# Hardscape = never satisfied



## Tropical_Wannabe (Aug 19, 2010)

Working on my first 'real' planted tank. I say 'real' due to the fact that I'm actually using the information I've learned here to do it right, rather than the impulse buy at the big P stores and simply sticking something into the gravel.

I have no idea's about arranging Hardscapes. Searching the internet results are usually planted/filled tanks with no real examples of the scape before planting.

So, although I've been lurking here since forever - I'm diving in, and looking for a bit of criticism/education on my current layout.

Driftwood, and Petrified wood. Thinking about a stream between left and right side, still unsure. Black patch is simply a visual of my Black Diamond sand.

Thanks for looking!


----------



## Raymond S. (Dec 29, 2012)

This one could take you a while. The wood I'd like to see more of especially the sides of because it's the only thing in there which really has any character to it. The rocks(petrified wood) are good but not as any kind of center piece is what I mean.
And center piece doesn't necessarilly need to be "in the center". Just a main focus
piece. There are a couple of Aquascape entries which have petrified wood in them but
they use it as a hill side with plants growing all over it and just pieces of it showing through. If you looked at some of them you would see what I mean. Those tank actually have hills built into the back arias with the petrified wood at the front parts of them. That piece of wood really looks like it needs to be turned sideways to me.
Hard to tell without seeing it that way though.


----------



## FewestKitten896 (Dec 13, 2013)

Look up some information on the "rule of thirds"...it makes stuff visually appealing and can be applied to a lot of things. Think of a Tic-Tac-Toe board going across the front of your tank while you scape. If you want the wood piece on the right the main focus then start with that piece and build around it. Or if you want the petrified wood to be the main focus, the largest piece can be your main focus with the small pieces complementing it.

If you want some inspiration, you can look up James Findley from The Green Machine on YouTube. He has some videos of his process of aquascaping with stones.


----------



## Tropical_Wannabe (Aug 19, 2010)

Thank you both for your assistance, I really appreciate it immensely.

Does height really matter? The driftwood piece is rather flat, so I thought turned as shown gave some height to the hardscape.

I have a couple of other photos of just the driftwood.





As for the Petrified Wood, I could use them as a retaining wall?
I'll be looking up Mr. Findley for sure, thanks!

Again, thanks for your suggestions.


----------



## FewestKitten896 (Dec 13, 2013)

Don't be afraid to stick it up on end also. Once you get some substrate in there, you will be able to embed it into the substrate.


----------



## Tropical_Wannabe (Aug 19, 2010)

Somehow, I think I have too many pieces of Petrified wood that my brain say's to use'em all.
Also, I've read a few members don't like mixing wood, (drift/manza/grape/etc.) Thought I'd toss in a couple of small pieces I have.
I do like the flat driftwood turned up on end!!



Better - Worse - Good grief, Give up!!


----------



## bluestems (Feb 7, 2012)

Tropical_Wannabe said:


> Better - Worse - Good grief, Give up!!



The different types of stones and wood are a bit confusing to the layout here, they are competing with each other and none are really standing out. Maybe try choosing one type of stone with or without one type of the wood. Some examples to check out:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8svi4SOWA9s
An idea of doing a two-tier layout design, again with the petrified wood, and possibly adding this piece of wood on its side as it this pic (laid to the left, off center):



Tropical_Wannabe said:


>



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqqnFQ5jChU
Green Machine layout with just petrified wood. You could do a variation of this in the two-tier layout by ADG above, using some of the round rocks as supports in the back that would be covered/hidden by substrate and plantings, keeping the visible rocks the petrified pieces.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k_6Djhpf5Y
Several plant layouts using stone and wood from ADA. The first one could possibly work using your petrified wood in visible spots and the round stones as hidden supports of the branching pieces of wood.


Hope these help to inspire you


----------



## shawnwaldon (Dec 5, 2013)

Tropical_Wannabe said:


> Somehow, I think I have too many pieces of Petrified wood that my brain say's to use'em all.
> Also, I've read a few members don't like mixing wood, (drift/manza/grape/etc.) Thought I'd toss in a couple of small pieces I have.
> I do like the flat driftwood turned up on end!!
> 
> ...


