Pigletts Progress

[Smoke]

Well here you go, I think the image is starting to solidify.
View attachment 97475

Would it be possible to share the image that's solidifying? Is the left side of the tree going to fill in more? Is this the chosen front view?

I read where Adair gave you the whole trident growing process in three paragraphs, but I do not agree with all the hacking back on the branches yet. That will come later.......much later. This tree is not ready for all the reducing on a trunk this large. There is a process for that and it does not mean continual cutting back. Right now I like your little branches. They are so much more intricut compared to what this tree had when you purchased it. The problem is they are not built on any secondaries yet. For that you need some grow out ( I know, just what you didn't want to hear) of the branches and some girth to look like secondaries.

We have seen many trees here over the years where beautiful tops get made on really coarse bottoms because they skipped the middle part of the process. The tertiaries get built on the primaries with no secondaries to induce the proper taper. Building the proper secondaries may take as much as three to five years.

If I had this tree, for me I would be working towards this type of look.

 

[Coach]

Would it be possible to share the image that's solidifying? Is the left side of the tree going to fill in more? Is this the chosen front view?

I read where Adair gave you the whole trident growing process in three paragraphs, but I do not agree with all the hacking back on the branches yet. That will come later.......much later. This tree is not ready for all the reducing on a trunk this large. There is a process for that and it does not mean continual cutting back. Right now I like your little branches. They are so much more intricut compared to what this tree had when you purchased it. The problem is they are not built on any secondaries yet. For that you need some grow out ( I know, just what you didn't want to hear) of the branches and some girth to look like secondaries.

We have seen many trees here over the years where beautiful tops get made on really coarse bottoms because they skipped the middle part of the process. The tertiaries get built on the primaries with no secondaries to induce the proper taper. Building the proper secondaries may take as much as three to five years.

If I had this tree, for me I would be working towards this type of look.

View attachment 97802

That is an incredible vert Smoke! Really impressive vision. Thank you for sharing that portion of this type of build and how important it is. Learned a lot from this.

 

[Smoke]

Just so you know I am not blowing sunshine up your skirt, I can show you tridents that did not receive this process and still have 1/4" primaries for first branches after 10 years in a pot. Trust me they will not get larger on their own.

This was the small bud I kept on the right as a first branch. this was taken in 2004, three years after I got the tree. The first branch is about 1/4 inch.



This is the tree in dec. of 2015, eleven years later and the first branch is still not quite 3/8 inch. I need to let it grow about 6 feet long and get some first branch girth. Cut it back and then start over. I don't want to do that now after 15 years. You only have a year or two invested and could make a much better tree with screwing it up now and enjoying it later.

 

[Jeremy]

[QUOTE="Adair M, post: 335930, member: 13405]

Then when they start to grow out, if the top one is growing, rub off the bottom one. Then, let the new twig grow out until there are 6 or 8 years pairs of leaves. Then, wire. Yes, wire the new soft shoots. The up bud will be growing up, but since it's young and pliable, you can bend it down so that its growing in the same direction as the branch. Yes, it will make a little hump. When you wire, wire out to the tip if you can, and put movement into the branch. Up, down, side to side. The little twigs are soft, you can put n a lot of soft movements in.

Oh, the leaves? Yeah, they're in the way, but wire around them. Use aluminum wire. It can be pretty thin, the branches bend easily.

Now, let it grow about a month. By this time, the branches will have set (lignified) where you wired them. The wire may even have cut in a bit. Remove the wire. The curves you put in have set.

Now, here comes the hard part: it's time to cut back!
How far? Remember the up/down, side by side stuff? Well, examine the part of the branch you wired, and cut back to the first up/down leaf pair!

Yes, this means you cut off 90 % of the branch, including most of all the branch you wired![/QUOTE]

Let's call this a noob question, definitely not a challenge. But why waste the effort wiring and adding so much detailed movement to branches that will be eliminated? Why not just identify the up/down buds before wiring and wire to there? Just seems like a waste of wire in order to gain a temporary silhouette. I understand the premise, wiring provides much needed sunlight to inner buds but the whole premise of adding movement and wiring to the tips seems like a waste of time when we only need to get to the first or second set of leaves

 

[Adair M]

[QUOTE="Adair M, post: 335930, member: 13405]

Then when they start to grow out, if the top one is growing, rub off the bottom one. Then, let the new twig grow out until there are 6 or 8 years pairs of leaves. Then, wire. Yes, wire the new soft shoots. The up bud will be growing up, but since it's young and pliable, you can bend it down so that its growing in the same direction as the branch. Yes, it will make a little hump. When you wire, wire out to the tip if you can, and put movement into the branch. Up, down, side to side. The little twigs are soft, you can put n a lot of soft movements in.

