The Art of Bonsai Project

This thread is for discussing the article by Will Heath: Technology Killed the Bonsai Show Star

Will,
Despite my own interest in artful bonsai photography, I feel that the three-dimensional physicality of a tree is a critical component of the full experience of apprehending and appreciating bonsai. For this reason, I see no clear or present danger of bonsai being
replaced by airbrushed cyber-bonsai. As much as I enjoy looking at photographs of bonsai, I would much rather stand in the presence of the real thing.

Nonetheless, I appreciate the warning that you've posted here. Even for those of us who are lucky enough to live in cities with active bonsai communities, opportunities are more plentiful for showing bonsai on the internet than in "real-life" shows, and these internet forums may reach larger and more vocal audiences. As a result, I can see how some enthusiasts could start to view the finished photograph - rather than the full tree - as the ultimate end or goal of the artistic process.

In past years, I have fallen prey to this sort of thinking with some of my kusamono, for example. I am almost certain that I have spent more time looking at some of my photographs of these kusamono than I have spent looking at the actual plantings themselves! (Here I of course refer to truly looking, with the intent to appreciate them artistically rather than with the intent to check on them horticulturally.) Your article serves as a reminder to find the time and space in which appreciate my own bonsai and kusamono creations in their natural and three-dimensional forms.

With my best regards,
Carl

Will,
An interesting problem that you have brought up.
Will the photograph be considered the equivalent of the tree? Many judged contests now have photographic winners. These trees may or may not look like their carefully orchestrated picture or in fact may no longer be alive!
As with all new technologies, time will sort out the good and the bad and impose "rules" to live by. Then we can all argue about the rules.
Appreciate your bringing this up for discussion.

I look at digital bonsai as a separate art form albeit very closely related to the art of live bonsai. Beside its identity as a visual art form, it also serves as "an introducing band before the main gig". And as sometimes happens, these sidekicks can outdo the real show.

The reason why I see it as separate is that in this age of digitally enhanced photography a slight touch-up of the tree in the picture can make a world of difference in the looks of the bonsai. If you had to do the same touch-up on the real tree, it could take years of work. An example would be to enhance the taper slightly, or add a little texture to the bark. These things take a few minutes on the computer, but can take ages on the real tree. These things can separate a vintage specimen from an upstart tree. In view of this, how can one look at a picture and identify it with the real tree? In my opinion, one cannot. Once the picture of a bonsai is called art, the genie is out of the bottle and the picture has a life of its own, separate from the real tree.

There was a time when a picture had one purpose only: to document the tree. That time is gone, but I see it as a positive thing, an advancement in the art of bonsai.

I stopped using the Internet Bonsai Club forum when people started posting so-called visuals of their trees. 'Nuff said.
Colin

For that reason I think it is incumbent on the poster to only offer reasonable renditions that are likely achievable. Perhaps even a couple of versions of intermediate steps, and caveats that 'this will take a while'... I don't see the harm if they are offered and taken for what they are.