I agree with bluestems, using too many different styles of things in the tank will just confuse everyone. In general you want to have a main "centerpiece" to catch your eye and some smaller pieces to tie in the centerpiece. Although I like the big piece of driftwood in this picture it is too big the way it is situated in the aquarium. I would suggest laying it on it's side at an angle from the rear corner so the highest point of the driftwood will be at the top of the aquarium, but in the back. Good luck with your aquarium.


----------



## Raymond S. (Dec 29, 2012)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsa8VhLGh2s
What I was talking about before is making two levels with the petrified wood as the border between the two. If you move the slide on this video to close to 3 min. it is when you get to 316 that youwill see one like what I'm talking about.
You would not be that elaborate of couse. You can just use like 2/3 of the tank
with higher land than the other third. Left side or right side doesn't matter. Just
don't make a straight line from front to back where the land gets shorter.
My favorite one is at 5:48 on there.
It might look good to place the driftwood sideways in the lower part with maybe one or two nana petete on it.


----------



## bluestems (Feb 7, 2012)

Raymond S. said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsa8VhLGh2s
> What I was talking about before is making two levels with the petrified wood as the border between the two. If you move the slide on this video to close to 3 min. it is when you get to 316 that youwill see one like what I'm talking about.
> You would not be that elaborate of couse. You can just use like 2/3 of the tank
> with higher land than the other third. Left side or right side doesn't matter. Just
> ...


The ADA video (third in my post above) shows several examples of how they setup aquascapes from start to finish that are similar to the one you like at the 5:48 mark. Now that you have an idea of what you want in mind, I think it might help you to fill a small amount of soil into the bottom of your tank and start testing different combinations and positions. This is the hardest part of aquascaping, imho. Good luck with it. :smile:


----------



## Solcielo lawrencia (Dec 30, 2013)

Tropical_Wannabe said:


> Somehow, I think I have too many pieces of Petrified wood that my brain say's to use'em all.
> Also, I've read a few members don't like mixing wood, (drift/manza/grape/etc.) Thought I'd toss in a couple of small pieces I have.
> I do like the flat driftwood turned up on end!!
> 
> ...


This is actually kind of modern-looking. I don't know if it would make a good fish tank, but it actually looks kind of nice like that. Significantly better than the first picture. Perhaps a terrarium with some cacti or orchids would be in order.


----------



## xylophone (Jun 8, 2014)

Just one newbie's opinion, but usually I think one type of driftwood looks better. I mixed malaysian wood with manzanita and it just kinda clashes.


----------



## secuono (Nov 19, 2009)

Tropical_Wannabe said:


> Somehow, I think I have too many pieces of Petrified wood that my brain say's to use'em all.
> Also, I've read a few members don't like mixing wood, (drift/manza/grape/etc.) Thought I'd toss in a couple of small pieces I have.
> I do like the flat driftwood turned up on end!!
> 
> ...



I like it, simply because there's a lot of interesting things to look at. I do the same, otherwise, I get bored of the one boring theme...lol.


----------



## Tropical_Wannabe (Aug 19, 2010)

Thank you everyone for you suggestions and opinions. This really has been much more difficult to achieve than I ever imagined.
I'm no artist, but I do know what I like - just can't duplicate it unfortunately.

In quite a few of the video's I've watched over the past day or so, James Finley comments that breaking the rules is the only way to find that next new thing. (Obviously not a quote, just paraphrased a bit).

I've come to at least one conclusion, I don't have enough of the 'correct' material to mimic the awesome tanks here on ThePlantedTank, or anywhere else for that matter.

Stupid budget's got my hands tied, so I thought I'd use less of what I do have, and build from there. I know without a doubt things really look better with substrate (not Styrofoam), and plants. Hardscape can be modified much easier than one's plants.

I've got my driftwood soaking in a tub, that will take a while before it sinks, and I think I'm going to start with my dirted substrate and try the 'dry start method' with some staurogyne repens. From what I've learned here, 30 to 45 days should be long enough to get a good rooted carpet started before submerging the little guys.

