What cases / when is it right, aesthetically-speaking, to ignore the rule of "angle the tree toward the viewer"?

[Forsoothe!]

For the life of me I can't understand the virulent resistance to the obvious with this. Forward lean in a trees adds perspective, subtle, yeah, but it's there. Simple artistic technique used for literally hundreds of years in Western and Eastern art.

I think what's being argued here is the extent of the lean. What are the logical limits? Also, many of us are not interested in growing cookie-cutter trees which are the spitting image of someone else's trees. What draws Americans to the HOBBY is doing for one's self, one's own design, to the extent that we can express OUR will. This, verses listening to the teacher say, "You must do this, and never do that." If that kind of mindset doesn't drive westerners away from bonsai as a hobby, -just as young people in Japan are not taking up the art, I don't know what would. Ask yourself what kinds of people would be drawn to bonsai: people who want to be told what to do? I don't think so.

I like "pretty" trees, feminine I suppose, and deciduous. I can easily respect others that like rugged trees like JBP that emphasize age. You can characterize it anyway that suits yourself, but we want what we want, even if it's a little cockeyed according to other's taste. Hard and fast rules will drive away exactly the kinds of creative, free-spirits that should be attracted to bonsai. Even if @rockm wasn't wrong about perspective.

 

[amcoffeegirl]

As promised:

View attachment 230271

View attachment 230272

View attachment 230273

So, the apex of the foliage, even on a cascade, moves towards the viewer.

Thanks - stunning tree

 

[Cajunrider]

For me this is no different than the concept of store fronts. Some stores are designed to look great with the front view but the sides are not much to look at. However that's the way the business drive it.

In Asian countries and pronouncedly Japan, "face" is a big thing. One can struggle with many things but a good face must be maintained, sometimes at a detriment to other things. I don't necessarily agree with it but that's how it is.

Taking that to bonsai, if I am doing a bonsai tree that will be primarily viewed from the front I choose, I will take the forced perspective into account and use it to my advantage. However, if I am growing one that will be put in a court yard with no primary viewing angle then I will design my tree accordingly.

At the moment I will be happy if my bonsai are simply healthy.

 

[Cajunrider]

Thanks - stunning tree

Agree

 

[coh]

Taking that to bonsai, if I am doing a bonsai tree that will be primarily viewed from the front I choose, I will take the forced perspective into account and use it to my advantage. However, if I am growing one that will be put in a court yard with no primary viewing angle then I will design my tree accordingly.

I think there are 2 points being debated

1) How much lean is too much? Some of the trees that are shown from the side look completely ridiculous and when you walk around an exhibition, you often see the trees from
the sides first. They may look great from that narrowly defined front, though. In the context of what I would call "formal (Japanese) Bonsai" that front view is all that matters but I think
many of us are questioning that, whether it's best to sacrifice the appearance from other angles all to support that one narrow viewpoint. Obviously this ruffles some feathers especially
from the more rigid "thinkers" here, to be expected.

2) Does the "forced perspective" really add anything that can't be achieved in other ways? As Smoke suggested, just design your trees to be a certain height
rather than making them taller and then leaning the top to make it look more compact. Build an apex that has a higher branch density rather than leaning the apex to make
it look denser, etc.

Adair posted a couple of pictures earlier in the thread at my request - one of his trees with a pronounced forward leaning apex. I asked him to reposition the tree so that the apex
was vertical (so tilt the entire tree back) and post a picture of that. I didn't see much if any difference in the appearance which suggests the impact of forced perspective is a lot
less than people think.

 

[rockm]

Distinct clouds of foliage, on a JBP, with space in between... on an 8 inch tree...

Show me one.

I can come close:

View attachment 230274

But this is my initial styling. It hadn’t ever been decandled. So, I had to cut the needles. After a couple of years, I’ll have the needles down to 3/4 inch. But clouds? And space in between?

I’m pretty good. But not THAT good! Lol!!!

I think what's being argued here is the extent of the lean. What are the logical limits? Also, many of us are not interested in growing cookie-cutter trees which are the spitting image of someone else's trees. What draws Americans to the HOBBY is doing for one's self, one's own design, to the extent that we can express OUR will. This, verses listening to the teacher say, "You must do this, and never do that." If that kind of mindset doesn't drive westerners away from bonsai as a hobby, -just as young people in Japan are not taking up the art, I don't know what would. Ask yourself what kinds of people would be drawn to bonsai: people who want to be told what to do? I don't think so.

