# Critique my 10g hardscape please



## Navigarden (Jun 25, 2010)

Those are some great stones!
I'm really jealous I've been wanting some Seriyu but cannot afford; must use zebra rock instead (blech lol).

It looks good so far, but i do have to stay that an odd number of stones will look much more visually pleasing. I would either remove or add a stone. 

Also your set up looks relatively symmetrical. Part of the beauty of iwagumi is the asymmetrical layout. Since those rocks look like they take up a larger ammount of space anyway I personally would remove the larger one on the right, and put in two smaller ones in it's place.

What do you think?


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Thank you for the comments. 

I was becoming quite worried for a bit, as the thread had 80 views and no posts. I was thinking to myself, _'now it can't possibly be that bad'_. Maybe it is the long original post that deterred some people, I don't know.

*On the odd rock issue:* I only have these four stones at this time. I have some more stone that shipped today from Boink that I'll see if I can incorporate into the scape once they arrive, which should be in a few days.

*On symmetry:* I plan on fixing that tonight. I think the way I took the pictures makes the setup look more symmetrical than it actually is. I haven't decided exactly what the focal point is, as I have two areas that fall in the left and right of the golden rule. 

Anyway, I'll be putting the aquasoil in the tank tonight and transferring the hardscape in as well. So *there should be more images here in a little bit*, which means pictures that give a better idea of the hardscape.

Comments are still very welcome, keep them coming :icon_smil.


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

*UPDATE #2: The newest photos are in on post 18, so please only use earlier images as a comparison: http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/aq...ml#post1144755
Any comments will be appreciated.*

New photos are in. I don't know what it is, but I don't like the way the photos of the tank look as much as when I'm seeing it from my desk chair. This time I put the AS into my tank and played around with the stone arrangement for a bit. It is slightly different than my last image, but the concept remains the same. This thing sure did end up being heavier than I imagines for a little G. It will likely be a pain to move to the 10th floor where my dorm is.

As I mentioned earlier, I plan on adding at least one more small stone to the layout, or may add a few more depending on what people think. 

Anyway onto the images:

1. Light on, low angle FTS









2. Room lights only, low angle FTS









3. 3/4 view, left









4. 3/4 view, right










Thanks for taking a look and commenting in advanced. Maybe these images will spur people to post on the thread *hint hint*.:icon_smil.

___________________
Armonious


----------



## MARIMOBALL (Mar 18, 2007)

I would bring the two larger stones close next to each other. Kepp there position though. make sure the stone on the left is set a bit taller than the one on the right. Also a mound would look better, make sure the focus is off center and to the left. Make your slope steep. with no more than 1/2 inch in the front. The stons are nice but they are small for the the tank. Your tallest stone should be 2/3 the height of the tank. Hope this helps.


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Thanks for the comments marimoball.

I was thinking about moving the left grouping about an inch closer to the right one. I might try doing that and seeing how it looks.

With regards to slope: Isn't 0.5" too little substrate in the front; my concern would be whether or not my foreground would root with that little substrate beneath it? Currently my substrate slopes from about 1.25" in the front to 3.5" in the back.

On the stone size: My main stone is actually very close to 2/3 the height of the tank. It is about 60% the height of the tank.

So many more views in relation to how many comments. All the ones so far are very welcome, but I would obviously like a few more as well.


----------



## Darkblade48 (Jan 4, 2008)

I agree with what has been said thus far, but to reiterate:

An odd number of stones should be used. Either use 3, or when you get the additional rocks, use 5.

While the rocks that you are currently using may be (actually) 2/3 the height of your aquarium, once they are submerged within the substrate, their apparent height decreases substantially. Depending on what plants you will be using, you may have some trouble. 

As you know Iwagumi focuses on the hardscape (the positioning of the rocks). If your plants were to cover too much of the rocks, then it would be taking away from the main focal point of the aquarium.

However in the end, whatever you decide on should please you


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

The planned plants for this tank right now are HC as the foreground with some dwarf hair grass in the background. So nothing that will cover up the stones much at all.

Perhaps it would help if I did increase the slope somewhat in order to give the illusion that the main stone and supporting stone -both of which are in the back of the tank- are taller than they actually are. That, combined with pulling the stone out of the substrate a bit would help the visible height of the stones in the hardscape.

How is the positioning of the current stones in the hardscape? Currently, I am thinking of moving the right grouping towards the left one slightly more (maybe an inch or so over). Then the fifth stone would be placed behind the supporting stone of the secondary stone and slightly to the right.


----------



## Francis Xavier (Oct 8, 2008)

If I come off as snappy it is because I'm not fully caffeinated and have a headache (and you requested it!).

