# Why hobbyists fail as aquascapers?



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

I believe that many people fail in creating the aquascapes their creativity creates because they either A) do not understand the growth patterns of your plants -- learning how to use your palette is so important but almost always overlooked, B) lack of dedication -- if your stem plant arrangement always looks like a rainforest, perhaps it is time to incorporate lower maintenance plants as a greater part of your design, and...

C) no background or knowledge of aesthetic principles and techniques. Yes, yes, I have heard it many times before that beauty is in the eye of the beholder or that art cannot be restricted by rules. No. If you do not learn how to punctuate or capitalize or spell, then you cannot become a good writer. If you do not learn how to apply the golden ratio, create depth and perspective, or adding focal points (note: there are many more), then you cannot be a good aquascaper. You are not restricting your creativity by learning the rules that are out there. There is no need for an outcry that aquascaping as an art is being shackled with restrictions. You need to learn the rules before you can break them as in any other art form. Plain and simple. 

Start with a simple, basic layout design and learn how to execute that well before doing something more audacious. That's one of the better pieces of advice I can give to the would-be beginning aquascaper.

Thoughts? 

Carlos


----------



## SnakeIce (May 9, 2005)

Starting with the right equipment is essential as well. I still don't have any co2 and I think my creative opportunities have been fewer because of that.

the growth advantage that co2 gives means that a hobbiest can try more things in less time since the plants rebound faster from fiddleing. If you spend more time trying to figure out why your plants arn't, or algae is, growing, the creative thought can get lost. 

Carvers of stone just need another block to practice on, Aquatic designers have to make their own block befor they can practice. The effort of createing that mass itself gets in the way of learning the Art.


----------



## bharada (Apr 17, 2004)

Isn't this a bit like saying, "why the hobbiest fails to have his/her painting exhibited in a museum?" Artistry (whether in music, sculpture, gardening, what have you) is generally something that is inherent in a person and is not something that is learned—otherwise every community college art student would have paintings hung in the Louvre.

Most of us attempt to create a 'scape that is visually pleasing to ourselves. With the truely gifted the resulting 'scape is pleasing to the general public as well. Can the average hobbiest study the "rules" and turn him/herself into the second coming of Takashi Amano? Doubtful, but they can attempt to recreate what they see that pleases their eye. Even then, there's no guarantee that what they create will hit the mark.

Not everyone is an artist, which is what makes great works—whether it be a Motzart symphony, or an Amano's aquascape—great.


----------



## Aaron (Feb 12, 2004)

in art, craft, or hobby, there is SKILL, and the is VISION. as an art teacher, I can teach anyone how to draw, paint, sculpt. learning to do any one of these things is no different from learning any other skill. Having the vision to create something unique I think something you can't teach. It's like having perfect pitch in music, or speed and hops in football and basketball.

The foundation for any work of art or aquascape is sound design. Amano touches upon this by advocating the golden section. undertanding this and the elements and principles of design will help.

AHHH!!! Too much art talk! gotta open my presents!


----------



## Faruk Gençöz (Nov 4, 2005)

A couple of minutes ago I was watching TV on which two, very talented music stars were talking. Both of them said that they did not know the notes at all. One of them said it could be better to know the note to write down or take a record of their compositions. The other said there is no need of them at all.

If one wants to relate one variable (x) to another  within the context of a causal relationship, x would be the cause of y.
In the light of the above examples we can say x is the knowledge about notes and y is being a music star. There can be four degrees of relationship pattern or condition type between x and y in a controlled experiment to be able to say exactly what was going on between x and y. 

