# Aquarama Aquascapes - PFK blog and video



## gf225 (Mar 26, 2005)

This may interest some of you aquascaping enthusiasts.......

You'll need to register to the PFK website.

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/blog.php?blogid=98

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/video.php?video_id=bdbjjWuf8y0

I've not seen the video footage yet, as I can't access it from my work's computer and I haven't internet at home for a couple of weeks. So any feedback would be welcome.


----------



## Rek (Jul 19, 2005)

i have try to downloda from this images










but the links don't works

can you help me to find WATER GARDERING 2007

tanks


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

(Sigh.....)

I think that it is an interesting read, but I am really beginning to dislike all of these self-proclaimed "rules" that need to be followed all of the time! I think for a beginner, it is becoming increasingly more frustrating and expensive to keep following someone else's subjective guidelines to have a "winner" of an aquascape! 

Whatever happened to simply giving suggestions to help someone achieve a look that they want for their tank? Now, unless you create "islands," "streets," follow the "golden rule," or want to mimic a terra firma scene, your tanks aren't worth a darn, so don't even bother trying to start the hobby. It is irratating to keep getting lambasted with more rules to follow in order to create the next "in thing."

Who determines what the next "phase" is anyways, and what makes them a so-called expert that they can then turn around and start spewing out demands and rules to the masses? This is a subjective hobby, and having fun and getting some relaxation while doing it is what matters! You don't see many artists trying to mimic Picasso, Rembrant, or Giger when they came out with their works, so why should the hobby/art of aquascaping be ANY different?

My subjective rules and/or advice: Enjoy the hobby. Do some pre-planning and research, then buy your material and construct something that is pleasing to YOU! If you want advice, ask for it. But for heaven's sake, don't follow someone else's "rules to be a winner"!


----------



## zig (Jul 3, 2005)

Video footage isn't that great pretty poor quality tbh, tanks look interesting but hard to tell given the quality of the footage, lots of moss seem to be the theme for quite a few of the tanks.


----------



## andrew__ (May 18, 2007)

DonaldmBoyer said:


> (Sigh.....)
> 
> I think that it is an interesting read, but I am really beginning to dislike all of these self-proclaimed "rules" that need to be followed all of the time! I think for a beginner, it is becoming increasingly more frustrating and expensive to keep following someone else's subjective guidelines to have a "winner" of an aquascape!
> 
> ...


That's about what I think everytime I click on the aquascaping section and see "Iwagumi" in the title of every other post. It's been done already, lets see something new.


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

> Whatever happened to simply giving suggestions to help someone achieve a look that they want for their tank? Now, unless you create "islands," "streets," follow the "golden rule," or want to mimic a terra firma scene, your tanks aren't worth a darn, so don't even bother trying to start the hobby. It is irratating to keep getting lambasted with more rules to follow in order to create the next "in thing."


I have never understood why some people take instructions as a personal affront on freedom. There are not rules of aquacaping that if somone does not follow they will be shunned, stoned or penalized! It is instruction on technique. Did you ever take an art class? Painting, drawing, pen and ink? You learn technique. The art instructor does not coddle you and tell you how good you are when all you draw is stick figures! You may like the stick figures, it may be the look you want, and yuo have every right in the world to draw stick figures, but if thats all you want to draw then don't take an art class!You learn various ways of technique. How to create a three dimensional image, shading, composition, color, contrast, style, interpretation. Same thing with photography, sculpture, lithographs, whatever... Why is that so hard for some people to accept that when it comes to aquascaping?



> That's about what I think everytime I click on the aquascaping section and see "Iwagumi" in the title of every other post. It's been done already, lets see something new.


Yeah Andrew, thats what happens when something becomes popular. People see something they like and want to do it. Whats wrong with that? Do you have something different to share? I'd love to see it. Maybe you can start a new trend!


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Robert--

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I don't have to be the first one to tell you that there can be some pretty arrogant people here that just don't offer constructive criticism.....and the consequential lack of humility bothers me. Besides, this isn't a class as you aptly suggested, it is a hobby. If I took a class in Aquascaping 101, I would expect criticism. Here, I expect advice, but 90% of the time, the advice offered is related to what the "in-thing" is, and how to make it look more like the "in-thing." Even you have to admit that this is pretty obvious. 