Below is my 'last' attempt (really crappy pic - sorry bout that) at a hardscape. I decided to do a mix of wood, and perhaps try some 'fissin' ?(sorry can't remember the name/spelling - moss in blender added to wood) on the smaller branches.
Course, once the carpet is grown in somewhat I may have acquired a few more 'correct' items and will have to go at it once again.

Thanks for all your advice, I truly appreciate you all. 



p.s. at what point do people start journals?


----------



## Raymond S. (Dec 29, 2012)

Who knows how much some spend on their "stuff" to go into the tanks they build.
I do take walks in the wooded arias around where I live, but I got lucky on that one as this picture will show. Far too distant to get details, but immagine what is in there.
The second one is a stream in there.
http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=14289&pictureid=61970
http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=14289&pictureid=61978
I have no lack for rocks. But don't particularly want a hillside scape.
I guess I'm mostly saying that I prefer to get my stuff for the tank for free.
A couple of the pieces came from when the utility company cut a couple of limbs off trees to get closer/w a backhoe to dig a utility line ditch on my block.
These things don't need to be exotic or store bought or expensive. But you do need patience to get "stuff" in this way.
That scape looks better. Don't forget to leave some space behind the wood for plants.


----------



## scapegoat (Jun 3, 2010)

I see a big problem... and it's probably the reason why you can't come up with a nice scape. there is no cohesion between these pieces. each part has it's own characteristic because they're completely different than the others. 

cut down on the types of things you're putting in there. one type of wood, one type of rock. That'll cut down on the hodge podge look and bring some continuity to your aquarium. and remember, you can always change it down the road.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

scapegoat said:


> I see a big problem... and it's probably the reason why you can't come up with a nice scape. there is no cohesion between these pieces. each part has it's own characteristic because they're completely different than the others.
> 
> cut down on the types of things you're putting in there. one type of wood, one type of rock. That'll cut down on the hodge podge look and bring some continuity to your aquarium. and remember, you can always change it down the road.


+1 Very good advice!

Unless your looking for a very artificial type look different types of wood and different types of rock don't really work in one scape. You also need to pick either rock or wood and make it the major hardscape focal and then build around it with smaller pieces (This is the general idea) of either more wood (same type) or rock. You can build up the substrate and plants around it as well and go from there.


----------



## Solcielo lawrencia (Dec 30, 2013)

Tropical_Wannabe said:


> I'm no artist, but I do know what I like - just can't duplicate it unfortunately.
> 
> In quite a few of the video's I've watched over the past day or so, James Finley comments that breaking the rules is the only way to find that next new thing. (Obviously not a quote, just paraphrased a bit).


The problem with "breaking the rules" is that in art, you simply can't without also being incomprehensible. That's like breaking grammar rules in speech/writing or in music and dance. You'll notice that_ no one_ does this, and if they do, it's more difficult or impossible to understand. "Breaking the rules" is something non-artists say to justify their process or results. You'll also notice that Finley's "breaking the rules" doesn't exactly come up with very balanced arrangements. Do not follow this advice. He is simply parroting feel good sentiment. Feel-good sentiment does nothing to create a balanced work. What Finley really means when he says "breaking the rules" is that he's just 1) experimenting with stuff because he doesn't know what the results will be, and 2) he's not an artist and doesn't know what the rules are. (He may eventually, but learning to become an artist takes a great deal of knowledge and skill which is usually acquired over many, many years.) His rational justifications are interesting, but it's the kind of justification art dealers tell wealthy buyers a piece of _Artist's Sh*t_ in a can is worth $200,000.

[I can't post URLs because the title of the work contains a forum-censored word. You'll have to search for Manzoni's faeces for yourself and even read his motivations for creating the work, which include duping the wealthy into thinking his poop was worth the weight of gold, literally, simply because it was in a can and he was the artist. The work's appeal is that 1) wealthy individuals and institutions bought it, and 2) the humor that individuals and institutions bought and spent so much for it. If it has artistic merit, it's in its statement/criticism of the dealer-art world of his time, which still applies to this day.]



> I've come to at least one conclusion, I don't have enough of the 'correct' material to mimic the awesome tanks here on ThePlantedTank, or anywhere else for that matter.