1. x could be a necessary and sufficient condition for y to appear (there is only one cause for y, that is x)
2. x could be a necessary but not sufficient condition for y to appear (x is among the combination of several interdependent causes) 
3. x could be not necessary but a sufficient condition for y to appear (there are multiple but independent causes for y and x is one of them) 
4. x could be neither necessary nor sufficient condition for y to appear (there is no causal relationship between them)

For the above music star examples it seems knowledge of notes is neither necessary nor sufficient condition for being a music star. On the other hand these stars are talented from their birth. Their extraordinary talent can be enough to carry them to the star society. For a hobbiest that has no talent from the birth, I would agree with Carlos that the knowledge about basics is necessary. On the other hand I would say basics of aquascaping is necessary but not sufficiant cause of artistic performance. There is a combination of multiple necessary conditions for the aquascapers who construct aquascapes at the hobby level.


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Just as a side note, I am not expecting Monet's and Van Gogh's of the aquascaping world to emerge just because they understand rules. However, I believe most people (at least more people) are capable of creating the beautiful layout they desire for their own personal enjoyment.

SnakeIce touches upon another big one -- equipment! Without the proper pieces of driftwood or rock or plants or hardware, the aquascaper is handicapped.

When buying driftwood or rock, always buy more than you think you need. When executing a layout, I usually layout 6-12 branches next to me. I usually only use 3-5 in the end and save the rest for a future layout.

Carlos


----------



## bharada (Apr 17, 2004)

Like both Aaron and fgencoz suggest, art is a two pronged process. There is the creativity side and the execution side. There are some folks that lack both and no amount of teaching will help.

Then there are those who are creative but lack the ability to turn bring their creative ideas to fruition—think creative director who employs a staff of highly skilled artist, or the great athletic coaches who never made it big in their sport.

Then there is the flip side, those who lack the creative vision, but are highly skilled to execute. These folks can flawlessly imitate anything they see, but lack the vision to create a masterpiece all their own.

The final group are those who put peolple in awe. They are the child prodigies who grow into the masters of their craft. The YoYo Mas or da Vincis of the world. We're speaking of mainly of artists here, but this heirarchy applies to nearly all fields. The gifted mathematician who can see the flow of complex equations or the musician who instinctively knows the tones that will form the perfect harmony. These are the ones who see the world differently—or at least the part of the world that pertains to their craft.

Most of the population (definitely where I place myself) fall somewhere in the middle, with a bit of vision and skills. Sometimes enough to get us in trouble. Other times enough to pull off a beauty. But consistency of greatness will forever be something we're searching for.


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Yeah, but Carlos.....what if I don't happen to LIKE your aquascapes? Do you still consider yourself to be an artist? What about me? Do I consider you to be an artist if I don't like what you do? Does it really matter what I think? 

I don't think that there are any rules here......I happen to draw really well, and have sold everything I have made, so some people consider me to be a really great artist. Yet, I never took any classes in it, never researched it, so does that make me an artist or a hobbyist to you? The people that bought my stuff would still consider me an artist, but to you, I am a hobbyist. That doesn't mean that you would be wrong, but it doesn't mean that you would be right, either! You would be right only according to the "rules" that you had set out to define what does or does not make something artistic, but it doesn't make your rules "the end all, be all."

Frankly, I consider myself to be a hobbyist in drawing and in aquascaping. They both are great hobbies to me, and both turn out very nicely. I have done my research in aquascaping, and do the best that I can with it; everyone that has seen my tanks fall in love with them. But if I don't follow your rules, that doesn't mean that I have failed in my aquascaping endevours. Maybe, I just follow my own rules for it, and you failed as an aquascapist. Which is not necessarily true. It is entirely subjective!

By the way.....your tanks, from what I have seen, look awesome! You certainly know what you are doing, and it shows; you are very accomplished in what you do, and your tanks do look better than mine. I feel it is important for us "hobbyists" out there to have people like you that we can strive to achieve what you have with your tanks. But, it doesn't mean that all hobbyists have crappy tanks.


----------



## trenac (Jul 16, 2004)

I think what makes a really good aquascaper that creates award winning aqusacapes is pure raw natural talent. This is something that can not be taught or learned in a book. 

Studying different techniques, knowing your plants & how to prune them, having the right equipment, etc and a lots of practice might make you a good aquascaper. Still to get to the point of Takashi Amano and others takes a raw natural talent. You have to be born with it!