Yet another guy in the article who tells you "how to construct a winner." I guess someone must have died and made him Aquascaping God? What gives him a right to dictate to everyone else what you HAVE to do to have a nice tank? This is a HOBBY, not a CLASS! It is a SUBJECTIVE hobby, not an OBJECTIVE one, yet there remains people that feel the need to instruct the masses of aquascapers as to how to make a good tank. And THAT, Rob, is what gets me a bit annoyed. The point of this hobby, like any other hobby, is to utilize one's creativity, and not feel forced to follow "Golden Ratios," "streets," "islands," and etc. Unfortunately, I see more people who get into this hobby feeling pressured to turn out the next great Iwugami, copycat off of Knott or Amano, and it leads to seeing the "same old, same old." HOW BORING!!! It is like going to multiple museums and seeing nothing but Picasso constantly, then going school and being told that your art is nothing because it doesn't look like Picasso's art. Or people who knit who copycat off of a self-proclaimed "master of knitting"?

It is the underlying pressure to follow rather than lead. These people don't typically "suggest" to do this or that; they "instruct," as though they are for some reason the epitamy of aquascaping, that they somehow reached some unapproachable "pinnacle" that the rest of us poor morons will never even come close to obtaining unless we follow what they did. Rather, it is much more fun to discover how to create depth on your own, what plants look good together to YOU, what driftwood YOU like, etc.

So, Robert, as I have already said, I understand where you are coming from to a point, but I totally disagree with the "tone" that these people allude to. This isn't academia, and a "noob" shouldn't feel "forced" to follow these "rules" or even the unlying theme. This is a hobby, it is about self-discovery and recognizing your own talents and honing those talents. If you want advice, you ask for help or you can read a book. But to follow, in general, is a terrible thing in anything! You become an automoton, and will always be at the mercy of the next "new thing," unable to offer anything unique to the hobby.

No offense, and none taken. Just my opinion.


----------



## stepheus (Jun 13, 2006)

andrew__ said:


> That's about what I think everytime I click on the aquascaping section and see "Iwagumi" in the title of every other post. It's been done already, lets see something new.


Amen. I ve been wanting to say that a long time. I just hate seeing another ROCKS and HC combination. It hurts my eyes. However, I ve been seeing some iwagumis with really nice progression in midground and background lately. So, you got to agree that iwagumi is not dead, copy cats are dead in creativity.

I agree with both Robert and Donald. Dont shoot me for sitting on the fence, but if you both could look at each other's opinion and try to understand where each you both come from, both of your ideologies can be appreciated. Both argued it well.

As for the rules that were observed in Aquarama, this is new to me since most of the time, eq are suppose to be removed before judging:


> how aquarium equipment, such as the obligatory CO2 diffuser, has been hidden from view, as well as symmetry and asymmetry and the arrangement of plants. They're particularly fussy about the latter:


I got to say there are some really nice tanks in the vid. Fuzzy, but the tanks are nice.


----------



## gf225 (Mar 26, 2005)

Interesting comments, thanks.

Matt Clarke apologises for the poor video quality.

Personally I think judging guidelines are a good thing. As an aquascaper with no artistic talent I need all the help I can get. 

Perhaps with practice one can 'break free' from the 'rules' and have the confidence to implement their own innovations.

Some of us aren't born leaders, after all...


----------



## Jessie (Apr 23, 2007)

Donald, I had the same rant in another forum. I hear you and see where you are coming from. It's not the styles and techniques that are bothersome, it's the elitism that seems to accompany such methods. I've seen some pretty scoffing posts from people saying "well would Amano do that?? NO!" as if there are lines that a person must not cross. That's pretty frustrating. There's one thread around -- I can't remember who -- where a person titled their tank as "ADA 90cm" or something to that sort and then went onto say that their tank is not ADA, but titled it ADA because they felt that would be the only way to get people to look and start a discussion in their thread. It's sad that people feel this way.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, I've seen a lot of threads from beginners that have progressed from taking the advice on here and have created some really beautiful tanks. There's a few out there who have really taken the bull by the horns and learned a lot.

