Leo in N E Illinois
The Professor
- Messages
- 11,462
- Reaction score
- 23,719
- USDA Zone
- 5b
I like this tree. I like the progress you have made. I like it enough to comment. Understand I am not telling you what to do. I'm just proposing 2 options.
To my eye, this tree seems skitzophrenic, Top of the tree is an upright, the first branch is a cascade. The tension between the two directions is somewhat static, so the eye gets stuck. Not moving down, not moving up.
The trunk slants to the right, the top needs to have movement toward the right. The top has too heavily backtracked to to the left, making for a "balanced" hence static movement. The top needs to have movement to the right. The reverse of branch movement to the left needs to be less than the movement to the right.
If it were mine, I would either make it an upright, in that I would eliminate the cascade branch, and make it more windswept to the right.
Or, my personal love of the challenge to do a good cascade, I would emphasize the cascade. Right now, the design is tepid, neither an upright nor a cascade. I would bring the apex down, way down, and to the right. I would extend the cascade branch and have it descend to nearly the level of the feet, or even to plunge below the level of the feet.
Either way, you have 2 nice trees in there, I would choose one or the other.
But even if you don't go for either option, I think the apex needs to move to the right more, to take the tree off balance, to introduce dynamic tension.
Just my thoughts, ponder them, if you like the ideas, great. Maybe other ideas will come to you.

To my eye, this tree seems skitzophrenic, Top of the tree is an upright, the first branch is a cascade. The tension between the two directions is somewhat static, so the eye gets stuck. Not moving down, not moving up.
The trunk slants to the right, the top needs to have movement toward the right. The top has too heavily backtracked to to the left, making for a "balanced" hence static movement. The top needs to have movement to the right. The reverse of branch movement to the left needs to be less than the movement to the right.
If it were mine, I would either make it an upright, in that I would eliminate the cascade branch, and make it more windswept to the right.
Or, my personal love of the challenge to do a good cascade, I would emphasize the cascade. Right now, the design is tepid, neither an upright nor a cascade. I would bring the apex down, way down, and to the right. I would extend the cascade branch and have it descend to nearly the level of the feet, or even to plunge below the level of the feet.
Either way, you have 2 nice trees in there, I would choose one or the other.
But even if you don't go for either option, I think the apex needs to move to the right more, to take the tree off balance, to introduce dynamic tension.
Just my thoughts, ponder them, if you like the ideas, great. Maybe other ideas will come to you.
