• Welcome to Japanese Gardening Forums 日本の園芸フォーラム. Please login or sign up.
April 12, 2021, 11:13:43 AM


NOTICE:  JGO online resources will now be hosted by North American Japanese Garden Association. Learn more at https://najga.org/

Don Pylant, April, 2021

opinion on karensansui

Started by patch, May 25, 2009, 09:28:39 AM

Previous topic - Next topic


Therefore, C stones should be set so as to survive a flood that would carry tree trunks and other boulders over them, not hook onto them and tear them from their hold.  Rock D should be brought into the falls more and set vertical - a bastion that serves as the ancient sentry and support of the high plateau where the water (life) begins. 

And I would set B deeper and little more horizontal and turned also in respect of the power of the river flow.  You can play with leaving a cleft between the "water's" surface and the slanting bottom of the stone for mystery.  It will still be a feature, but as Edzard pointed out, there would then be a natural direction to release the eyes to continue along the stream and to the falls.

As Edzard says, if you could either widen the pool to become a lake, or narrow the pool to become a mountain stream, it would feel more natural and inviting.


Happy to know that my project can serve as a source of entertainment.  ::) I appreciate the viewpoints I am given. That is what any good forum is all about. 

O.K. Making  stone D more vertical ? the stone has a natural curve in its structure. I May have to change to another stone ? 
       Stone C is actually 2 seperate small stones (you can laugh if you like) ( oh the irony of it, only my daughter knew what the hell it was suppose to represent) a turtle in the stream ?  :-[. No wonder I didn't feel the Umph.
Stone E of the lower falls originally started out with a different incline/ direction in force toward the falls But, because of it's massive size and without other stones in place it felt overpowering and unstable ? if that makes any sense. Stone B needs to be shifted with the flow. got it.
   Originally the stream was more narrow and the width was more consistent from the first falls down to the second. I later made the decision to widen it to what you see now. I'll have to change it back.

What I really want is for the view to represent a mountain/ forest stream meandering through the scene. I have no problem with removing stones to acheive this effect. In fact, the less the better. 
Edzard and Don,
  Once again, thank you very much


I wouldn't change it back Patch... just adjust or add, reset. The two small stones can stay and add stone at the top falls. The stone E, does not need to be directed toward the falls at the top - unless you want them related, rather try setting perpendicular and aslant - into the water, as the falls - or use a different stone. To narrow a stream add other stones that enhance what you have. The setting is very formal edged, loosen it a bit, add tumbled stone that descend into the water. (I'm presuming the scale is the same as the Valley photo I posted in Junes thread which make those stones cliffs that are 100 to 300 feet in height)