I just believe it should be less competition and label-snotty, and more HOBBY, enjoyable.


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

I saw the video. I read the comments. I did not see the contest results. I imagine the contest went to the entry that broke the fewest rules. Like any other contest, aquascaping contests need rules. It is essential. Rules tell the contestants what they need to do to win. Rules tell the judges how to determine the winner.

The more general hobby also needs rules but the rules should not be used in the same way that they are used in contests. I presume that when someone posts a photo and asks for advice that they are looking for constructive input -- like a good student, they want to learn. I could be wrong. Sometimes they are just fishing for compliments. You can't teach the same material to every student at every lesson. To beginners you teach general rules and simple technique. More advanced students need more specific rules and more complicated technique.

Years ago I believed that aquascaping was an art. Now I believe it is a craft rather than an art. The medium is far too limiting to call aquascaping an art. Music is an art. Sculpture is an art. Aquascaping is a craft, like sewing or woodworking. Being a craft does not free aquascaping from rules, it just means that the rules are more straightforward. The technique is just not that difficult and there are right ways to do things and wrong ways to do things. The rules don't mean that everything we make comes out the same, but if we follow the rules then the results do produce a consistently useful result.

There are always alternative ways to do things. One of the "rules" is that plants should be arranged so that plants in the front don't obscure the view of plants in the back. It's a simple rule that makes sense. It's also a rule that can be broken, sometimes with pleasing results. While the rule can be broken I doubt that many people would discard the rule; it is too generally useful.

Some of the responses that aquascapers get when they ask for input are arrogant, or at least seem that way. The appearance of arrogance is inevitable when people give beginners comments that should only be given to more advanced aquascapers. Comments can also seem arrogant when the comments ignore the aquascaper's goals -- often because the aquascaper failed to specify their goals. Also, some of us are just arrogant.

When you post a photo on a forum and ask for input you don't get to pick and choose the people that respond. Along with the responses that are helpful and appropriate you will get responses that are ignorant and arrogant. If you want to narrow that range of comments then you need to ask questions in a more controlled environment.


Roger Miller


----------



## gf225 (Mar 26, 2005)

Hi Roger,

Insightful comments and very interesting on the craft vs. art thing. I wonder if they're mutually exclusive?


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

George,

Art and craft aren't mutually exclusive. All art requires craft, but very little craft is elevated to art.

Unlike the widely accepted arts, aquascaping has a very limited emotional scope. The limitation is in the medium. An arrangement of plants in a glass box under water will probably never communicate to the general public a higher concept or generate much of an emotional reaction -- things that we expect of art. Aquascapes can be very pretty, but that is about the limit of what they can be.


Roger Miller


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Roger--

I respect your opinion, but my opinion is that you are totally wrong!! NO OFFENSE, OK? 

I used to think that too, until I really started paying attention to some of the people here and listen to what type of effort they put into their "craft" or "art", depending on what side of the issue you take. Try repeating that to Steve Chong who, for example, has made numerous scapes that remind him of certain places in the Far East (Japan, I think) which brought him peace or happiness to a degree. I know that there are others who also try to "mimic" or re-create a sea-side terra firma scape in the aquarium. It is an attempt to regain a "zen" that they experienced above the surface. So, I think that you are incorrect in assuming that scaping is not able to generate much of an emotional response. 

Furthermore, I don't see how painting or any other "art" form is any different from scaping. Aren't you trying to capture a unique image or a sense of tranquility when you work on your aquarium the way a painter paints a nice landscape, a sculptor sculpts a figure, a dancer dances, etc.? One could say that a painting of a landscape is just simply a painting, or a photograph is just a photo. I think that it really depends on the general public to decide for themselves what is and what is not worthy of being deemed "art."

I don't think dancing is "art," it is dancing. But, even I have to admit that I am in the minority as most people can label dancing as an "art form." What say you?


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

I take no offense. If I were easily offended I would have pulled out of internet forums a long time ago.

