never allow it to happen.
90 degree angles more or less the same.

I'm hiding a trident area on that swepper myself, because without it, both apexi will be the same height, or I'll have a bald spot.

I figure I have a 5% chance of removing it within 10 years and it being more visually appealing.

Needless to say, I went vegan with hopes of quitting smoking cigarettes to reach that day.

So to keep the branches in correct order from the get go, as the master would do with the graft...

And because @music~maker more or less dared me to find conflicting info....

An Angle Study.

I haven't defoliated particularly...
(Maybe @c54fun could? Or @cbroad could share case study pics? It's one of you'se!)

So I have nothing but general ideas in regards to what the branches will actually do in the particular "defoliation situation".

But I have noticed some things that would make a great argument against it! Again!

Consider the leaf and how it presses against the branch to keep it at a softer angle.
Consider how removing it will allow that branch to more easily reach that unwanted 90degree angle.


I've marked a couple red for over 90degree and green for under 90, for easier identification.

Note. The up down buds seems to naturally reach wider, which is OK where we are going up anyway.

And the side by sides closer to 90 or softer.

It seems they both WANT TO BE 90.

I feel just as you can put a ruler on the silhouettes and have them the same within 10%, you can put a protractor on these angles the same.

Highly predictable.

Watch how the older the wood gets, or, the longer you leave the middle branch growing, the more solidified out of 90 becomes.


Of course we can sometimes use over 90 degrees to our advantage....but not regularly...
But I don't understand leaving those opposing branches in the first place anyway!

Here is some properly timed quick removal of the center bud or branch. Much nicer softer angles.





I didn't even notice them healing wounds till I looked at this pic!


I'm gonna wrap up a couple more thoughts on these angles and come back in a few.

Some random ideas of how to utilize this information more or less.

Sorce

 

[Vin]

You know you don't have to cut the center branch. You can cut either side of the center branch to help direct or lessen the "big-v" effect.

 

[music~maker]

If I was, you are defending it just the same without practicing it! yes!?

Lol - I wasn't defending the defoliation technique so much as I was defending critical thinking.

That technique makes a certain amount of sense to me because I can already think of ways that I might be able to use it on occasion. It's definitely not something I would use in every circumstance - quite the contrary, actually. But like I said before, just another tool in the toolbox.

This is about Defoliation leading to what seems to be LESS precise control of branches.

And because @music~maker more or less dared me to find conflicting info....

An Angle Study.

The angle thing is certainly an interesting observation, but I still don't see the connection to the defoliation technique. Like @Vin said, you don't have to prune the middle park of the fork. You prune whatever makes sense for the canopy you're trying to build. But I like the thought process - if you're going to advocate one method vs. another, showing us ways that you think one method succeeds and another falls down is a reasonable approach. At least then, we have something tangible to discuss.

I am glad you posted those examples, because they give us something specific to talk about. I think you're initial question was how do people prune these ... well, here's a real-world example of how I would approach this one.

For example, this first one with the 90 degree angle...

01_20170905_140744

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

For something like that, one option might be to try and achieve a branch like the following:

02_20170905_140744_goal

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

Not the only path forward, but not an unreasonable one. So let's talk about how we could get there. I'd probably start by removing half of the fork, and then letting it heal for a while, possible even an entire season to allow the remaining branch to contribute to healing the cut more efficiently.

03_20170905_140744_step1

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

Next, I'd work the foliage back to the bud I want. I actually don't always cut back to the node I want. I often cut back at least a node further out because that helps ensure that I get the branch where I want it. Again, you might think that's overkill, but nothing sucks more than having nature ruin a good plan.

04_20170905_140744_step2

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

Pruning back as shown will yield growth that looks something like below. Now we're back at a similar state as the bonsai4me situation. Could I have gotten here in one step? Sure. But I would have lost out on using the remaining branch growth to help heal over the initial removal of that upper fork. For me, it's all about trunk and major branches above all else. If I can squeeze in a little extra growth to help add some character and heal a wound, I'll do it almost every time. Especially on boxwood, which can take a long time to develop decent bark and thicken up.

05_20170905_140744_step3

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

And after we've gotten the branch growth we wanted, we can prune back. We now have the option of leaving both branches ...

06_20170905_140744_step4

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

Or going for the initial goal we set out to achieve.

07_20170905_140744_step5

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

And one of you other examples ...

08_20170905_141308_action

• music~maker
• Sep 5, 2017

In this case, I'd probably shorten the branch where I made the white mark, and then wire the remaining branch on the right to form a new leader as I've indicated by the wiggly line. Then I'd probably let it go for a season and then see where I was at.