As for the hardscape materials you currently have, you can actually create a very well-balanced arrangement that could look quite good. (I can already envision some possibilities from the first picture.) It may not look like what people expect an aquascape to look like, but it can be both unique and beautiful. 

A lot of people who've read a few of the "How To" aquascaping articles will tell you that uniform rocks and wood should be used because that's exactly the kind of advice that's written in them. None of these articles has yet to described what the viewer is supposed to be looking for. And while having uniform hardscape is an easier route, it's not the only way and it won't make an arrangement balanced simply by having them.

Learning how to balance shapes in a 3D space is an incredibly difficult thing to do. That's why so many aquascapes are un-balanced, even though uniform materials are used. Almost any hardscape material can be balanced in an aesthetically pleasing manner. But doing so requires either tremendous effort or an acute sensitivity to the senses, but usually both.

*Note that the term "balance" is used exclusively. Aesthetic balance is what makes a visual work of art (which includes dance) pleasing to the eye even if the subject/theme isn't desirable. E.g. a (trompe l'oeil) painting of a dissected frog isn't appealing to most people, but the composition of the subject (the frog) is arranged in an aesthetically-balanced manner. If you strive for balance, you'll eventually find an arrangement that is aesthetically-pleasing, even if it doesn't look like most aquascapes. If, however, you want it to look like most aquascapes, then by all means get similar hardscape materials and simply copy an arrangement that you find to be the most aesthetically pleasing to the eye.

_Lesser artists borrow, great artists steal._
- Igor Stravinsky


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Solcielo lawrencia said:


> ...
> As for the hardscape materials you currently have, you can actually create a very well-balanced arrangement that could look quite good..


Can you show one of your *well-balanced arrangements* that uses two different woods and two different rock types similar to what the OP has. Since he is trying to do that it would be very helpful to the OP and others viewing the thread.


----------



## Solcielo lawrencia (Dec 30, 2013)

houseofcards said:


> Can you show one of your *well-balanced arrangements* that uses two different woods and two different rock types similar to what the OP has. Since he is trying to do that it would be very helpful to the OP and others viewing the thread.


Don't have an example. An analogy I would use is the use of more than one plant species in a tank. And yet, most people don't have a problem with more than one species. So what's wrong with having more than one kind of wood or rock? It's the exact same principle. Remember, our visual system processes visual information, shape, size, color, etc. the same. Only our rational system distinguishes a plant from rock. Artists have learned to ignore the rational system (which we use to think in terms of rule of thirds, golden ratio, tiers, etc.) and rely on the visual system in making aesthetic choices.

One caveat to using more than one type of wood, rock, or plant, is that it creates contrast. Contrast demands attention from the eye. If you want something that is peaceful and serene, limit contrast. If you want "pop" factor = high contrast. The caveat to high contrast is that the visual system can tire rather quickly if it isn't well-balanced.


----------



## scapegoat (Jun 3, 2010)

Solcielo lawrencia said:


> Don't have an example. An analogy I would use is the use of more than one plant species in a tank. And yet, most people don't have a problem with more than one species. So what's wrong with having more than one kind of wood or rock? It's the exact same principle.


A more apt analogy would be multiple species of plants planted very closely together. Instead, we bunch plants by species and try to discourage mixing, to a small degree. It's the same thing with the hardscape focal points.

we've a small slice of "nature" in a confined space, in an unnatural setting. Yes, it's easier to come up with a more pleasing aquarium by using similar-to-each-other materials. What's wrong with that, especially when starting out? and it's solid advice to a beginner that'll have them feeling better about the work they've put in.


----------



## talontsiawd (Oct 19, 2008)

Solcielo lawrencia said:


> The problem with "breaking the rules" is that in art, you simply can't without also being incomprehensible. That's like breaking grammar rules in speech/writing or in music and dance. You'll notice that_ no one_ does this, and if they do, it's more difficult or impossible to understand. "Breaking the rules" is something non-artists say to justify their process or results.