I like "pretty" trees, feminine I suppose, and deciduous. I can easily respect others that like rugged trees like JBP that emphasize age. You can characterize it anyway that suits yourself, but we want what we want, even if it's a little cockeyed according to other's taste. Hard and fast rules will drive away exactly the kinds of creative, free-spirits that should be attracted to bonsai. Even if @rockm wasn't wrong about perspective.

Jeez. this is silly. Use or not. Up to you. I'm not telling anyone to do anything. You seem to think I'm some kind of bonsai god (and thanks for thinking I can turn people away from bonsai in droves. I like being an all-powerful being)...I'm not. Merely pointing out the blindingly obvious.

You seem to be one of those "rule" haters with some kind of chip on your shoulder about "being told what to do." Dude there ain't any rules, I have no power over you or anyone else. there are however, basic techniques that enhance your trees and make them better. Ignore them if you want, your trees will show that ignorance without any help from me.

 

[bonsaichile]

I think what's being argued here is the extent of the lean. What are the logical limits? Also, many of us are not interested in growing cookie-cutter trees which are the spitting image of someone else's trees. What draws Americans to the HOBBY is doing for one's self, one's own design, to the extent that we can express OUR will. This, verses listening to the teacher say, "You must do this, and never do that." If that kind of mindset doesn't drive westerners away from bonsai as a hobby, -just as young people in Japan are not taking up the art, I don't know what would. Ask yourself what kinds of people would be drawn to bonsai: people who want to be told what to do? I don't think so.

I like "pretty" trees, feminine I suppose, and deciduous. I can easily respect others that like rugged trees like JBP that emphasize age. You can characterize it anyway that suits yourself, but we want what we want, even if it's a little cockeyed according to other's taste. Hard and fast rules will drive away exactly the kinds of creative, free-spirits that should be attracted to bonsai. Even if @rockm wasn't wrong about perspective.

Here we go again! The myth of the "free-spirited artist," the maverick who does it according to his own rules... pfff! ?

 

[Adair M]

I think what's being argued here is the extent of the lean. What are the logical limits? Also, many of us are not interested in growing cookie-cutter trees which are the spitting image of someone else's trees. What draws Americans to the HOBBY is doing for one's self, one's own design, to the extent that we can express OUR will. This, verses listening to the teacher say, "You must do this, and never do that." If that kind of mindset doesn't drive westerners away from bonsai as a hobby, -just as young people in Japan are not taking up the art, I don't know what would. Ask yourself what kinds of people would be drawn to bonsai: people who want to be told what to do? I don't think so.

I like "pretty" trees, feminine I suppose, and deciduous. I can easily respect others that like rugged trees like JBP that emphasize age. You can characterize it anyway that suits yourself, but we want what we want, even if it's a little cockeyed according to other's taste. Hard and fast rules will drive away exactly the kinds of creative, free-spirits that should be attracted to bonsai. Even if @rockm wasn't wrong about perspective.

There’s no “rule” that says trees must lean forward. No one is trying to stifle creativity.

But, “it just happens” that trees that lean forward tend to “look better” than trees that don’t.

Bonsai styling is subjective. Everyone is entitled to their own preferences.

In art, I prefer an Impressionist to a Cubist painting. Neither one of those is as realistic as a Vermeer. They’re all great art, however.

I have a Formal Upright JBP with no forward lean. For that particular style, there IS A RULE that dictates that the trunk is to be as perfectly verticle as possible, or else it doesn’t qualify as being a Formal Upright.

But, see, the very fact that there IS a rule about the verticality of an FU, but not for the other styles infers that they aren’t bound to being straight up. The other styles have other “rules” that define them, based upon the relationship of the position of the apex relative to the nebari of the tree.

Thus, it’s impossible to have a “slant” style tree with the apex positioned so that it’s visually centered over the nebari. To be a slant, the apex has to be to one side or the other. Do you want to call that a “rule” or a “definition”?

 

[Adair M]

Here’s another “ridiculous” looking tree:









Much like my other JBP in this thread, the trunk actually seems to move away from the viewer down liw, but comes back towards the viewer at the top.

(Isn’t that what happens when we bow towards someone? Don’t our hips move back as our chest comes down and forward when we bow? Just asking...)