I guess the point is, those 90 degree angles aren't that big a deal. There's almost always something you can do with them. If you catch them early enough, you can often just select branches that don't result in that angle, but if you don't, you just work them into something better somehow. But whether the tree throws those out naturally, or you get there by the defoliation technique, that's just something that boxwood does. One way or the other, you'll have to deal with that situation from time to time.

 

[sorce]

Ok...Boxwood for real!

As A Slow Game Advocate....
Speed is still Everything!

A.J. Pierzynski of the Chicago White Sox had a thought on hitting....
"Every pitch is mine until it isn't "

I feel the same way about bonsai techniques.

Sometimes, like this Defoliation technique, you get pitched a ball high and outside....and you still can hit it out the park.
But this is a slow ass hobby, so why not set yourself up to get everything right in your wheelhouse?

So....

Yes, we don't have to cut out the center shoot, we can cut to the right or left, up or down facing forks.

An appropriate course of action which then begs the question.....

What of the more vigorous center shoot?

What of the resulting straight line?

The more vigorous center shoot can be cut back, if it needs.

And the straight line can be wired.

But the point is to NOT HAVE TO!

With a little forethought, we can avoid these actions.

A metric shit ton of prevention if you will!

Sure, that one extra pruning of the center shoot to slow it down, ONLY when necessary, is nothing to a healthy tree.
A mere 1% wasted energy say...

But 1% of energy saved on each fork on a tree which is ramified into the thousands, and we start accumulating...

A metric shit ton of energy....

Energy that can go into ....
Healing.
Roots.
Allowing flowers.
Big chops.
Rough winters.
Hot summers.
A missed watering.
Etc. Etc. Etc.

In regards to...

Extra growth along the branch will likely thicken up the base just below the new branch you want, thus increasing taper.

Please consider this @music~maker provoked thought which is also Real.

Well, Damn...

Real as far as this is an exercise in identifying what is true or false in what we read.
Most of which is both true AND false!

BASICALLY, READ THIS UNDERSTANDING

"IT DEPENDS "

Bonsai professionals say that a small branch won't thicken the section below it until it is the same size as the part it's thickening.
We know this is not altogether true because science, aka 0soyoung, tells us any amount of growth is building tissue.

So we understand this as true and false.

The real truth we can derive from this is VISUALLY...
There is a significant leap in thickening behind any growing area when the parts after it are allowed to grow to the same size.

But grow to the same size and our taper is gone!

We can better understand this theory by exploring trunk chops.


If we have this tree, and sometime down the road we decide we want to thicken B.
We know we won't see any significant increase until we have a sacrifice branch where A is near the size of B.

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE.
which FYI should have been built in the first place!

The flip....
We know we can use small branches, cut off smaller and healed over easier, on a slow game approach. And also thicken that base.

Neither better or worse...
But there are considerable aesthetic differences in the two.

A reverse understanding of this phenomenon presenting itself in trunk building, is the fact that they hold their taper.

The truth that is.....don't chop it till it's thick enough!

Otherwise you are waiting YEARS and years, and years and years,,,,,to start over!

Anyway this is to say.....

It is not LIKELY, that those branches will thicken what's behind it, heal stuff. Science has it as a fact.

But with this understanding,
It's leaning to MUCH MORE LIKELY we will achieve more energy, and better healing, by simply cutting back to proper nexts.

Cut-Grow-Rest and get into energy positive.
Cut Grow-Rest and get into energy positive.

Man....

I so want to go out and find the branches but I can't remove any more for education!

Imagine cutting those baby shoots in that b4me diagram and holding them in your hand. X2 even.

Then grab a foot long shoot with big thick leathery leaves on it with some tertiary branching already due to vigour...

Which one feels more energetic?

"Play swords" with them which one wins?

Root them! Which one is going to perish?

..............

Kids to school.

Sorce

 

[music~maker]

It's funny, we're saying (and seem to believe) many of the same things, but there's clearly about a 10-15% gap somewhere (I do appreciate the conversation, btw).

It is not LIKELY, that those branches will thicken what's behind it, heal stuff. Science has it as a fact.

Of course they will, but it depends entirely on how long you let them grow before cutting back. If you let them run for five years they'd clearly help with healing, right? Not saying one should, but there's clearly a point at which they contribute meaningfully.

But with this understanding,
It's leaning to MUCH MORE LIKELY we will achieve more energy, and better healing, by simply cutting back to proper nexts.