----------



## Simpte 27 (Jul 16, 2004)

I cannot agree with you more, Carlos; but the problem I run into is not only knowing growth patterns of plants but still trying to grasp the concept of a basic layout. I look at all the tanks on the net and say wow! Even if I don't like the layout, I CAN appreaciate the creativity in it. I look at mine and say it looks like a tank with plants in it that grow well. No balance or symmetry to speak of. I guess I'm lacking on the artistic side and its really frustrating.


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Having been carefully watching aquascapers 'grow' throughout the years from mediocre to amazing, I have to counter point all the people saying 'you have to be born with it' to make an aquascape that is worthwhile. I think a lot of it is practice, practice, practice. Compare Takashi Amano's layouts from 1990-1991 to those he produces now, and the level of refinement in his skill has increased immensely.

I can even take Justin Law and Norbert Sabat, members of our forum, as examples. I've been looking at their layouts before most people started admiring their works in the English speaking forums. The works they produces in the first 1-2 years did not get as much praise for a reason -- now they produce works that have universal attraction and very high level aquascaping technique.

People may be born with the talent, but if they do not develop that talent, they will not show talent anymore than anyone else.



> I don't think that there are any rules here......I happen to draw really well, and have sold everything I have made, so some people consider me to be a really great artist. Yet, I never took any classes in it, never researched it, so does that make me an artist or a hobbyist to you? The people that bought my stuff would still consider me an artist, but to you, I am a hobbyist.


Careful. I never said half the things you say in this paragraph. The post was about why people *fail* to produce good works -- the beginning aquascaper who is absolutely clueless on how to improve his or her layout because they never come out how they imagined (execution). Notice how I keep putting "rules" in quotation marks. I prefer to call them techniques. Every art form has techniques to help execute what your creativity allows!

I never said you are a hobbyist or an artist or even implied it. That discussion topic belongs to another thread. We're not getting into that here. 



> But if I don't follow your rules, that doesn't mean that I have failed in my aquascaping endevours. Maybe, I just follow my own rules for it, and you failed as an aquascapist.


Again, I repeat, the beginning aquascaper should learn the rules to have knowledge about them -- it is not about following rules by the book (that would be boring). I realize and prefer layouts which break any number of rules to create something original and refreshing. However, I don't think the beginner on his first layout ever with absolutely no knowledge of what the term golden ratio means should strive to create something completely original and well executed at the same time. *Keep it simple at first and practice.*

I don't want beginners to be frustrated and lost on their first attempts.

I don't think it is fair to say that the only people who will be 'great' aquascapers are the ones who can just do it with raw natural talent. We should not try to make creating aquascape something difficult that only a few "prodigies" can perform. FYI, Amano, Jeff Senske, Oliver Knott, and other 'pros' have been doing this for 10+ years and have produced dozens if not hundreds of layouts. I think that helps.

Carlos


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

So, really, you admit that there are no rules, that aquascaping in really the science of learning.....I never heard of the Golden Ratio until a few months ago, just using my intuition over the past ten years, and my tanks look friggin' great. A lot of this is about trial and error, and if newcomers think that they can put together an Amano style tank in a day, obviously that isn't going to happen, whether they follow the "rules" or not. The great thing about this "hobby" for me at least is the learning first-hand wisedom that one accrues by getting his/her hands "dirty." People "fail" in learning something new because they aren't willing to learn from their mistakes. People fail aquascaping because whether they follow the "rules" of not, they lack the "sticktoit" approach and give up on it.

You are mincing words and implications together.


----------



## DonaldmBoyer (Aug 18, 2005)

Your implication is hobbyists fail to be good aquascapers. So my question, overall, is that can only artists be good aquascapers because they understand the "rules," and hobbyists don't understand the basic "rules"?


