Re: Melaleuca Sp. literati
Posted: February 25th, 2012, 7:07 pm
I guess it had to happen. Of the triptich, I like the first one, not the third one 
. I also like craig's last upright.
The reason I find the 'first' of the three more attractive is that the entire 'line' of the trunk tells one exciting story about intense and dynamic movement. In number three, there is an alignment of the lower half of the trunk with the bit after the trunk turns back to the right above it. This 'linking' of the two sections of trunk stabilises and rigidifies the movement, not seen in the first pic. Number three goes a long way to cancelling out the visual movement of the trunk - that strong alignment negates much of the feeling of twisting and turning, for me at least.
Interestingly, the 'vetical' trunk lines, like craig's of 9:28 yesterday), isn't so 'stiff' like number three. While it isn't as fluid as number one, it at least doesn't impose rigidity.
I agree with those who opted for the less is more with the foliage. If Ash's concerns about starving the roots and weakening the tree don't prove true, then, apart from the added work of controlling this clearly strong grower, the 'looks' of the small crown allow the most significant element of the trunk shine through.
For me, which ever pot you choose, it should emphasise the trunk line. A 'dark' pot allows the light coloured bark to stand out. A 'light coloured' pot tends to compete with the trunk line for attention as i view it. For me, I find that the eye goes for contrast over similarity, so if the pot is similar to the trunk in colour, the 'eye' will seek out what is different and that is the foliage. Since it is the trunk that is the major feature of this lovely tree, the lighter coloured pot doesn't serve to show that trunk as clearly as a dark pot would.
. I also like craig's last upright.The reason I find the 'first' of the three more attractive is that the entire 'line' of the trunk tells one exciting story about intense and dynamic movement. In number three, there is an alignment of the lower half of the trunk with the bit after the trunk turns back to the right above it. This 'linking' of the two sections of trunk stabilises and rigidifies the movement, not seen in the first pic. Number three goes a long way to cancelling out the visual movement of the trunk - that strong alignment negates much of the feeling of twisting and turning, for me at least.
Interestingly, the 'vetical' trunk lines, like craig's of 9:28 yesterday), isn't so 'stiff' like number three. While it isn't as fluid as number one, it at least doesn't impose rigidity.
I agree with those who opted for the less is more with the foliage. If Ash's concerns about starving the roots and weakening the tree don't prove true, then, apart from the added work of controlling this clearly strong grower, the 'looks' of the small crown allow the most significant element of the trunk shine through.
For me, which ever pot you choose, it should emphasise the trunk line. A 'dark' pot allows the light coloured bark to stand out. A 'light coloured' pot tends to compete with the trunk line for attention as i view it. For me, I find that the eye goes for contrast over similarity, so if the pot is similar to the trunk in colour, the 'eye' will seek out what is different and that is the foliage. Since it is the trunk that is the major feature of this lovely tree, the lighter coloured pot doesn't serve to show that trunk as clearly as a dark pot would.
.
Much appreciated!