As a musician, I disagree with this somewhat. We often state the same idea as such, you must know the rules before you even think about bending them, much less break them. Basically, if you don't know what the rules are, breaking them is a path to failure (usually) and some may call it "experimental" or the like, which is almost always a justification of not achieving what they really want to, but not really knowing how to get there. A similar thought process, though in many ways different. A perfect example is a beautiful 2 or 4 stone Igwami setup. It basically defies the simplest rule of that type of aquascape, but, you would rarely see (done well) by someone who is less than extremely competent in that style of aquascaping.


That said, going to the OP. I agree with others that when you kind of have a "grab bag" of hardscape materials, none really matching the next, it gives a sense of chaos to begin with. Even though your second try actually has many attractive design elements and is attractive, it lacks a true focal point, much less an overall theme. It's almost more impressive that you made it interesting, and attractive with the materials you had, than making something more attractive with more cohesive materials, though the second would likely be more appealing to you, and would be more appealing to me.


I am no expert in hardscaping or soft scapes for that matter but a few things really help me. First, having enough material to do what you need. This often really means, having more material than you need. With stones, often when you swap one out, you need to swap another out. Having more stuff to work with usually makes things easier.

Secondly, find a point of reference and familiarize yourself with it. For me, I was drawn to Igwami. I would look at all these tanks and not really understand how they created it. However, once I paid more attention to rock cropping by the coast, I found similarities to that. It was a bit ironic to me because looked at mountains as inspiration but I found that even very simple rock formations often look much more similar to Igwami than mountains do, plus you can take it all in at once, making it easier to understand. Same with a beautifully done flower garden, it's often very similar to a Dutch tank. In fact, even a simple planter can similar for that matter. You will see differences of color, height, size, and texture. See what draws you in, see what is "filler", something that keeps the space but doesn't attract you as much. If everything is a focal point, it doesn't work, but without the filler, you can't easily draw in a focal point.

Lastly, sometimes it's easier to go simple while you learn and just plan for the next scape. The first tank I was fairly satisfied with that was Igwami influenced was far after I got frustrated with the style in my own attempts. I found 3 rocks with enough character to draw interest, but I just placed them in an existing tank. I often find wood does well in the same way, don't necessarily plan the tank around the wood, plan a tank and find some would that fits. This won't get you a brilliant hardscape usually, but it will show you how you can make it "play nice" with the soft scape. For me, it allowed me to understand the role more.


----------



## Solcielo lawrencia (Dec 30, 2013)

talontsiawd said:


> A perfect example is a beautiful 2 or 4 stone Igwami setup. It basically defies the simplest rule of that type of aquascape, but, you would rarely see (done well) by someone who is less than extremely competent in that style of aquascaping.


And who wrote the rule that an iwagumi must use an odd number of stones? In Japanese rock gardens, you can see two-stone arrangements such as this:









and any number of stone arrangements. One book on rock arrangement shows various possibilities that can be used for any number of stones. Thus, most of the so-called "rules" in aquascaping are arbitrary or misapplied, especially popular ones such as the golden ratio or the rule of thirds, to which there are unnecessarily abundant rational justifications and diagrams on the internet that supposedly shows why it's such a good arrangement. They sound nice, rationally, but aesthetically, completely misses the mark.

As an artist, I never learned the golden ratio or rule of thirds until I started photography and aquascaping. But if I looked back at my artwork, many focal points fell upon the golden ratio (never R3) simply because it looked best there. I never intentionally thought "I have to put this at the GR"; I did it intuitively by following my sense of aesthetics. This is what an aquascaper should do: learn to follow their sense of aesthetics. The ones who can do this will seem to naturally come up with something really pleasing. The ones who think rationally too much will struggle because the rational mind and the seeing mind are two completely different systems. The rational mind will almost always win, as in the case of Manzoni's, _Artist's Sh*t_, and many other "modern" works of art.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Solcielo lawrencia said:


> Don't have an example. *An analogy I would use is the use of more than one plant species in a tank. *And yet, most people don't have a problem with more than one species. So what's wrong with having more than one kind of wood or rock? It's the exact same principle


That really doesn't make any sense to me. Google Aquascape and look at all the images. You'll be hard pressed to find one scape created by any experienced aquascaper that has more than one type of rock or wood. It just doesn't look natural. It doesn't occur that way in nature. It's easy to look at any vista and see more than one species of flora in nature, now people do take liberty and plant more species than would be found naturally in one area, but it's not difficult for the human mind to make that jump in the interest of good aesthetics.