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

I think you are trying to pick at an argument that just is not there. We're not writing prose here with multiple levels of underlying meaning to find a debate launching point. I'd much rather you consider reading my entire post instead of pulling out pieces of it. This thread will not be repeated into an aquascaping is art vs hobby type of discussion. In this thread, I could not care less if you call what you do art or hobby. Nor was this thread meant to be a debate.

We are trying to find ways to help those with less skill and experience achieve their goals. We want to make having an attractive aquascape an attainable goal. If you have a naturally good eye and by chance followed the "rules" without learning them, more power to you, but we have to be considerate that not everyone can 'get it' naturally. Some never will, and that is OK, but if learning technique/rules helps one, five, or ten people improve their layout skill out of 100, then it is worthwhile to teach.

So...

Any other ideas on why beginner aquascapes fail? So far we have five reasons:

1. Lack of dedication.
2. Lack of knowledge of plant growth patterns.
3. Lack of any background on aesthetics -- just don't know what to do.
4. Lack of proper equipment and material.
5. Lack of practice (I added this one right now).

If we can collect enough reasons with substance, I'll write them up formally and post it as an article in the APC Library so that neophytes can use them as pointers.

Carlos


----------



## niko (Jan 28, 2004)

To me there is one single problem with being a successful aquascaper: Vision.

There are very few aquascapes that I've seen that are indeed created with a vision and are something new and exciting.

If you dream up a beautiful aquascape and actually make it there isn't much that will conceal its beauty. Algae problems, bad plant growth, bad photography, ugly fish will diminish but will not kill the idea.

I do sound impractical but let's remember how many perfectly clean, manicured, and boring tanks we've seen.

Here's a thought:
"Isn't it this perpetual mania of imitation that prevents man from being a god?"

--Nikolay


----------



## Dewmazz (Sep 6, 2005)

Don't forget budget  
Unless you're freinds with a _lot_ of (the right) people, funding this amazing hobby is pretty hard (esp. if you don't currently hold a job  )
At least that's what I've encountered. lol...


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

I think the basics behind an aquascape are the principals in design and layout, like whats outlined in Birgits article, (Great article Carlos, where'd you dig that up?), but anything beyond that is purely subjective. I don't think anyone out here, or who has ever entered any online contest is an artist more than a hobbyist. I have seen stuff by everyone out here some of which I like and some of which I do not. It is all subjective. Entries in the first AGA contest made me go WOW, and now when I look at them I go.. eh. Learning how and then experimenting and putting it into practice is great and much fun, taking it too seriously after that point is, well,. subjective at best.



> The post was about why people fail to produce good works


Under what contex are you talking about? How do you define failure? By what standard? I agree there are principals of design and models to work from, but people often go by their own rules, like James Hoftiezer. There are certain basics that can be learned, and artistic ability comes easier to some people, but then somone with all the ability in the world can still make something that looks like crap to someone else. I do not think you can or should define "good works" without it being subjective.

"neophytes" I can't believe you actually used that word. Nobody likes to be called a failure for what they do, if you re-phrased this to ask what makes a successfull "good work", I would add to your list, attention to detail. What has fascinated me about amano's aquascapes is his attention to the finest detail. It is truly incredible.


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

> Robert Hudson wrote: like whats outlined in Birgits article, (Great article Carlos, where'd you dig that up?)


I asked permission from Birgit Wolfgang to use that article, since I believe it provides a good sound basis and summarizes the beginner's manual on vectrapoint quite nicely. She agreed.



> Under what contex are you talking about? How do you define failure? By what standard?