Look at the first picture. Do you see the forward lean? I don’t either. If the forward lean is so pronounced that it looks obvious, it’s too much. As I said, it’s subtle. You SHOULDN’T notice it. Unless you go looking for it.

Just like the Great Wizard in the Wizard of Oz, there is “a man behind the curtain”. If you want to spoil the image of a beautiful tree, sure, take great pains to see the back where the scars are.

Bonsai trees are styled to be seen from the front.

 

[BackyardBonsai]

Here’s another “ridiculous” looking tree:

View attachment 230307

View attachment 230308

View attachment 230309

View attachment 230310

Much like my other JBP in this thread, the trunk actually seems to move away from the viewer down liw, but comes back towards the viewer at the top.

(Isn’t that what happens when we bow towards someone? Don’t our hips move back as our chest comes down and forward when we bow? Just asking...)

Look at the first picture. Do you see the forward lean? I don’t either. If the forward lean is so pronounced that it looks obvious, it’s too much. As I said, it’s subtle. You SHOULDN’T notice it. Unless you go looking for it.

Just like the Great Wizard in the Wizard of Oz, there is “a man behind the curtain”. If you want to spoil the image of a beautiful tree, sure, take great pains to see the back where the scars are.

Bonsai trees are styled to be seen from the front.

Beautiful looking trees.... until I see the side views. Look rather silly.

 

[coh]

Here’s another “ridiculous” looking tree:

View attachment 230308

That one doesn't look ridiculous from the side. Come on. But it still doesn't prove that the lean does anything to improve the view from the front.
It just proves that it's there.

And before you go on telling me how "all the great trees lean", let me stop you right there. Of course they do, because that's how people have
been building them for years and years. It doesn't mean it's the only way or even that it's the best way, it just means it's the way it's been done.

(Isn’t that what happens when we bow towards someone? Don’t our hips move back as our chest comes down and forward when we bow? Just asking...)

And what does this have to do with anything? I brought up the idea that the Japanese train their trees to lean forward because of the idea that they
should bow toward the viewer, and was told that wasn't true. Now you're using it to defend your position...which is it? And even if it is true,
I don't live in Japan, I'm not Japanese, I don't bow to people. So it is completely irrelevant to me.

Bonsai trees are styled to be seen from the front.

Rigid, rigid...not everything in the world is black and white.

BTW, don't you mean "Bonsai are styled to be seen from the front."? Isn't "Bonsai trees" redundant?

 

[rockm]

the "looks silly from the side" thing is just plain silly. Do you say the same about a painting, or sculpture? Not really, both of those ARE MEANT TO BE VIEWED FROM PARTICULAR ANGLE--yes, statutes and sculpture DO have a "preferred" or even "Mandatory" viewing point.

The three-D arguments over bonsai go waaaaaay back. General conclusion after sitting through those arguments for the last twenty years is, that bonsai designed to be seen in the round tend to be more compromised than those design to be viewed from a single point. The number of flaws increases exponentially with the shift in viewing points.

I have a feeling that those so heavily against the "lean" have not seen many world class Japanese made trees. The technique DOES make a difference, even though it doesn't seem to when seen on a screen (Flat screens distort three dimensions)

 

[Adair M]

BTW, don't you mean "Bonsai are styled to be seen from the front."? Isn't "Bonsai trees" redundant?

That’s a subject for a thread all it’s own! Is “bonsai” a noun? Or an adjective? Possibly even a verb!

Look, I’ve defended my case by showing examples of some pretty good trees, that just so happen to have a pronounced forward lean.

You don’t think it’s necessary to have a forward lean. Ok, show me some! Formal Upright, and Broom is a type of Formal Upright, are special exceptions - by definition - so, don’t use those as an examples of good to great non-forward leaning trees.

 

[rockm]

Here we go again! The myth of the "free-spirited artist," the maverick who does it according to his own rules... pfff! ?...

It takes vastly more talent to harness your art and make it work towards a goal than to let it run wild with no sense of direction...Most good art is hardly "free"--it is composed with logic, controlled purpose and understanding of what works visually. Yeah, even modern art.. Think Jackson Pollack just sat down and started throwing his brush at the canvas? Nah, didn't work that way

 

[Cajunrider]

*Brings popcorn and leans forward to watch in anticipation

Don't like my lean? My perspective is "forced"! This is like a car wreck that rubber necking can't be avoided. Soil like I tell you. Soil like.