Personally, I think the scape looks a little too 'flat,' and the stones seemed to be randomly placed down as opposed to flowing together - past that the two stones on each side in a pair is a bit symmetrical.

It also appears like you've buried your stones a little too much - they're much smaller in presence than they were situated in front of the tank.

My iwagumi style is a bit inherently different than most people - as a friend of mine put it, I tend to cluster all of my stones, but I believe that the focus of iwagumi revolves around "mini" iwagumi layouts within a 'larger' iwagumi whole.

What that means is, the different sections of your tank: i.e. in this case the left and the right, are composed of individual groupings of rock, so you would have your main stone grouping, then your secondary stone grouping (in this case) on opposing sides, laid out in such a way that brings together the layout as a whole together.

Get one more stone, group it with the main stone group, and adjust from there.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Diegosaenz (Aug 4, 2010)

It looks good but I did read somewhere that for iwagumi tanks you need odd numbers of stones, 1, 3, 5, 7, etc and since I only had 2 I had to go with just 1 haha, I'm not sure if there's a 1 stone iwagumi but hey, it works better for me, my 2nd stone was too big for my small tank. good luck!


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Francis Xavier said:


> If I come off as snappy it is because I'm not fully caffeinated and have a headache (and you requested it!).
> 
> Personally, I think the scape looks a little too 'flat,' and the stones seemed to be randomly placed down as opposed to flowing together - past that the two stones on each side in a pair is a bit symmetrical.
> 
> ...


Thanks X, this really helps a lot. I especially like the last three paragraphs, which made alot of since to me. I have a few more stones on the way, so I'll see what I have to work with once those get here. 

Maybe part of my problem was that I had a concept in my head after I got these stones of what I wanted the layout to look like. Maybe I should just wait until my new stones arrive and see what I can do with those.

Your reply didn't come off as snappy in the slightest to me. To me, snappy would be if you simply said, I don't like it, or it looks bad, or if you told me that I needed to do certain things. Rather, it was simply a collection of things that you found maybe aren't working out.

One of the things that is fun for me is finding out what works with what I have. So I think of a critique thread as more of giving me hints; this is part of the way the thread has seemed to go for the most part anyway.

Feel free o critique the current pictures, but the scape will change some once my new stone arrives.

*In looking at the scape, think of whether to not what is there could be made to look good with the addition of another stone, or three. I know it looks kind of awkward now, so maybe looking at what it can be with an addition or two could be better.*


----------



## gordonrichards (Jun 20, 2009)

Remember to scape the way you want to scape. You're the artist!


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

@ gordon:

Of course I'm only going to keep a scape if I like it. In the end, I know whatever I do will not be to everyones taste no matter what do, so my main goal is to make sure that I like what I'm doing. I see that as a given.

With that being said, I definitely think that with experience in this hobby comes the ability to see what layouts work and what layouts do not work. I have seen a lot of layouts, but do not have the experience that many here have gained from several years of aquascaping.

So that is why I made a critique thread. Everyone in real life that has seen my current layout really likes it. However, none of them have really even heard of aquascaping before, so while I appreciate that they like what I have laid out, I take their opinions much more lightly than people who also do this as a hobby. 

In the end, I want to make something that not only I enjoy, but that can also be appreciated by people who have never seen a planted tank before, as well as the people here on the forum who are more knowledgeable with regards to layout aesthetics.


----------



## ReefkprZ (Aug 21, 2010)

just a thought here, try laying the rear center rock on its side. to me it almost looks like the two taller rocks are competeing to be the eycatcher. that may of course change with the addition of plants but it kind of splits the attention having two structures so close in height. 

overall though, I think its a great workable hardscape.


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Good comments ReefkprZ. That is exactly the type of response I was looking for.

I'll probably try that out, since the secondary stone has a side that I really like. It may be a bit tough to squeeze it into the limited depth that I have got, but it is probably workable.

My only concern if I do what you suggested would be that the 'gravity' of the scape, where the majority of the eye is drawn, will be shifted solely onto the large stone on the left.

EDIT: I tried lying the stone down, and it just didn't look quite right. One thing that I did try, however, was pushing the secondary stone into the substrate more, which made the main stone more prominent. This, combined with something else I am trying, make the scape look much more dynamic.

Expect more images of the revised scape later.


----------



## ReefkprZ (Aug 21, 2010)

I agree, with the tallest structure on the far side the gravity of the tank shifts that way. I myself like the uneven look balancing it out with plants may be a solution. or shifting the taller rock in to balance it more maybe. If it were me I would try it one way look at it for a while walk away come back, re-arrange and do it again until I finally got tired of moving them. that would be the deciding factor in the arrangement, when got tired of re-arranging them. :icon_smil


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

I don't mind the look of one sided layout. My brother finds it a bit unusual though. I have the left grouping placed now, and am liking it now more than ever. The main stone really stands out now. 