Failure is defined by what the actual aquascaper desires. I clearly never called anyone a failure at what they do. Only YOU can judge if you have failed or not. I am not basing it on the standard of Amano, or Luis Navarro, or anyone else. It's all about what the aquascaper wants. If the aquascaper really wants to recreate a Riccia layout with a decent iwagumi arrangement and fails to create something that is satisfactory to HIM, then how can he make it work on his next try? This is exactly why I stated:



> Carlos Sanchez wrote: We are trying to find ways to help those with less skill and experience *achieve their goals.*


Carlos


----------



## RedBaron (May 16, 2004)

Very interesting discussion. I don’t know if I can decide when aquascaper succeeded and when failed in creating layout. It depends strictly on the point of view. Different people like different things. 
Anyway, you write such failure can be caused by lack of knowledge (golden ratio etc.). IMO even this knowledge can be responsible for not as good layout. I’ve noticed that many people try to match the hardscape to golden ratio. They split aquarium space into sections and than try to create something on that basis. IMO it doesn’t make any sense.
I try to put driftwood and rocks in such a way to get the best possible combination. If this combination matches golden ratio than ok if not I don’t care.


----------



## trenac (Jul 16, 2004)

Carlos... I think you should add lacking of natural talent to your list.


----------



## vivalagourami (Nov 27, 2005)

Hey! I'm brand new to aquascaping! Just one month into it, so I'll add my two cents if you don't mind. 
Aquacaping...like writing, like music, like painting...can be a hobby if you want, or it can be an art. But calling it an art in my mind requires the acceptance of the fact the word "art" idicates a much higher level of professionalism and skill.
My tank as an aquascape looks like a dump.
http://www.itsnotmadcow.blogspot.com
But that doesn't bother me at this moment for a lot of reasons everyone touched upon. I have...*gasp* a plan!
I don't really have the time necessary to practice and develop my skill, so I have a handicap. I have a totally non related day job, so I don't get much help there. That doesn't mean I'll never get there. It's just going to take much longer. At this point, I'm working on learing plant structures, signs of deficincies and fertilization and the general chemistry and ecology of the planted tank. I have a poltical science degree, and not much of a basis to understand NH3, NO3, Co2 versus Co3, acidity, alkilinity or even stems and rhizomes, photosynthesis and propagation. So I've had to work on this all on my own via the library and the internet. I think that I lot of people want to grow plants and make a fish tank look nice, so they quit here with a working knowledge verus and understanding. To be able to really aquascape on an artistic and professional level, I believe I'll have to take that knowledge to the next level first. The next thing I have to do it learn how the plants grow and how to work with them inside those parameters. So, right now, I feel like my best bet is, as crude as this sounds, is to chuck a bunch of plants into my tank and watch them constantly and over time. While I've been reading many of the articles mentioned (Brigits in particular), and learing about 1:1.618 and focal points etc. my tank is not going to look like a Monet painting unless I can see for myself how the plants work. I can't just go to a landscaping contest, look at the blueprint and put plants in where the orginal aquascaper put plants in and have it look the same if I don't know how the plants grow. So I'm just gonna toss in a bunch of species for now, see what kind of palette is available and pull it up, replant it, pull it up, replant it...etc. etc. until I get a handle on prediction how it will grow into what I want. 
Then, I plan on doing a bunch of studies. All artists have to do studies, no one just stands in front of an easel on day and lays out an fantastic portrait. Its more condusive in the long run to an artist to develop work through experimenting with different versions of that work before its put on a canvas, similar to a writing doing drafts or a film maker doing rough cuts...
So then, I'll probably pull up a few studies and replant them, and pull them up again and replant them...
but eventually, I will get to one final product. And if no one in the world likes it but me, at least I got there the right way.
And after a few months of enjoying it...I can break it down and start all over again and make another piece of art! FUN FUN!
I'm expecting my first real aquascape to be a 2 - 2 1/2 year process. When that's all said and done...I will consider myself an artist instead of a hobbbyist. So you will have to wait that long for pics! LOL!
I may make another one, or I may just decide to run a hobbyist tank from then on. We'll see. I'm the type of person that will put 2-3 years of work into one thing. Smile...and move on to something totally unrelated. But I'm glad I got into aquascaping. I'm very happy with it after years of learning to keep fish. Its a nice change of pace from my previous obsessions.


----------



## SnakeIce (May 9, 2005)

If any portion of this post is helpful for further development feel free to use and expand on this.