 

[coh]

the "looks silly from the side" thing is just plain silly. Do you say the same about a painting, or sculpture? Not really, both of those ARE MEANT TO BE VIEWED FROM PARTICULAR ANGLE--yes, statutes and sculpture DO have a "preferred" or even "Mandatory" viewing point.

Show me a "great" statue where the body makes an abrupt 30-40 deg lean right about mid-chest. That's kind of what many of these trees do. If you look at most statues of the human form from the side
or back, do they look as deformed as many bonsai do? Or do they still look like humans, just from the back or side?

The three-D arguments over bonsai go waaaaaay back. General conclusion after sitting through those arguments for the last twenty years is, that bonsai designed to be seen in the round tend to be more compromised than those design to be viewed from a single point. The number of flaws increases exponentially with the shift in viewing points.

Compromised in what sense? In the sense that the tree doesn't look as "perfect" from any angle as it might if it were designed with only one front in mind? Well, as you like to say - "duh!" If you design a tree
to be viewed from all or multiple sides it will never look as "perfect" from one single position as a tree completely designed with that one view in mind. But it will look more like a real tree that you might
encounter in a field or in the mountains. Plenty of room for both approaches here.

 

[Deleted member 21616]

Show me a "great" statue where the body makes an abrupt 30-40 deg lean right about mid-chest

Here's 10-15% for you, but it's a silly statue:

LOL

Jokes aside, everyone has expressed their perspective quite clearly at this point. The arguments have not been getting any more convincing or any clearer over the last 2-3 pages...

 

[Adair M]

We’re not trying to depict a real tree that you might encounter in a field, or in the mountains.

Bonsai is an art. We’re depicting an idealized miniature tree. What we as humans would think of as “an ideal tree”. We are inspired by natural trees, for sure. But we’re not trying to replicate them.

There’s lots of artificial techniques we do to show our idealized tree. We provide a view of the trunk. Would a tree in a field do this? Not naturally! We plant in a pot. Natural? I haven’t seen any naturally occurring ceramic pots recently.

We grow azalea as trees. Ever seen a single trunk azalea growing in someone’s garden? Me neither.

This is an artificial man-made Art. Inspired by nature. Not a replication of nature in miniature.

 

[coh]

We’re not trying to depict a real tree that you might encounter in a field, or in the mountains.

Maybe you're not...don't lump me into that group though.

Bonsai is an art. We’re depicting an idealized miniature tree. What we as humans would think of as “an ideal tree”. We are inspired by natural trees, for sure. But we’re not trying to replicate them.

Group think! You keep saying "we" and "we're" as if you speak for everyone doing bonsai. Let me ask - over the history of bonsai in Japan, have the styles and methods changed
or have they been the same since the beginning? I've seen photos of bonsai from decades ago and they don't look much like what you consider the epitome of bonsai today. Chances are, 30 years from
now things in Japan will look different than they do now. So it's a moving target, you've just chosen a particular snippet/view of that moving target and that's it...case closed from your
point of view. Which is fine, you should feel free to do whatever moves you. As should the rest of us.

I know you are pretty inflexible in your approach but it doesn't have to be that way for everyone.

Anyway...

 

[rockm]

Show me a "great" statue where the body makes an abrupt 30-40 deg lean right about mid-chest. That's kind of what many of these trees do. If you look at most statues of the human form from the side
or back, do they look as deformed as many bonsai do? Or do they still look like humans, just from the back or side?


Compromised in what sense? In the sense that the tree doesn't look as "perfect" from any angle as it might if it were designed with only one front in mind? Well, as you like to say - "duh!" If you design a tree
to be viewed from all or multiple sides it will never look as "perfect" from one single position as a tree completely designed with that one view in mind. But it will look more like a real tree that you might
encounter in a field or in the mountains. Plenty of room for both approaches here.

Oh good Lord, do a search on foreshortening and forced perspective, include the Statue of Liberty and David.

as for the "perfect tree" thing, bonsai is NOT about "REAL" trees. It NEVER has been. It is a manmade composition using living material that projects the human creator's voice, not nature's. As such, visual techniques that enhance the human's point of view are what matters, NOT nature. The argument that trees in nature don't have a front is not all that pertinent, since nature doesn't give a shit about presentation or the viewer.

there's plenty of room for both "approaches" but discounting a tried and true visual artistic technique is kind of like denying the tide comes in. It just works, regardless of 'approach'.