Now that being said, there are exceptions, so I wouldn't say it's impossible, but why would you debate this point HERE, where the OP is obviously a beginner looking for the basics. In addition you don't even have any examples to show the OP to back up what you claim. 

To the OP, you've received very good advise from scapegoat and talontsiawd to get started. 

When your playing pee-wee soccer, you really don't want instructions on refining your skills to be effective in the World Cup from someone that never played the game. You need to start somewhere and the place to start is with the basics.


----------



## ua hua (Oct 30, 2009)

I agree with what others have said about mixing hardscape materials. It just doesn't look good when there's a bunch of different types of wood and/or rocks. Even a very well done hardscape can be distracting by using different types of rocks. Take this tank for example from the AGA contest and read the judges critique. A very cool looking hardscape that would have looked a lot better if it used the same rock. Even if it's the same type of rock just the color difference between the two doesn't allow it to flow as well. 

http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org/2012/show354.html


----------



## Solcielo lawrencia (Dec 30, 2013)

houseofcards said:


> Now that being said, there are exceptions, so I wouldn't say it's impossible, but why would you debate this point HERE, where the OP is obviously a beginner looking for the basics. In addition you don't even have any examples to show the OP to back up what you claim.


Because very specifically, he already has a mixture of materials and has indicated that it's difficult to get uniform ones. Thus, my advice was to go with what he _already_ has instead of spending ridiculous amounts of money for materials that, by itself, won't make a better arrangement. Let's look at all those aquarists who've spent thousands on ADA products and the results were far from spectacular. (Malcolm Gladwell noted in one of his books that great athletes rarely are produced in state-of-the-art facilities. Most are made in rather mundane or even dingy environments. Part of the reason may simply be that state-of-the-art facilities makes athletes focus on the fanciness instead of the task they are training for.)

Skill is not something money can ever buy. Working on difficult tasks, even seemingly impossible ones, will net greater returns from the learning process than choosing easier ones (e.g. paint-by-numbers). You may get the desired results by choosing the easy route, but you may not learn much from it.

OP,
If I were to make an artistic critique, the second arrangement is superior. The third one, I can tell very obviously, was made using rationality, following grouping and pattern guidelines. You'll need to learn to follow your sense of aesthetics and ignore any "rules" that you've read until you come upon a problem that you cannot solve. Only when you can't solve it should you seek further help.


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Good find Ua Hua, here's a quote from the man himself when creating a layout:

"There are many types of driftwood and rocks, and you can select them based on your own preferences. One thing you must keep in mind is that you should stick to one type of rock and/or driftwood in an aquatic plant layout. If you combine different types of driftwood or rocks in a layout, they will appear unnatural. Since rocks and driftwood are natural materials, even the same type of rocks or driftwood may come in different colors and textures. In such a case, the colors and textures should be matched."

- Takashi Amano


----------



## Solcielo lawrencia (Dec 30, 2013)

houseofcards said:


> Good find Ua Hua, here's a quote from the man himself when creating a layout:
> 
> "There are many types of driftwood and rocks, and you can select them based on your own preferences. One thing you must keep in mind is that you should stick to one type of rock and/or driftwood in an aquatic plant layout. If you combine different types of driftwood or rocks in a layout, they will appear unnatural. Since rocks and driftwood are natural materials, even the same type of rocks or driftwood may come in different colors and textures. In such a case, the colors and textures should be matched."
> 
> - Takashi Amano


I disagree with Amano on this. If the goal is to create a serene nature scape, then follow this advice as it can lead to desirable results. However, if the goal is not to create a nature scape, but something that is aesthetically pleasing, then this advice would not apply.

Amano, btw, was the one who suggested that rocks should be slanted because of the flow of water. However, if we look at all the examples of iwagumi's that slant rocks unnecessarily, they are poorly balanced and look like they are about to fall over. This imbalance is uncomfortable, and yet people purposefully slant rocks simply because they are following this advice. They really should be following their eyes, not what they read.