What do I say of dance?

I'm on the Board of Directors of a ballet company. I chair the Governing Board of a performing arts school. My youngest daughter is a 17-year old ballerina who has been studying dance since she was 8 and who expects to apprentice with a major dance company next year. She teaches, trains and rehearses usually between 3 and 6 hours a day, 6 days a week, nearly year around. You may not enjoy dance as an art -- most guys don't -- but that is your loss.

My second daughter has been taking classes in graphic arts and design for at least seven years. She's a fine arts major and a Junior at the U with a full scholarship and she expects to make her living in a creative way. With skill and a lot of hard work, in another 20 years she may actually make a comfortable living with her art. In the mean time, her aquariums are a pleasant diversion.

My oldest daughter -- also an aquarium keeper -- is a wonderful painter, but she has no plans to pursue art professionally.

The things that we generally accept as art are *hard* to do. Learning the craft inside the art takes years of training, work, sacrifice, sweat and tears. Once an artists learns their craft then with observation, perseverance and a good business sense in a few years they may be able to make a living at it.

It takes a relatively tiny effort to reproduce a scene in an aquarium well enough to give yourself a feeling of satisfaction. I get the same sort of satisfaction from working on my tank. Craftsmen (and women) most all get satifsfaction and fulfillment from their craft. It is mostly the degree of effort that distinguishes crafts from arts, but it is also the ability that art has to create an emotional impact on the general population. Through their art artists can walk people through the whole range of human emotion and experience. Art can lift others to emotional highs and crash them to depressing lows. Art can give people hope, it can be terrifing. Art can build faith and it can baffle and mystify.

Aquascapes aren't in the same category.


Roger Miller


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Roger--

Yeah...I don't want to anger anyone, and it is easy to do over Internet forums because the reader can't understand what tone the response is given in!  Just wanted to make sure I didn't upset any of my friends "across the pond"!

I have to say that we will agree to disagree, but I find your argument intriguing! Business savy as part of an artist's approach....that is very interesting! Hmmm.....I remember drawing pics from a story I wrote and people began telling me how good they were. I eventually broadened my scope to include a lot of gothic and industrial themes that bordered on HR Giger/Boush in style. And I sold every single thing, and made a great deal of money. So, I impacted a general population emotionally, observed what type of people I could market to, and made a fair coin doing it while enjoying every second of it. I guess by your definition, I was or am an artist. I never really thought about it that way, to be honest. And I guess that I can't really say that you are "wrong" either. You make good points.

I just wonder IF art HAS TO impact someone on an emotional level, or even a general population for that matter. I hate to keep using this person as an example, but Chong seems to put a great deal of time into creating a scape and DOES get emotionally tied to it. I would have to deem him artistic in the realm of aquascaping, not just an above average craftsman.

Interestingly, on that note, I was a landscaper during my early college years, and also had the privilege of doing a research project on the landscaper who designed the grounds around the Henry Ford Estate in Dearborn, Michigan. On one hand, none of the landscape architects that I worked with, even though they were immaculately blessed with talent, considered their designs to be "art" even though they used typical artistic talents to design a landscape for a home or business. On the other hand, the man who landscaped the Henry Ford Estate (I believe his name was Jens Jensen) was considered, historically, to be a great landscape artist. This was because he designed the landscape to mature over time to look great as opposed to looking good for ten to fifteen years and having to start over.

Which leads to a question that I want to see how you would answer: Would being a "visionary" be another necessary qualification to be considered an "artist"? Would you consider Oliver Knott or Amano to be an artist due to their originality of their "vision"?

Sorry about not being a fan of dance; I was dragged to my sister's and girlfriend's recitals too much, and I consider dance to be too....."girly" for my liking. But kudos to your daughter(s)!


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

DonaldmBoyer said:


> Roger--
> Which leads to a question that I want to see how you would answer: Would being a "visionary" be another necessary qualification to be considered an "artist"? Would you consider Oliver Knott or Amano to be an artist due to their originality of their "vision"?