What I have gathered from this thread as to the reasons people fail to realize the reality of the vision their efforts work towards fall under one of the following:

1. Materials and equipment.

A. The right lighting, tank, water movement source, heater, substrate, and haveing a CO2 source is the first step.
_a_. Tank demensions make a huge difference in the way a scape comes across. A 25.2"x11.8"x9.8" custome tank lends itself to a scape much better than a standard 20"x10"x12" 10 gallon.

B. Hardscape, knowlege and source of types of wood and rock appropriate for use in an aquarium. 
_a_. An open mind able to see use of rocks not just like ones used in lauded scapes. possibly a short geology lesson on types of rocks that won't change the ph needed.
_b_. show how the wood centerpeice in a tank can be made of elements that are not centerpiece quality.

C. Plants
_a_. Size, growth pattern, leaf shape
_b_. feeding-fertilizeing... whatever you want to call it.
_c_. sources, get the plants you need.

D. Fish, 
_a_. keeping fish as a hobbygets in the way of aquascapeing unless you have other houseing for them.
_b_. fish choice complimenting aquascape.

2. Aquascapeing knowlege

A. Techniques
_a_. planting, pruneing, tieing down and up...
_b_. safe placement of rocks and driftwood, ensureing the hardscape won't move or damage the tank. physical limitations.
_c_. keeping substrate level or not, keeping sand separate from grow soil, how slopes are maintained.
_d_. placement of filter returns and manageing water flow directions.

B. Design
_a_. What the golden ratio means to an aquascaper
_b_. "oriental" concepts of odd numbers, not placeing more than two things on the same line. Any good how to book on bonsai and groups of dwarfed trees in the same pot will go over these concepts.
_c_. probably something I'm missing  Jeff Senske mentioned Amano telling him that he grew plants well but still was missing ______. I'm not at that point of learning so don't get it and don't remember what it was.

C. Personal development
_a_. practice. If we all could put as much time and do the number of tanks that Amano, Knott or Senske brothers have done we would execute better tanks.
_b_. practice. Educators know that what separates great artists from the rest of us is not aptitude or smarts but perserverance and guided practice.
_c_. practice. Identify what it is that you can change that would give you more practice. What are your weaknesses? do you need to attend a workshop to see techniques demonstrated? do you need to free a tank from the responsibility of keeping fish alive so you can make an aquascape?

3. Money. It is an issue, but I think there is more than one meaning to the expression starveing artist. It doesn't say if the artist is starveing his ability to make art or depriveing his or herself of nurishment. I suppose that one is up to you.

I believe APC has worked on providing the answer to ignorance on a number of those points: Plantfinder, forground planting tutorial thread, EI and PPS, Interviews with Aquascapers, and even the forum sponsors add something.

On the assertion that some people are born with aquascapeing ability, I say nonsence. They were born with the ability to learn, just like any other person. We all can learn to aquascape. Art and design is a knowlege that anyone can learn. You can be difficult and say some people learn faster, but that doesn't change the fact that everyone can learn. It just comes down to dedication and time.

Since aquascapeing is what this forum is about, I believe this is a discussion of the purpose of the forum. What do we want people to get out of this board.

I can say I know I won't be a great aquascaper.(by my own deffinition) I like fish to much to focus just on the arangeing. I do however spend as much time learning what I can so when I do some aquascapeing I can make the most of my practice time.


----------



## tsunami (Jan 24, 2004)

Thanks, SnakeIce. That is a very well done summary.



> Since aquascapeing is what this forum is about, I believe this is a discussion of the purpose of the forum. What do we want people to get out of this board.


*YES! You got it.* Although part of the discussion that should be fostered on this forum should be directed to advanced discussion on layout design, the bulk of it should concern what you have so carefully outlined.

With some editing, I'd like to add your post to the APC Library section as an article or perhaps as a sticky thread on this forum.

Carlos


----------



## Avalon (Mar 7, 2005)

I believe there are two aspects to planted aquaria, one being function and the other creative. Knowing how to use the tools and grow a plant is one thing, but knowing how to use the plant is another.