If you go back to the example I gave in my last post, cutting off the top part of that 90 degree angle ... To your point, if you at the same time cut the other branch back, you then have to grow the new growth back to a point where it's thick enough to use it for healing purposes. Not to mention, if you make both cuts at once, you do at least somewhat increase the chances of the entire thing dying back. I'd rather make the big cut first, let the existing branch run for a while to keep that path healthy and strong (which I promise you, will help it heal more quickly), then work it back (or cut it back) afterwards.

Energy and healing is ultimately achieved by growth, not cutting, fwiw.

Cut-Grow-Rest and get into energy positive.
Cut Grow-Rest and get into energy positive.

Couldn't agree with this more. I just tend to do a bit more "Grow-Rest" than "Cut".

Imagine cutting those baby shoots in that b4me diagram and holding them in your hand. X2 even.

Those are just starting points, man. I don't know why you're so hung up on the specifics of the b4me diagrams. You take an action, it produces a result, and then you get to decide what you do next with it. The baby branches aren't going to just stay that way. I don't get why that's such a sticking point.

I kind of feel like you're nit-picking to support your initial premise here rather than just being willing to admit that there's more than one way to achieve a result.

You know what would be helpful? If you could make your own pros/cons list of the various techniques like I did above, especially for the b4me way. You are clearly seeing some cons that I am not.

So far, you mentioned the 90 degree angle thing, which I've demonstrated isn't really an issue (nor is it specific to the b4me way). And you asserted that the new branches won't help heal the stuff below it, which definitely isn't true, assuming you let everything grow for long enough (and again, still not really specific to the b4me way). Any other reasons you can come up with why the b4me way is so terrible?

Not trying to be a dick or anything, I just really don't see what you're seeing here and am trying to understand your rationale.

 

[sorce]

Absolutely!

I'm learning so this is great!

I think if there is any misunderstanding, it is within the fact that all this information...is true AND false!

Most importantly.

Observation, and quality talk, can go a long way as to figuring out why, and what's good in what circumstances.

Essence of Nut!
To unstagnate American Bonsai, (to hear a German Bird tell it)...
By smashing on the Brits! Lol!

More.....

Sorce

______

 

[sorce]

@music~maker don't want up into miss the.above.post. jumping. To this tag/quote

I will put a proper study on how this all relates...
But for now...

See how all these are related.

It is not LIKELY, that those branches will thicken what's behind it, heal stuff. Science has it as a fact.

Of course they will, but it depends entirely on how long you let them grow before cutting back.

So far, you mentioned the 90 degree angle thing, which I've demonstrated isn't really an issue

This is the correlation, the balance we seek....

The purpose of the angle study, was to understand how long we can leave them to their own devices before we have to take avoidable actions!

Reach their absolute peak of gathering energy, and cut them JUST before they MUST be wired, or pruned to change angle, as any of these actions have a chance of being detrimental.

But rewind rewind....

Because I'm trying to avoid this situation in the first place.

Hence, cut grow rest!

(i like that you see the difference!)

Being evergreen, But clearly with different roots than a pine, would we call this an "elongating species", which refers to, energy mostly stored in vascular tissue?

In thinking of the thin tissues, roots, and stem tips, it seems their energy is "everywhere".

I ask because I dont know and it will help us perfect the use of this...

Cut Grow Rest.

Here is my Smartbox theory.

Buds are potential. Nothing more.

This is to say, if that trident at the tip in spring is still dormant.
And you have identified healthy Buds behind it, or even safer yes...established branches, as kept neat by the angle study!

I don't see any reason not to cut back to where we want two new strong branches.

"Allow it it's spring flush of growth"

Better....

Allow it MY spring flush of growth!

Preventing problems.

It's gonna grow them back buds/branches into the same branch that wants to reach that newly determined silhouette 3fer.

I think anytime from when it's warm enough to go outside, to when those buds green up, is a safe time to make this cut, because there has been no conversation within the tree, that says, ok, these are this year's buds!

Rather, as evident in boxwoods natural backbudding regime.....

Those internal buds and branches get set in case winter kills one.

So if we play winter, and saw them off gently before they green....

We are one step closer to the tree becoming 100%
Internal silhouette, which has the smallest leaves!

But further...and maybe this can be the last bfourme mention! Doubt it!

Harry isn't even "allowing it it's spring flush" either!

At that, unless other wise planned, why not practice this More, ahem, in-depth method of removing opposing buds leaves.

Which has already changed because I realize the leaf does keep the branch angle softer!

So there that balance of, leave leaf till leaf does IT'S one job, and before it swells the inside of the curve there then.

In depth?

More like holding our heads in a shallow pool, and watching us kick around like fools trying to get our forking back.

Forking Spoon A Brit!

A girl named Randy!

Sorce