# ADA 2005 no.1 and no.7 setup pic.



## dom (Apr 28, 2004)

No.1 - 全美水族---陳德全先生









No.7









copy from www.aquariumfarm.com. viewing purpose only.


----------



## turtlehead (Nov 27, 2004)

Oh wow, that is different, but definatly nice.


----------



## Jdinh04 (Oct 7, 2004)

Congrats, definately love the first one.


----------



## Navarro (Feb 12, 2004)

Wait is this the grand prize?
Navarro


----------



## david lim (Mar 30, 2004)

http://www.aquariumfarm.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=22948&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=10

Looking further through the forum where these pictures were located I got a better idea of what makes them Nature aquariums. These pics help a lot.

Awesome tanks.


----------



## omega (Apr 1, 2004)

As novel as the grand prize tank is, I feel that this tank lacks both depth and sophistication. It is simple. Not minimalistic but simply simple. Had the rocks been moved towards more the middle of the tank and/or the fore/midground more developed, I would have a better lasting impression. But with the pile of rocks being placed so far back with the midground so messy (as in not naturally messy but messy messy), much of the feeling of the steep cliffs is lost for me.  And what's the deal with the pile of red smack dab in the middle of the tank? What's the point of it being there? Just fullfiling the "must have red color" requirement? When I first looked at that tank, I was pleased but after a 2nd and third viewing, I feel very unsatisfied. I wonder what are its competitions. Does anyone have the link to these scanned photos?

Am I missing some beauty in this aquascape? What do you think?


----------



## Jason Baliban (Feb 21, 2005)

omega said:


> As novel as the grand prize tank is, I feel that this tank lacks both depth and sophistication. It is simple. Not minimalistic but simply simple. Had the rocks been moved towards more the middle of the tank and/or the fore/midground more developed, I would have a better lasting impression. But with the pile of rocks being placed so far back with the midground so messy (as in not naturally messy but messy messy), much of the feeling of the steep cliffs is lost for me.  And what's the deal with the pile of red smack dab in the middle of the tank? What's the point of it being there? Just fullfiling the "must have red color" requirement? When I first looked at that tank, I was pleased but after a 2nd and third viewing, I feel very unsatisfied. I wonder what are its competitions. Does anyone have the link to these scanned photos?
> 
> Am I missing some beauty in this aquascape? What do you think?


I'm not sure what I am looking at either. Are these the 1st and 7th place winners? Out of what? I think they are both poor examples of aquascapes. While both are pleasing to the eye, and unique in approach, I dont feel that they embody health, plant selection, depth, and or scape that a first place entry should have. Maybe I am missing the point here?
jB


----------



## kimbm04r (Apr 22, 2005)

No. 1 

This one reminds me of Stonehenge or moss covered ancient ruins in the middle of an open field. The fish "floating" in the background behind the "ruins" looks like birds flying through. The red area reminds me of an animal standing on its haunches looking into the distance enjoying the view.

No. 7

This one looks like a forest at the edge of a clearing with a small valley or stream going through the middle of it.


All in all I kind of like them both.


----------



## MatPat (Mar 22, 2004)

I have to say I like both tanks as far as creativity is concerned and they both are nice to look at.  It definately takes some imagination or as Luis showed us, some inspiration from mother nature, to come up with a tank like these two.

In my opinion they look too much like a LANDSCAPE versus an AQUASCAPE. It is for this reason that these two tanks don't appeal to me very much. I'm not much into trying to copy a terrestrial landscape in my Aquarium.


----------



## locus (Dec 7, 2004)

I'm at a loss as to how these placed so highly, they just don't do anything for me at all.

I guess it is good that they are awarding people for daring to be different, but I just don't think these scapes represent the best that there is.

I totally agree with Omega's comments.


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

I looked at David's link, and I went "ohhhhhh." Now, it makes sense -- and I think it puts in doubt #1's originality as a concept. It is a copy of a natural landscape, usually found in southern China.










From a design perspective, it is a little bland. It's a textbook concave arrangement.

Perhaps a little alien to us, but it's not totally square...

Carlos


----------



## |squee| (Feb 3, 2005)

IMO, if the scaper of the No.1 tank did something like the picture above, it'd have a much nicer outlook.

My impression was: Oh boy, not another vertical rock one... Is he trying to simulate trees on a mountain?

He should have left the tops of the rocks bare if he was trying to simulate that setup.  Which will be _very_ nice if it was something like the picture.

