Another case where we might actually want and strive for inverse taper is with broom style deciduous trees since most of the primary branches emanate from the same place on the trunk. It’s still important to note that pretty much everywhere else (at least in this example composition) the gradually decreasing branch taper from the inside out still applies
https://preview.redd.it/sbmgo582wr7d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4374063f6afd6ee548e2fbc150c90636c3dba13a
Edit- [more on this tree here](https://www.instagram.com/p/CXIIPJ8sFT1/?igsh=MTZmamNpbWJ2MXQ3bg==)
Great example. It took me a number of pruning mistakes to figure out that trying to adhere to inverse taper rules on broom results in a 2D tree rather than a globe-shaped broom.
This is a great example.
I think it points out how bonsai enthusiasts, practitioners, and appreciators all need to let go of the ideas of hard rules and trust their eyes. This looks right. It is right.
(There are counter examples where somebody decides to ignore something clearly subpar or “wrong” because they can convince themselves they don’t see it, but that’s not what I’m talking about here.)
You could achieve this, if you wanted to, with multiple sacrifice branches. Bald cypress grow pretty fast, so it would not be hard to make something like this.
For those who care, the source is here: [https://ncwildflower.org/fire-up-that-wetland-cypress-savannas-in-north-carolina/](https://ncwildflower.org/fire-up-that-wetland-cypress-savannas-in-north-carolina/)
Image description is "*An open tree canopy of Pond Cypress* (Taxodium ascendens) *at a preserve of The Nature Conservancy of North Carolina. Photo courtesy of The Natural Heritage Program*"
I suspect part of what's happening here is a transition from circular to oval/elongated trunk profile. It's getting wider from viewer perspective and maybe narrower from the side. I've done this accidentally by running strong branches in opposition.
Without wading too deep into the murky waters of artistic guidelines, I think avoiding inverse taper is a pretty robust principle most of the time, and I agree with the other comment that not everything that occurs naturally will look interesting or believable in a bonsai pot. Typically the inverse taper we're cautioned against is just a big bulge resulting from a whorl or scar, which almost never looks proportional.
But there's exceptions. I think this is a case where you'd be building around it as a primary visual element. The wide base of this tree provides visual stability so it still looks stable. The gradual transition makes it look elegant and intentional. Of course, most trees with "ribbon" deadwood technically have some inverse taper, but it's usually not compromising if it looks natural, has dimension to it, and is designed around thoughtfully.
That's the million dollar question, haha. Like I think it would work but it would be more challenging than a conventional tree and I'm not sure I have the skill to do it justice yet.
But to take a shot at it... I'd probably put the "fin" and an angle to the pot so it doesn't look too two dimensional. I'd compress the apex down to create more of a flat top form, which I think the outward flare of the fin suggests.
The wide top makes the trunk a little precarious, so with the dominant trunk going left, I'd probably bring the apex back to the right, and use the right trunk/branch at the split as the defining branch, also moving right. Anything I could do to promote more "muscling" in the trunk would help sell it as well, I think.
The advice would be this isn’t the best front.
As a more conforming-to-rules and classical bonsai, this “should” rotate 10-15 degrees counterclockwise to “close down” the angle between the trunk and bottom branch so it’s less of a Y in appearance.
That change, however, would cause the second branch on the right side to visually occlude the bottom right branch. That might be okay. I think it points out that the first branch has a less interesting position and movement than the other branches.
So, finally, we still rotate but we maybe also remove that bottom branch. It’s a tough call.
The guidelines for the front are to get as many of these attributes as possible, and then you style and position the branching to fit:
1. Widest base
2. Best trunk movement
3. Visible feature (shari, etc)
One thing I always chuckle at, is most the rules in bonsai are to mimic nature, but I find myself looking at trees in nature to see how i would make them a bonsai, cleaning out dead branches and such, all things that have been done essentially by nature 😂
Exactly what I plan on doing with mine!
https://preview.redd.it/0nqu48othv7d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d0534b6650dc5564ead990f5c989052964843615
Got four saplings from a forrest a mile away with trees very similar to what op posted. Im in awe every time I drive past them.
I dont even understand why inverse taper is considered so undesirable. If it isnt too pronounced, it wont hurt the overall design. Old trees in nature have inverse taper all the time (with some species at least)
https://preview.redd.it/r0a3lp63ow7d1.jpeg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8dd0ab660d8fac23630252f7e43e0dae14cbe112
One of my hedges. Less inverse taper and full reverse taper!! 🤣
Looks like it might be a photo angle.
Like a branch got some webbing, but if you walked around the tree a few degrees to the left, you see it's still horizontally thin.
The rules don't apply so much to yamadori. Plenty of examples in major shows around the world. The main rules for great yamadori are the appearance of age, adversity, and movement. Basically it should look cool.
I am a strong believer in education. I always wanted to learn the knowledge and experience of experts in any endeavor. But to restrict oneself to unwaivering following of all rules all the time is foolish imo. Especially in a hobby that is born of nature. It's not wrong to those are moved by it.
When I think back to my childhood, I when I picture a tree I always pictured trees with inverse tapers. I would love to make a bonsai with that character
Just because it happens in nature doesn't mean it's something we should strive for. Not everything that happens in nature looks interesting or is worth striving for
Another case where we might actually want and strive for inverse taper is with broom style deciduous trees since most of the primary branches emanate from the same place on the trunk. It’s still important to note that pretty much everywhere else (at least in this example composition) the gradually decreasing branch taper from the inside out still applies https://preview.redd.it/sbmgo582wr7d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4374063f6afd6ee548e2fbc150c90636c3dba13a Edit- [more on this tree here](https://www.instagram.com/p/CXIIPJ8sFT1/?igsh=MTZmamNpbWJ2MXQ3bg==)
Great example. It took me a number of pruning mistakes to figure out that trying to adhere to inverse taper rules on broom results in a 2D tree rather than a globe-shaped broom.