----------



## talontsiawd (Oct 19, 2008)

houseofcards said:


> When your playing pee-wee soccer, you really don't want instructions on refining your skills to be effective in the World Cup from someone that never played the game. You need to start somewhere and the place to start is with the basics.


Yup. You may see some who just nail it the first time but the reality is, if you are not the one who can nail it the first time, you need to just figure out where you are and start with the basics. 

Even in the last few posts, we see a scape where some criticize the rock choice, and for me, I may even criticize the layout but it's better than any scape I have done. 

A perfect example for me is my first rock scape. I didn't even like it but instead of spending 8,000 hours arranging rocks, I said, it's a planted tank, not an art piece. For some, it is an art piece, for me, I just wanted to get started. I used the most basic of advice/rules out and made something I enjoyed, knowing the short comings. My next was better, my next even better. My next tank will be a rock scape and it will have to be better than the last for me to move forward, that's a progression.


In my last post in this thread, I talked about being a musician. Truth be told, I was an average instrument player. Once I started to create my own music, I wasn't as good as most talented people when they started. I just learned as much as I could, but more importantly, I didn't let myself just learn, I did. 7 years later, I got the opportunity to go to studios, work with professionals, meet people I never thought I would meet, and got praise from people who inspired me. It was a slow progression.

The advice I give to musicians is don't try to perfect the song, try over and over to perfect the art. The first leads you in an endless struggle to make something excellent when you may not be there yet. The second allows you to grow at your own pace and be comfortable not being at the highest level.

Going on with that, it's often better to keep it simple than go complex, if the complexity is out of your comfort zone. Simple works, complex works, but complexity when you don't know where to go with it, that doesn't usually work.

Sorry, I get a bit philosophical some times, that mentality allowed me to be a professional artist. Am I the best now, no, but will I be better tomorrow, probably, if not, the next day, so to me, it's always a progression and perfect is always elusive.


----------



## BeastMaster (Dec 17, 2012)

houseofcards said:


> When your playing pee-wee soccer, you really don't want instructions on refining your skills to be effective in the World Cup from someone that never played the game. You need to start somewhere and the place to start is with the basics.


Love this quote, wish I thought of it!

To TW, I really like the 2nd pic of the DW piece. Personally, I would play around with positioning that hardscape element as a focal point and try moving your substrate around to produce some elevated areas towards the back. Then take 1-3 similar stone elements to offset and/or support the DW. Good luck, enjoy & don't take us too seriously. :bounce:


----------



## Narelle (Dec 6, 2013)

Hopefully this won't derail this thread onto too much more of a tangent than it is already on, but I would like to chime in as another traditional artist.

*On the notes about art* being learned, yes this is true to an extent, but there are also people just born with a natural eye for aesthetics. Those with an interest in art and natural sense of aesthetic can easily look at something and see where it is off balance and how to fix it, but beginners in art with no born inclination for it will only look at it and see that something is wrong. Just because one person can look and see "this is wrong, let me fix it this way", doesn't mean that everyone can. You cannot push someone to see something that they cannot naturally and have not yet learned to. That's not how learning works.
I would also like to note that not everyone views aquascaping like a painting. In ways, it is like one. But most people do not seek to create a surrealist piece in their fish tank. They want to create a natural environment for their fish that is also pleasing to the eye. So pushing for surrealism and a tank made to look like a painting seems out of place, as it is not what most people are looking for.