But one thing though, I didn't notice the red portion until it was mentioned here. I was surprised. Perhaps that's what added to his marks.


----------



## gregorsamsa (Jan 19, 2005)

Hey,

if im not wrong, doesnt Mr Amano do the same thing? As in i remembering seeing some picture of his workshop where he shows photographs of scenes in the "terrestial nature" and how he explain how he wishes to replicate it in the tank?


----------



## Aaron (Feb 12, 2004)

What I think is happening here is that ADA is encouraging the judges to choose works that push the envelope in aquascaping design. Looking at all the past competition books, the top 10 or so are tanks that are avante garde in some way, whether or not it does not really fit in with the principles that Amano set for us in his first book. After the top 10, it seems that each entry becomes very derivative of Amano's works, Dutch style etc. 

I would be somewhat concerned if the winner was unanimously accepted and adored by the masses. Scapes like this make us scratch our head, think about our craft and ultimately try something different.


----------



## locus (Dec 7, 2004)

Aaron said:


> I would be somewhat concerned if the winner was unanimously accepted and adored by the masses. Scapes like this make us scratch our head, think about our craft and ultimately try something different.


Scapes like this make me scratch my head and feel annoyed that someone i feel to be more deserving missed out on first place.


----------



## jsenske (Mar 15, 2004)

Thank you locus. I second your views on this aquascape. I don't expect a bunch of Amano replicas to win- but this is simply not at the level of sophistication that I am willing to bet many layouts below it are. I see the landscape inspiration, but the aquascape to me does not even fully capture that. I find it rather weak. Different- and weak. I am sure Mr. Amano's comments on it will shed some light as to what the judges saw in this composition. I mean- you don't get to submit the inspiration photo with your entry. If you did , we have some really nice cow pattie fields here in Texas I could do something "different" with in an aquascape. 
It seems just doing something different is the top prioirity. Seeing as how I have now edited the last 10 sentences of this post due to rather unsavory comments that betray my TRUE feelings about these works- I will move on.


----------



## AaronT (Apr 26, 2004)

I have to agree with most that the #1 aquascape just isn't up to par. I can see where the inspiration came from, but in my opinion the rock arrangement looks contrived and symmetrical to boot. It seems as though Mr. Amano and associates threw out all of their basic rules of aquascaping when judging the top tanks.

Honestly, I thought last years grand prize was silly looking too with the vertical rocks. At least that tank did follow good principles i.e. 1:3 and triangles galore.


----------



## Gomer (Feb 2, 2004)

There are many merits to judging a tank, and thinking outside the box is one of them. While the idea isn't original explicity, it is seamingly original in aquascaping. ..however, it seems that this tank was given way too much credit on "originallity" (#1 more so). In all honesty, I'd rather have all sorts of other tanks in my living room than either of those.


----------



## keisuke (May 31, 2004)

As an impressed layout.
It is amazing. Generally, the layout is copied from the natural scape.


----------



## Navarro (Feb 12, 2004)

I just don't know what to say about this one, the layout is just not my cup of tea. I am sure the time and effort spend on this layout was significant but I can assure you there will be many more layouts in the book that will trigger more questions about this year grand prize.
Like Jeff said I want to read the judges opinions on this tank, just so I can understand this year decision with an open mind. as it is now, I need an explanation.
Luis


----------



## gnatster (Mar 6, 2004)

It's funny, I don't think there is a thread on APC that has more posts self edited edited or even deleted by the writer. 

My first impression of #1 was a scene straight out of sci-fi movie. Look at it again. I see an overgrown jungle of post apocalyptic New York City. Your view from Central Park towards downtown. There is the canyon made by a street running through block of buildings in the center. Off to the left there is the angular top of the Chrysler Building, almost dead center but to the right in the back is the rebuilt Twin Towers and also the spire to the right is the Empire State Building. Thats what I see....

#7 also reminds me of a fantasy world, I can just picture Frodo and his party returning from a quest and popping out from the tree line on that path. 

While they might be highly original in what we know as Aquascaping I personally don't think they raise the bar. We'll need to wait and see what the comments that go along with them bear.


----------



## niko (Jan 28, 2004)

#1 and #7 are ridiculous and deserve no comment.

The ADA judges have disappointed me for a second year in a row. I don't care about the placing any more but only to see the competing tanks.

--Nikolay


----------



## Piscesgirl (Feb 25, 2004)

I guess I'm the dissenter. I find them both to be very refreshing tanks, different from the status quo, and beautiful in their own right. I would be very honored to have tanks that looked like that.