Oh, the leaves? Yeah, they're in the way, but wire around them. Use aluminum wire. It can be pretty thin, the branches bend easily.

Now, let it grow about a month. By this time, the branches will have set (lignified) where you wired them. The wire may even have cut in a bit. Remove the wire. The curves you put in have set.

Now, here comes the hard part: it's time to cut back!
How far? Remember the up/down, side by side stuff? Well, examine the part of the branch you wired, and cut back to the first up/down leaf pair!

Yes, this means you cut off 90 % of the branch, including most of all the branch you wired!

Let's call this a noob question, definitely not a challenge. But why waste the effort wiring and adding so much detailed movement to branches that will be eliminated? Why not just identify the up/down buds before wiring and wire to there? Just seems like a waste of wire in order to gain a temporary silhouette. I understand the premise, wiring provides much needed sunlight to inner buds but the whole premise of adding movement and wiring to the tips seems like a waste of time when we only need to get to the first or second set of leaves[/QUOTE]
Because the movement will look better.

What we are trying to eliminate are branches that start off straight, and have no taper, which suddenly have lots of ramification and little twigs. Which is, unfortunately, how most of us have developed our maples.

What we want is branches with continuous movement with continuous taper. Not just from internode to internode.

Building a maple is different than a conifer. With a conifer, we can take a branch we have, and wire it into place. With a conifer, it's different. We have to grow it out. We take the new growth, and direct it towards the direction we want it to grow.

It takes much longer to develop a top quality deciduous tree than it does a conifer. Much.

 

[Jeremy]

Thanks for the reply, Adair.

What we want is branches with continuous movement with continuous taper. Not just from internode to internode.

But isn't this what you are essentially gaining? All the wired branch gets cut off. What you're left with is a small section of wired branch that extends to 1 or 2 internodes to repeat the process. The fundamental part of building branches is to reduce internodal length. What can you possibly gain from wiring less than half an inch of wood 3-4times a season? What I'm saying is, why not do all the steps you've outlined, and then wire with as much movement as possible at the end of the season? Branches trained this way will only need 2Mm alum wire at best...

 

[Adair M]

My three paragraph description of the work greatly over simplifies the process. For more in depth discussion and pictures, I recommend Peter Tea's blog:

http://wp.me/p1KZGS-wK

 

[Jeremy]

Agree to disagree. Waste a shit tonne of wire over a season putting lots of wiggles into branches that will be cut off. Or do the wiring at the end of the season using the wiggles to compliment the clip and grow method to get the EXACT SAME result. Must come down to a money factor, I'm just a cheap Aussie noob with no leg to stand on as I only post in he tropical section

 

[Adair M]

You won't be able to put in the subtle little curves at that point.

Did you look at Peter's blog?

And here's more:

http://wp.me/p1KZGS-EE

 

[Dav4]

Agree to disagree. Waste a shit tonne of wire over a season putting lots of wiggles into branches that will be cut off. Or do the wiring at the end of the season using the wiggles to compliment the clip and grow method to get the EXACT SAME result. Must come down to a money factor, I'm just a cheap Aussie noob with no leg to stand on as I only post in he tropical section

You won't be able to put in the subtle little curves at that point.

Did you look at Peter's blog?

And here's more:

http://wp.me/p1KZGS-EE

Have to agree with Adair...wiring newly grown maple shoots vs older fully lignified shoots means smaller gauge wire and sharper bends exactly where you want them, and it's common practice to wire developing bonsai out then cut back when building branch structure...by the way, you can unwind and reuse the aluminum wire.

 

[Jeremy]

If your continuously cutting back to the first pair of leaves, the subtle movement comes from the pruning point?? If the internodes are reduced then no amount of wire can enhance that.

 

[Adair M]

What I wrote was the first pair of up/down leaves. These may or may not be the first pair.

And, as I said, my 3 paragraphs are a great over simplification.

If you take a look st the two blog posts, you'll see what I mean. In actuality, the two blog posts are about developing ramification. But, the tree he works on also needs some structure work. So, it includes some of both.

But, he does wire out spring and summer growth. And cuts back to where it needs to be cut back to.

 

[Adair M]

And the wire: unwind it, don't cut it off in chunks.

Once you get it off, grab each end of the wire with a pair of pliers. (It takes two pair of pliers, one in each hand). Bring the tips of the two pliers together (bending the wire) in front of your chest, then quickly try to "stretch" the wire with a jerk. It will be pretty straight! Sometimes I break off the little quarter inch piece gripped by one of the pliers. Aluminum is weak wire.

It works with copper, too. But copper will need to be re-annealed before it will be soft enough to wire branches.