*------*​
*To the OP*, I think you could create a beautiful aquascape with the pieces you have now, but first you do need to decide what you'd like in an aquascape. Do you want a manicured ADA or Green Machine tank or would you rather have an also beautiful, but more natural looking "slice of a habitat" sort of tank?
Your large piece of wood would be beautiful in a more natural looking tank, but doesn't well suit something you'd see in an ADA or Green Machine tank.
Your thinner manzinata branches would work for that style, if you find that you prefer the aquascaping with wood. However, if you find you like iwagumi, you may want to skip wood altogether.
Your biggest issue is that you have pieces of two very different styles of aquascaping. And they vary so much that they end up looking unnatural. In a river, the rocks all tend to look similar because they are what the earth in that area is made up of. Over time, pieces break away or are worn off by erosion and become the river's "hardscape". You will not find many places that have vastly different kinds of rock. The same goes for wood. There are different trees found near one river, but you will not see a large, heavy piece of wood mixed with tiny twigs. The twigs would be swept away and off to the side, if not broken up by the larger pieces. The thick, log-like pieces will either stay where they fall or make their way to the bottom of the river. They are usually very deeply settled in.
I think you would do well to try one of the following:
A scape with just the petrified wood and manzinata, following the manicured look of ADA and Green Machine tanks.
One with only the petrified wood, modelled after an iwagumi or something like James Findley's "Arizona".
A more natural, river bed styled tank with your large piece of driftwood and whichever type of rock you prefer.

I'm having a hard time getting an idea of what you're going for, based on your posts. Your interest in carpeting plants (Which, by the way - I would never want to try planting before I got my hardscape in - or at least figured out, if I'm using pieces that go on and not slightly in the substrate. Especially for a dry start, where you're trying to establish roots that you won't want to have to move later.) and the links others have posted leads me to think you'd prefer something more like an ADA tank or a Green Machine tank.
However, the arrangements you've tried look more like a natural river style tank.
There's been plenty of good advice on this thread, so I'm sure you are already starting to figure out what you like and how you might go about creating it. Don't worry too much about having too little hardscape if you limit yourself to one type of rock and one type of wood. Don't forget you have plenty of substrate and plants to fill the space with as well.

I hope the art debate tangent hasn't confused or discouraged you at all. If this were another thread, I would add more to that debate, *but this really isn't the place* and I am sorry your thread has gotten taken over by it. Hopefully it won't continue. *I think those pushing the debate should really create their own thread to discuss it instead of taking over the thread of someone just asking for help with their tank.*


----------



## Tropical_Wannabe (Aug 19, 2010)

You people are so wonderful, and I appreciate each of your comments and suggestions.

In my family, I am/was the best swimmer (8 kids). When we would go camping/fishing, I was always the one to 'fetch' Mom's and Dad's stuck bait on the bottom of the river.
I see the examples and ideas people have shared here, and elsewhere. Yet when it comes to putting my 'hands-on', I am clearly creating what I've seen so many times in the rivers I've swam in. (ah with greener plants :hihi: )
To me, wood is wood. I don't see the difference between a piece of driftwood, and a manzanita branch. I understand it, just don't see it.

Most of my successful 'bait' retrievals were from under water logs/branches with many small branches still attached.
The petrified wood I have I clearly see it doesn't fit the scene. Of course as suggested earlier, using it as a substrate wall to raise/slope the substrate and then hiding or subduing it with plants.

One new question comes to mind however, if I dirting my tank, and I want to have a large slope or ledges, what do I put under the dirt to maintain that 1 inch thickness of soil? Bricks?

Again, thanks to each and everyone of you for helping me become a better Planted Tank owner (okay, it's not planted yet - but it will be)


----------



## Raymond S. (Dec 29, 2012)

Is that not the purpose of the retaining wall ?


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

Solcielo lawrencia said:


> Don't have an example. An analogy I would use is the use of more than one plant species in a tank. And yet, most people don't have a problem with more than one species. So what's wrong with having more than one kind of wood or rock? It's the exact same principle.


If you truly believe that why not start a thread with a journal and put together a tank with different wood types and/or different rock/stone types. I for one would like to see you pull it off. For some reason it hasn't worked for amateur/professional aquascapers and Amano himself as referenced earlier in the thread. It could be the start of a new scaping style, why not go for it!


----------



## Tropical_Wannabe (Aug 19, 2010)

It has been quite some time since I've visited the forums, and for that I do apologize.
Real life events prevents us all from the hobby we so enjoy.

I thought I'd share a picture of my tank as it sits today. Lots and lots of reading and searching have come into play, however my internal vision is difficult to reproduce with what's available locally.

So here's my tank today, plain and simple, and I like it. 



Still battling with some hair algae, yet I think I'm winning.

All the best to you and yours!


----------