----------



## ryan_suiso (Jan 10, 2005)

You must remember that the judges are from around the world. Even in ’04 some of the top 25 tanks had ceramic ornaments and one had little cows ‘grazing’. Some of the top 10 from ’04 even had layouts were no fish were visible. Not exactly my idea of Nature Aquarium, but judges other than Amano scored these high resulting in an overall good score. 

Can’t wait to see the comments by all the judges once the booklet comes out. I bet Amano will have some critical comments.


----------



## MiamiAG (Jan 13, 2004)

Personally, I think it is a matter of lack of aquascaping standards. Think of it like the AKA that judges dogs. Each breed has its own criteria of what it should have to be representative of that breed. These criteria are standardized and can be judges accordingly.

Today, aquascaping, perhaps because it is an art form, is really dependent on a judges personal tastes. At least in my opinion. Add to this the lack of feedback from the judges as to why a scape was judged the way it was and the end result is confusion.


----------



## Norbert Sabat (Jun 26, 2004)

Personally I like #1 and #7 a lot. This guys look in future and create something unusual....I must say that: we scare do something that is different from aquascaping standards (IMO we judge everything with the same scale: is that NA layout, dutch style or mix?). ADA contest is more design contest than aquatic. In last year when i saw #1 i was disappointed but few months later i think it was briliant layout (maybe except r.wallichi in background). This year #1 and #7 IMO was much better than for example Oliver (#10) tank (sorry but few crypto and echinodorus for that high score?). I was very disappointed when saw score of some tanks but...whatever. My road to ADA 2006 start right now


----------



## NoDeltaH2O (May 13, 2005)

I think the number one entry is a very nice replication of GuiLin, an area in southern China known for its breathtaking landscapes. Anybody can place plants in a tank so that they look like plants placed in a tank, but it takes a special kind of daring outside of the box creativity to make plants look like trees and rock to look like mountains. Since this is an artistic competition, I think that rewarding creativity is an admirable thing for the judges to have done.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the studio...


----------



## Bert H (Mar 2, 2004)

"Art is in the eye of the beholder." I must say, while original in concept (IMO), #1 for me, lacks a sense of depth. But, I defer to the sentence I started this with...


----------



## plantbrain (Jan 23, 2004)

tsunami said:


> I looked at David's link, and I went "ohhhhhh." Now, it makes sense -- and I think it puts in doubt #1's originality as a concept. It is a copy of a natural landscape, usually found in southern China.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Carlos, if you go underwater in the springs around the Cypress swamps, you'll see Fontenalis growing on Cypress knees appearing very much like the general idea of the NO#1 scape there as well as 7.

But that was not likely their original intent, rather the karst mountains in China.

I do not care for them as presented, certainly not the ranking given here............but examples are present underwater.........I think using Knees instead would give a better feel for the scape and some different design placements, better foreground etc.

I suggested this design with KNEES a few years ago.

The rocks/wood, need to be off kilter some to feel right IMO.
The foreground needs some design I feel, but perhaps they wanted it to be a bit wild and unkept looking.

Still, there are many things they could consider to improve on both scapes.
that is something I tend to think about rather than rank. 
But that is their choice, not mine.

Judging is an ugly business, one I do not care for. I'd rather see democracy there. Or judged by the owner's own vision alone.

Hey, if they got a 1 and 7 out of ADA, bully for them.
Perhaps that will encourage more entries and more focus on creativity for new designs.

But that is weird, Amano even said he did not care for the stones like his Chinese versions of those same mountain scenes at the AGA meeting.

Maybe he changed his mind a few months.........fickle?

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## MatPat (Mar 22, 2004)

plantbrain said:


> Perhaps that will encourage more entries and more focus on creativity for new designs.


I think you may have hit the nail on the head Tom. Maybe this is exactly what the high ranking of these two tanks is supposed to do.

After all, the amount of contest entries is relatively small considering the amount of planted tank folk there are in the world. Now consider that alot of us have more than one tank we could enter into a contest...


----------



## Jason Baliban (Feb 21, 2005)

Maybe honorable mention, or most unique approach. Some other award could be giving. But these two hardly show all the aspects a #1 should embody. Depth, color, or even plant health.

I appreciate cutting edge and art. I would agree that these are unique and deserve recognition, however, they in now way deserve their given placement.

jB


----------