I don't think being visionary is a prerequisite for being an artist. Some artists are visionaries and that helps build their reputation. On the other hand there are many like Brahms who are artistic conservatives. I couldn't call him a visionary but few people would deny he was an artist.

I consider Amano to be an accomplished businessman who's art is primarily in his photography. His contribution to aquascaping comes mostly from using techniques well established in other Japanese crafts and applying them to aquascapes. I think he is visionary. Few people would have seen that arranging plants under water might be turned into an international business.

Oliver is a wonderful aquascaper and craftman. I enjoy his work, but I don't see his work as visionary. Perhaps some future retrospective will shed a different light on the question.

I doubt I'm in a good position, making this argument in this forum. People here and in other internet forums have been telling each other for a few years now that aquascaping is art and that they are artists. When knowledgeable people who *aren't* part of this little fraternity concede that aquascaping is an art, then maybe I'll believe it. Aquascaping is a craft -- one that can be learned with very little effort. and that can produce lovely results and give the aquascaper a great feeling of accomplishment and satisfaction. If we pretend that it is more than a craft then we invite entirely unjustified elitism and arrogance into the hobby. I think that gets this conversation back to where we started.

Roger Miller


----------



## Jessie (Apr 23, 2007)

Roger Miller said:


> I consider Amano to be an accomplished businessman who's art is primarily in his photography. His contribution to aquascaping comes mostly from using techniques well established in other Japanese crafts and applying them to aquascapes.
> 
> Roger Miller


Bingo. Thank you for saying that.

Anyways, I agree with points that both Donald and Roger are making.

I believe the tough part for aquascaping and many aspects of fish keeping in general is that the true appreciation and recognition of craft/art form is exclusive to other keepers who can understand and comprehend the science, patience and skill that goes into creating an aquascape. Outsiders looking in, who have no experience and passer-by interest in aquariums can see them as visually pleasing, but can't appreciate it on the same level of the rest of us because they're unaware of the time and resources they require.


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Roger, Jessie-- you make good conversation! Well done! I can't say that you've changed my mind, but I am very willing to give you both due props for making your cases. Roger, I don't think that you would be considered "in the minority" regarding your opinion. Even I can't say that I am an "artist" in regards to aquascaping. I just feel that certain people in this area could be considered artists is all. However, you do make excellent points and opened my mind to another side of this craft which I hadn't really considered before. So, thank you!

WOW! I think I really strayed from the original point here! LOL! Sorry! Oh, apologies to Roger....for some reason, I thought you were located in the UK, not New Mexico! Whoops!


----------



## gacp (Sep 11, 2006)

Aquascaping: art or craft? Hummm...

I'd say, "YES"  Both, I mean. It depends on the intent of the aquascaper.

If the intent of the aquascaper is to create an aesthetically pleasing view, well, that's a craft, not doubt. Skillfull craftmanship or shoddy one, it is a craft.

Now, when the aquascaper attempts to _say_ something with his creation, when there is _meaning_ put into it, then aquascaping can definitely be art. Not necessarily good art, as the artist may fail to convey that intended meaning and fail catastrophycally to stir an emotional response in the viewer, and in extreme cases even in himself... but still, this is art because it is meant to be.

Aquascaping as both art and craft can coexist, even in the same aquascaper. I myself do: create a pleasant view, or try it to have meaning. I even have plans for far more ambitious aquascapes (I need more $$$ and more experimentation  ) and I defintely see those as works of art. Of course, some might very well say "that's ****ty" art, or even "that's not art"---it happens to all artists, I guess 

Amano's are often, if not always, art. Steven Chong's aquascapes are also art, I think---he certainly means it so. Steven mostly tries to evoque places he has been too; I myself mostly delve deep into my biological insights about beauty in evolution and the ecological match of aquatic critters and places. I'm sure there are many other people, and many other intended meanings.

Still others, just do aquascape as a craft; and that is also fine.


----------



## standoyo (Aug 25, 2005)

Good arguments all round but, here's mine to add to the mix. 