 

[JudyB]

@Smoke the image that you painted so nicely is the image that I'm going for basically. I will probably have a different branch structure than you drew on the left. A branch that is coming from the central part of the tree will fill the area more than the branches from the far left trunk. I want a small gap in the canopy over that branch showing where the old dead part of the trunk died, and give a bit of separation in the canopy there.
I agree that constant cutbacks to the same place will never make the tree. I cut back to the point where I thought the image could be built on the branches that I kept, and back to where nothing is straight or badly angled. I also want to make sure I get inner ramification, not just twiggyness on the outer canopy. So I cut back keeping what I thought I could build upon in this season as the main branches to keep.
What I hear you saying is that I need to let it grow much fatter before cutting back again. I agree that this is true for some of the smaller branches that I've started to fill the center area. But what I don't want is to get something that isn't tapered or is too heavy for the upper tree. Some of the branches that you drew on, are basically the size of the drawn bits. So I don't think I'm too far off your mark. I will not cut this tree back this hard again, but it's only the second year in a pot, so wanted to get rid of anything that read as a flaw. That's why I said that for me the image is solidifying. The branches that were kept, are the branches that will make the tree. Your image is beautiful and of course is basically what I see for this tree. How could it be otherwise.
Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[Jeremy]

What I wrote was the first pair of up/down leaves. These may or may not be the first pair.

And, as I said, my 3 paragraphs are a great over simplification.

If you take a look st the two blog posts, you'll see what I mean. In actuality, the two blog posts are about developing ramification. But, the tree he works on also needs some structure work. So, it includes some of both.

But, he does wire out spring and summer growth. And cuts back to where it needs to be cut back to.

Yes, the up/down buds are either going to be the first or second set. If for example they are the second set of leaves you would only cutback to there if the nodal length was acceptable, correct? Otherwise you'd go back to the first set of horizontal buds, or even back to nothing and start again! And if that length were acceptable it would be null and void to do any wiring past that point. Any wiring you do up to that point could also be done at a later stage considering it's only going to use half an inch of wire. I'm just saying its all well and good to be diligent, but doesn't seem to be overly necessary. You end up more than double handling and wasting resources. Everyone has their own approach though, to each their own

 

[Adair M]

I like Smoke's virt, but I think it should have "structure" branches. Smokes virt did show them with taper and subtle movement, which I like.

I found a few images from Kokufu 70 of tridents, and while they are not the massive trunks like yours, they have wonderfully developed branches with taper and movement.



The tree above features the plate nebari. But take a look at the branches. Lots and lots of little curves! And slow, continuous taper. And, for the most part, the branches make the series of little hills as the move from the trunk out.



The tree above has straighter branches than the one previous, but they still have subtle movement. This one has more open space, and may be more what Judy has in mind. But the branches still feature movement and taper.

The only way to get subtle movement between internodes is to wire the young green stems.

 

[Jeremy]

We must always think of the future though. If you want noticeable movement then the wiring needs to be extreme, thickening of branches really softens curves. I believe you'll get the same results wiring at the end of the season. After X amount of years you'll be cutting back hard to restart the process, this is where the real movement starts

 

[JudyB]

I like Smoke's virt, but I think it should have "structure" branches. Smokes virt did show them with taper and subtle movement, which I like.

I found a few images from Kokufu 70 of tridents, and while they are not the massive trunks like yours, they have wonderfully developed branches with taper and movement.

View attachment 97810

The tree above features the plate nebari. But take a look at the branches. Lots and lots of little curves! And slow, continuous taper. And, for the most part, the branches make the series of little hills as the move from the trunk out.

View attachment 97811

The tree above has straighter branches than the one previous, but they still have subtle movement. This one has more open space, and may be more what Judy has in mind. But the branches still feature movement and taper.

The only way to get subtle movement between internodes is to wire the young green stems.

Personally, they both look a bit contrived for my taste... (for MY taste) Not that they are not wonderful trees, but if I had a branch that straight on a D tree, as the second tree left low branch, I'd cut it off and start it over! Especially with the opposite branch and that shoulder like curve.

 

[Nybonsai12]

Looking at the virt and then looking at Adair's pics, it looks to me like two types of styles at play.. Smokes seems more of the naturalistic type(dare i say Walter Pall-like) and Adairs pics are what I would expect in a Japanese styled tree. I like both very much but I think the existing structure on Piglett lends itself more to the natural-ish styling. There is lots of great information/instruction being passed around this thread.

 

[Jeremy]

I agree with nybonsai, not to take away from the Japanese style but Al's virt is bang on in my opinion. Such a masculine trunk deserves to sway towards a 'natural broom' style. Allow some time for the left side to fill out and this is a killer tree