I'm going to try out the right grouping here and see how that goes. Once that is done, it will be picture time.

What I may end up doing to connect the right side to the hardscape is place two smaller stones on the right side. It will likely either come out to five or seven stones. I think it would be nice to see some small, hardly noticeable stones along the right side of the scape. I think making the substrate much more dynamic really helped out the layout though.


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Alright, made a few changes to the scape. I'll attach a few images. Please compare these with the last set and tell me whether or not what I did was an improvement and what else you may think the hardscape could use.

Changes made from the last iteration include:
1. Increasing slope a good bit.
2. Making some more variation in slope. The left side of the substrate is roughly 1" deeper than the right.
3. Pulled the main stone out of the substrate more to make it more prominent.

I plan on placing a fifth small stone somewhere between the two supporting stones that are already present in the hardscape. In addition, two supporting stones may be placed along the right side of the tank.

Onto the images:

1. Probable viewing angle, lights on:










2. Probable viewing angle, lights off:










3. Full tank shot, low angle, lights on:










4. Full tank shot, high angle, lights on:


----------



## ReefkprZ (Aug 21, 2010)

I like that. the slightly more prominent look of the left stone draws the eye but then the slope down gives the eye an angle to follow leading the eye after into the rest of the tank. IMHO (in my humble opinion)


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

That was exactly the thing that I tried to do with the changes. I think that the additional stone on the left grouping will help solidify that side, while perhaps adding those two smaller stones I mentioned will keep that right side interesting.

Keep the comments coming. I find it neat myself to see how the layout is evolving as I gain more input and change things up here and there.


----------



## neumahrs (Jan 12, 2010)

I think it really does need one more stone. Plus that second stone is a little too centered


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

One more stone is in the works.

With redards to the second stone, do you think it should be moved further to the left or further to the right?


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

*New Hardscape Update*

Update:

Received a new stone package from Boink over Memorial Day weekend. It took me a few days due to working the holiday weekend before I really had any time to dedicate to working on the hardscape, but over the past couple days I had a few hours to just work on the tank. 

Things have changed up a bit, and I think this result to be better than the last. There are seven stones in total; the layout is also much more centered than in the last iteration.

Anyway, two new images of the new hardscape for you all to look at/ critique. As before, my low quality P&S doesn't really give the best lighting, as the highlights and shadows are quite exaggerated (does anyone have any tips of how to fix this?). Anyway, I look forward to the comments about this new setup. 

FTS, low angle:










Far shot, medium angle:


----------



## neumahrs (Jan 12, 2010)

What I've discovered works really well is do hdr photography to preserve details in the dark and bright areas of the photo.

Another option is to shut off your aquarium light and place the tank in an area where you get a lot of indirect natural light and take a photo.

Far as layout goes, it looks good.


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Thanks for the advice on the photos neumahrs. I'm by no means an expert in photography, I just wish that my camera had more options. You cannot really adjust any of the normal presets that you could in a DSLR. 

I thought that it would be a good idea to take the photo using the tank light, as in my opinion that would give the best representation of what the hardscape would look like once planted.


----------



## sapphoqueen (Feb 9, 2010)

too simetric... move a little the rocks around to look more natural IMO


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Do you have any specific ideas that you would think would improve the aquascape sapphoqueen? I don't really understand what makes the tank look symmetrical. Not to sound as though I don't appreciate your input, but simply telling someone to move the stone around isn't very specific. 

Any other opinions are appreciated.


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

Bump.


----------



## MARIMOBALL (Mar 18, 2007)

Almost there the two main stones look good . Just need to tweak the other stones for example the small stone on the right should be brought forward and the one one the left moved back. also add some substrate between the two large stones.


----------



## DANIELSON (Jul 15, 2010)

This is going to turn out great +1 for the adjusting of the smaller rocks.


----------



## Armonious (Aug 16, 2010)

@ MAIRMOBALL: I actually made your first two suggestions before you had even posted this. I assume you were talking about the two smallest stones in the hardscape? My camera is behaving funny, so I haven't uploaded the photo of that yet.

I suppose when you mention adding substrate between the two large stones that you are referring to mounding it a bit in that area. I have to move the substate around a bit more anyway, but it'll probably settle somewhat once I move it to school.

@DANIELSON: Thanks for the comments as well.

Any other comments are welcome. I'll try to get some new images up here sometime Friday. Look out for my journal here in the next couple of days, as well as a thread on how I went about building my DIY stand.


----------