This is where the "vision" comes in. I don't have the aquascaping vision yet. The apple has yet to hit me on the head, and it's quite frustrating. Seeing a picture and realizing the same qualities of it in your own tank is quite different. From time to time, I'll run across something in my own tank that is quite amazing to me--for example achieving a true sense of depth is quite amazing--but I find it difficult to replicate. I've picked up a few lessons from my own practice, but I think it's going to come down to someone actually showing me to actually learn how to implement it each and every time.

Being that folks learn via differing methods, I think most would benefit from hands-on learning. Back in high school, I failed Algebra 2 6-weeks straight; I just wasn't "getting" it. I went to a tutor one time, for one hour, and made high B's low A's from then on, with relatively little effort. You could say I realized the "Algebraic vision."

I feel workshops (hands-on) would be the most beneficial, yet few clubs, if any, actually do them on a regular basis. I live in no-plant land, and it's a 5 hour drive to the nearest club, so if I miss one, oh well, maybe next year. I've never really understood that about clubs. Why do you want to meet and talk about things when you could actually be doing them instead? Forums are for talking, meetings are for doing.


----------



## Faruk Gençöz (Nov 4, 2005)

I would like to add some empirical info to "personal growth" issues Carlos and SnakeIce raised.

Empirical evidence suggests that a term called "hardy personality" style makes people less prone to stress and more successful in coping with problems. This personality style is characterized by three factors.

*Control*: Hardy people believe that they can control ongoing problematic events.
*Commitment*: Since they believe that the problems can be manipulated they show higher levels of commitment to produce solutions to problems
*Challenge*: They interpret the problematic situations as a challenge rather than stressful.

Hardy people have been found to be more successful at work in western literature. That's why several people developed hardiness scales to evaluate the job applicants on these scales. Hardiness scales can be criticized but what the hardiness concept provides theoretically (three factors) is quite strong.

I think the three factors can empirically cover "practice" and "dedication" issues raised by Snakeİce and Carlos. Aquascapers who perceive less control and less challenge, will be more likely to show less commitment to their engagement. Perception of control can be thought as the most strategic among the three factors and can be strengthened with basic knowledge provided to beginners.


----------



## Gomer (Feb 2, 2004)

All aquascaping (art) is built on basic principles, many of which have been outlined in here. Sitting down to understand them, and exicuting them just takes practice. Under these basic principles, anyone can create a good aquascape. Some people have to work to create these, while others just do it without needing to think much. 

Everyone, with practice and patience, can create a good aquacape; however, to create a breathtaking piece of work, you need either need to have "the gift" or be lucky.


----------



## SnakeIce (May 9, 2005)

I welcome the use of my previous post. Thus the first sentance in the post.  It is just an outline that I created, so I assumed that to be of further use it would have to be fleshed out and edited. It could be used as an organizational index to articles and websites that provide more information as well as an article itself. Even a general coverage of the points listed could get quite lengthy if made into a single text. 

I would wish that this becomes the organization of in depth information on each facet of makeing an aquascape.


Any one see anything I missed? maybe a new thread can be made with that for editing the outline and suggestions. I did a good work, but don't think it is anywhere near finished or the definative last word on the subject.


----------



## Simpte 27 (Jul 16, 2004)

Natural talent should be reworded as visual focus. Many an auqascaper see what they want, but is unable to create it. That falls into yet other categories.
Just because you see a plant does NOT mean it will look like that in your tank. Lighting corolors are important here.
You may not be able to grow said plant to the same ability as another. Matpat's Limnophilia aromatica looks much better than mine but some of my hygros and crypts grow much better. One works for me but maybe not him.

I still think it comes down to what you can bring out of a certain plant. If you can achieve to bring the reds out of certain plants, the will be more appealing. If you can get them bushier it also helps. If you bacopa or ludwigia looks stunted, it will not be as appealing. You have to know how to bring out the most in your plants. Stunted, defficient plants will only frustrate the neophyte.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

I think the difference is in mindset.