Not sure if I'm qualified to add my comments but I do believe Aquascaping can be elevated to artform[the dedication for perfection of some of the more advanced] given that with increasing competition to produce works that will affect us emotionally in a good way. The definition in dictionary says 'art is a skill at doing a specific thing typically one acquired after practice' and also 'the expression of and application of human creative skill and imagination'. How can Aquascaping not be art then? Perhaps you have not seen the dedication involved in creating some of the masterpieces in Amano's or Oliver Knotts work.

Granted if you plonk plants into an aquarium and put the light on it's still art but not GREAT art.
It's something like what your 5 year old drew for you that made you happy but it's not going to be a classic that's going to be auctioned at Christie's.

Having been aquascaping for 6years, it is my humble opinion aquascaping IS Art. Something that comes naturally to me even before I heard of the golden ratio. It affects me emotionally and people that see my tanks want it for themselves. I tell them they need to learn all this and that and they go 'Whoa!'. Granted they are not your accredited snobby art types, Art is everywhere. 
Art imitates nature.

If you plonk plants into a tank, it grows nice and it makes you happy please don't call it an Aquascape-that's a planted tank or tank with plants. 

I'm very sorry I sound harsh but I've been MOMA in San Francisco and some of the works being passed off as Art are eye openers. Open your mind and you will see, but if you are already set in your beliefs then there's nothing left to say.

That said, standing in front of the large skew-eyed mickey mouse mural is breath taking. The emotion of that is not conveyed in the little pic in the booklet.


----------



## Wahter (Nov 15, 2004)

Don't mean to hijack this thread, but I've posted some photos of the planted tanks in the 2007 Aquarama competition in the articles section of our club's website (no registration needed). I've also added some photos of one of the Singapore aquarium stores that I visited while I was there and I am working on three more articles for the club's website.

http://www.ncaquaticplants.org/

Enjoy.

Walter


----------



## Paul Higashikawa (Mar 18, 2004)

Good to see you again, W. I still remember seeing your discus pictures as well as that one year when Amano was here in the States.

I also wanna add another point and that is alot of people here are beginners or newbies who have just started this hobby. So alot of 'styles' many are so used to seeing, perhaps taking for granted, are still new and fresh to them. And I don't recall there was a rule here on APC that banishes those from posting similar styled layouts. Again, my point is, to alot of people they are still cool and new and refreshing to look at. Also, it might be a person's first-ever attempt in aquascaping. And he or she might find iwagumi nice, for instance, then decided to try one. Nothing wrong with that.

Lastly, I want to add Iwagumi IS an art form and it began eons ago in China, then spread throughout rest of Far East Asia, with Japan being the country that took it to its pinnacle; what peopel have come to understand today.

*Iwa=stone/rock*

*Gumi=group of/grouping*.........Hence, *Iwagumi=Rock Placement/Grouping*.

And people are applying the same concept to aquascaping, which is great. Some people post pictures here just to share their happiness and eagerness, especially when it is their very first attempt. Again, nothing wrong with that. That was one of this forum's purpose. To encourage and further educate people about this fascinating hobby.

Just my somewhat verbose 50cent Happy aquagardening!!!


----------



## Aen (Jul 24, 2007)

Just enjoy it. Anyone can enjoy it. If it becomes too competitive and argumentative, it's not peaceful anymore. Art is to be enjoyed, loved and shared. Most importantly art has no rules. If you had create your very own aquascape, though not stunning in a veteran's eye, be proud of it because it's yours, it makes you happy. If it makes you feel good, it's art. Something made solely for competition though a little empty, is art too.

Here's a little story for you.

*PICASSO'S CHILD*
Once Picasso said: "I used to draw like Raphael. But it has taken me a lifetime to draw like a child."

Picasso was a competent artist when he drew like Raphael. He became a great artist only when he awakened the child in him and started drawing without any pre-determined technique.

The same is true of every art. For example, the contribution of technique in the work of a competent musician is 100 per cent. But the contribution of technique in the work of a great musician is only 10 per cent or so-the remaining 90 per cent being contributed by the child in the musician. Only when you transcend technique, you become great in your field. You come full circle.


----------



## gf225 (Mar 26, 2005)

Nice story about Picasso. I like it.


----------

