AusBonsai

Hi all

I just had another question. Soz just not understanding some things. If you look at the pic below. I measured the trunk width/diameter from the pic being 0.3cm at the very base. And the height at 7cm. (from the pic)

That leaves a ratio of 1:23 trunk diameter to trunk height, and yet the tree looks really great, looks like it is an old tree that could have been around for 100's of years, established etc. If the 1:6 or 1:12 ratio was to be applied to that tree it would totally ruin it? So does the ratio depend on the tree being developed or am I doing something wrong in measurements?

Thanks

Kindly

Daniel

It is just a guide, you don't have to follow it. Personally as long as there is taper I think trees look ok. Look at the trees in the top bar, I think only one of them comes close to 1:6.

Yep purely just a Guide to help develop trees that have "balance"
also depends greatly on where the measurements are actually taken. That in itself can generate very lively and interesting discussion

I prefer taller more slender trees closer or exceeding 12-1, but others like them stouter and are the other end of the spectrum.

Ken

An ideal ratio might also depend on the species. Trees that are known for massive, stout trunks will probably give a better bonsai impression as a short thick tree - overemphasise the important attributes to make an impression on the viewer - where trees that are known for tall, stately trunks will probably look good when grown like the one you have posted - again emphasise the important characteristics to make the impression on your viewers.

Also comes down to personal preference and, as Ken asks - Where exactly do you measure trunk thickness

shibui wrote: Also comes down to personal preference and, as Ken asks - Where exactly do you measure trunk thickness

From the point that gives you the answer you want

Josh.

Bonsai has changed over the last 10yrs from what im seeing any way its all about the composition of the tree i see plenty of tree with 3 branches on one side, reverse taper ( junipers an pines with drift wood mainly), first branch out the back etc but at the end of the day if the trees design fits the tree all is good i say.

Thanks guys

I agree with everything you've said. I think a lot of the time tree types are not taken into account. I mean even walking around my neighborhood, some trees have naturally thick short trunks and are shorter trees, so a 1:6 ratio would suite them, but others are very tall and have slender trunks so something like 1:12 ratio would suite them better. I'm specifically interested in swamp cypresses, and I've collected a lot of pics of them from nature on the net, and they pretty much all have a look of a tall slender trunk (with that awesome swelled base, which is so hard to reproduce ) with different styles, either flat top or standard branching from the sides etc.

So ye ultimately I feel the type of tree should always be taken into account as well, and how they grow in nature.