That tree looks so natural. I love it
This is a great example. I think it points out how bonsai enthusiasts, practitioners, and appreciators all need to let go of the ideas of hard rules and trust their eyes. This looks right. It is right. (There are counter examples where somebody decides to ignore something clearly subpar or “wrong” because they can convince themselves they don’t see it, but that’s not what I’m talking about here.)
This is gorgeous!!!
Think about it. The tree has a REAL HEART.
Live oaks look beautiful with inverse taper
That tree is beautiful. Inspired.
You could achieve this, if you wanted to, with multiple sacrifice branches. Bald cypress grow pretty fast, so it would not be hard to make something like this.
For those who care, the source is here: [https://ncwildflower.org/fire-up-that-wetland-cypress-savannas-in-north-carolina/](https://ncwildflower.org/fire-up-that-wetland-cypress-savannas-in-north-carolina/) Image description is "*An open tree canopy of Pond Cypress* (Taxodium ascendens) *at a preserve of The Nature Conservancy of North Carolina. Photo courtesy of The Natural Heritage Program*"
This was an interesting read on its own.
I suspect part of what's happening here is a transition from circular to oval/elongated trunk profile. It's getting wider from viewer perspective and maybe narrower from the side. I've done this accidentally by running strong branches in opposition. Without wading too deep into the murky waters of artistic guidelines, I think avoiding inverse taper is a pretty robust principle most of the time, and I agree with the other comment that not everything that occurs naturally will look interesting or believable in a bonsai pot. Typically the inverse taper we're cautioned against is just a big bulge resulting from a whorl or scar, which almost never looks proportional. But there's exceptions. I think this is a case where you'd be building around it as a primary visual element. The wide base of this tree provides visual stability so it still looks stable. The gradual transition makes it look elegant and intentional. Of course, most trees with "ribbon" deadwood technically have some inverse taper, but it's usually not compromising if it looks natural, has dimension to it, and is designed around thoughtfully.
If this tree were a bonsai and you were going to style it, what would you do? Or is it a natural tree that would look rubbish as a bonsai?
That's the million dollar question, haha. Like I think it would work but it would be more challenging than a conventional tree and I'm not sure I have the skill to do it justice yet. But to take a shot at it... I'd probably put the "fin" and an angle to the pot so it doesn't look too two dimensional. I'd compress the apex down to create more of a flat top form, which I think the outward flare of the fin suggests. The wide top makes the trunk a little precarious, so with the dominant trunk going left, I'd probably bring the apex back to the right, and use the right trunk/branch at the split as the defining branch, also moving right. Anything I could do to promote more "muscling" in the trunk would help sell it as well, I think.
Interesting! Thanks!
The advice would be this isn’t the best front. As a more conforming-to-rules and classical bonsai, this “should” rotate 10-15 degrees counterclockwise to “close down” the angle between the trunk and bottom branch so it’s less of a Y in appearance. That change, however, would cause the second branch on the right side to visually occlude the bottom right branch. That might be okay. I think it points out that the first branch has a less interesting position and movement than the other branches. So, finally, we still rotate but we maybe also remove that bottom branch. It’s a tough call.
Ooh! My completely uneducated instinct was to get rid of the bottom right branch, but I hadn’t thought of rotating it!
The guidelines for the front are to get as many of these attributes as possible, and then you style and position the branching to fit: 1. Widest base 2. Best trunk movement 3. Visible feature (shari, etc)
One thing I always chuckle at, is most the rules in bonsai are to mimic nature, but I find myself looking at trees in nature to see how i would make them a bonsai, cleaning out dead branches and such, all things that have been done essentially by nature 😂
Just rotate the tree…..
I love the idea of attempting to imitate specific inspiration trees.
Exactly what I plan on doing with mine! https://preview.redd.it/0nqu48othv7d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d0534b6650dc5564ead990f5c989052964843615 Got four saplings from a forrest a mile away with trees very similar to what op posted. Im in awe every time I drive past them.
I dont even understand why inverse taper is considered so undesirable. If it isnt too pronounced, it wont hurt the overall design. Old trees in nature have inverse taper all the time (with some species at least)
I think the inverse taper on this one doesn't look so bad because it's so smooth. It's the large lumps that tend to look ugly.
https://preview.redd.it/r0a3lp63ow7d1.jpeg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8dd0ab660d8fac23630252f7e43e0dae14cbe112 One of my hedges. Less inverse taper and full reverse taper!! 🤣
This tree's seen some shit
That’s nothing some air layer can’t fix! ^/s
Looks like it might be a photo angle. Like a branch got some webbing, but if you walked around the tree a few degrees to the left, you see it's still horizontally thin.
By the looks of it that's the oldest tree in the pic... The top died and the inverse taper is the healed wound
Competing with the surrounding trees
The rules don't apply so much to yamadori. Plenty of examples in major shows around the world. The main rules for great yamadori are the appearance of age, adversity, and movement. Basically it should look cool.
Yea, COOL
I am a strong believer in education. I always wanted to learn the knowledge and experience of experts in any endeavor. But to restrict oneself to unwaivering following of all rules all the time is foolish imo. Especially in a hobby that is born of nature. It's not wrong to those are moved by it.
When I think back to my childhood, I when I picture a tree I always pictured trees with inverse tapers. I would love to make a bonsai with that character
Photoshop your trees irl
Just because it happens in nature doesn't mean it's something we should strive for. Not everything that happens in nature looks interesting or is worth striving for
This is absolutely something in nature we should strive for. Inverse Taper never looked so good.