Thus i wish to all at once thank esp. to memory Tom, JP, Wulke a few more, MM here and before. Let alone the natural power in that Gossamer engine! This biology i never would have imagined that thru these years is that totally different potent view i got; from all the trading and things wrought. Aand especially that model that MM just expressed so well. The dynamic weight concept was already familiar; jsut not viewed to that form. That and the inbalancing, demaximizing by redistributing weight distribution to throw all kinds of variables and stuff never thought of; have been my secret cache stolen booty!
So i've addedd and blended them into my plan, but wary of extremes have secretly held a lil'moderacy. Kinda naming some bottom close stuff as the trade off for the customer's eye; teld Tom as we wrote that i thought that sometimes that the best thing a tree could do for it's own health and that of it's brethren; is to please it's caretakers and like.
But, there is more; the imagery of crowded brethren on forest floor as reflected by Burnham here. For in these woods, that i assume is optimal away from the bumbling human kind; eye see the patterns of light starvation bringing out familiar patterns, in deed perhaps factually i studied some there and try to bring them closer to homes. i see clean limbs, mostly slanting up. We speak of maximum strengths, allowing nature to choose according to miilions years of testing and tweaking. Then take something like that from the test fold of a crowded corral, then isolate; as purists trust nature to dry wounds etc. then say don't touch a thing; but haven't we already?
So still the searching novice i must now step forward from watching and ask; are trees figured to be healthier in the forest or yard? Are the wind protections, soft buffering of other branchings around the crown by brushing brethren more stabilized? Is the forest floor so much richer or other variable that shaded anemic sprouts are not necessary in the wild, but in the yard? MM do you allude that the tree in yard is compromised there and needs extra help? Or that we are trying to artificially extend life beyond design by tweaking these nature-all things?
So, ive gone with soft modesty, still evening lower skirt, cleaning lower central crotching, gracefull arcches and sweeps to complent rose tressils, follow roof lines etc. Naming them femine attributes put to the large, grow all over everyone, dead hanging branches, farting outloud othis male beast. Imaaging adding grace to it's majesty, once again naming that that balance in things, seems breathlessly right to me. But saying that is for the eye, and the rest for the tree; make my decisions favoring the tree, but sofftly to that imagery. Pictures like that you've seen guide my rigging too. So kinda refreshed in mind, all razzing aside, really appreciate Mike's picturesque model, proccedural model for reference imagery.
But what is right? i am kinda still foundering! With my rigging i can show a limbs not horizontal to the ground in woods by natural selection of constaained light, have lots less pulls on them, making stronger. In the Florida storms, Open sea all around, tropical climate (perhaps not seasoning, tempering as good of wood as harsher climates????), large lower latteral/horizontals have these severe pulls and winds etc. But not tons of leveraged snow, ice expanding in cracks (and spur divots???) i guess in trade.
Sooooooo, these and more my mentors on this topic here, where does this flow?