As Aaron suggested, an artist is trained in execution skills, and uses his own vision.

However, artists also think about things differently than someone doing something "just for fun."

Its an idea that has many names, but many contemporary art education programs emphasize something like "habits of mind," basically, skills that happen mostly in the mind, in preparation to create art. It can also be thought of as a way of thinking/living.

Habits of mind can involve things such as "experimentation/risk taking" "connection-making" "concentration", well, there are a lot of names for many ideas involved.

These types of ideas are seen in aspects of an artists thinking/living. For instance, keeping a sketch book and constantly adding to it/updating it. Many artists keep a sketch book and are always writing down new ideas/plans in it, or stuff from other people of places or things. Inspiration hits them and they write their ideas down in hopes that they'll reach fruitation eventually. Many artists are constantly on the look out for new ideas/concepts to add, things that they can include. Always mulling over which concepts can be combined in what ways . . . The list goes on and on. It might be fair to say that the "habits of mind" guide the artist at every moment.

Ultimately, it means that an artist should be a dynamic existance that is constantly widening, deepening, combining, restarting, recombining, refocusing, and ultimately expanding his vision/ideas/skills/inspiration/etc. I guess that means an artist needs to bring more creativity and intensity to the art.

An artist is *serious*-- not meaning personality, but meaning in his determination. Even if he hasn't accomplished much yet. Like in anything, he has to believe in himself.


----------



## SnakeIce (May 9, 2005)

tsunami said:


> With some editing, I'd like to add your post to the APC Library section as an article or perhaps as a sticky thread on this forum.
> 
> Carlos


Did this idea get forgotten or just put on the back burner? Part of the reason I made the outline is I would like to read up on some of those points. An organization of articles covering that outline would be nice.

Even if we could get some one to author an article with members here being the source of information that would help by collecting knowledge on the subject. This way no one person has to work on the whole subject matter.


----------



## Happy Camper (Jul 22, 2004)

Dear Carlos and other thread participants

I think that for a complete newcomer to the hobby its simply just a matter of too much to take in all at once. The newcomer needs to get into a 'stable routine' first, start growing healthy plants (understanding the processes involved) and then finally once the routine is 'tight' can he/she begin to create eye pleasing layouts. Experience and stability are tantamount to any hobbyists success. Composition is everything and usually will only come with experience.

Although in my case I just do not have access to fancy carpet plants and nifty substrates and co2 setups. This can be a *huge* hindrance. I've kept at it over the past couple of years as they're bound to hit our country 'sometime'. The eternal optimist...oh yes 

Also we must realise that every 'creative persons' work will be different, after all it is in essence an expression of your inner self, and thus should be celebrated so. It does no good if we all copy Takashi's style. What if we were all painters and decided to copy a great artists style like William Kentridge, then we would all have tanks that look exactly the same, like the reef hobby IMO, all the tanks look very similar.

I say don't be too critical of your work or other folks (although constructive criticism is very good if you want to improve, sometimes the artist can't see the forest for all the trees and outsider opinions can 'set you free').

Celebrate your creativeness and be happy in your process 

Kindest Regards
Cameron James
All the way from Sunny (but chilly) South Africa


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

Happy Camper said:


> It does no good if we all copy Takashi's style. What if we were all painters and decided to copy a great artists style like William Kentridge, then we would all have tanks that look exactly the same


That's true, and there is traditionally a bit more room for innovation in freshwater aquascaping than in reef-keeping (though that might just be because people in the reef hobby usually _choose_ to follow the same lines of construction).

However, I think we should also come to grips with the fact that this is an art form with limitations. Aquascaping can hardly be used to effectively talk about drugs, sex, war, violence, suicide or giant robots. :lol:

I'd like to say that aquascaping is used almost explicitly to express beauty of life or nature. As artists though, we should not try to fight too hard against that. Innovation is important yes, but we should also accept, forgive, and utilize the limitations of the media.

After all, people have been doing landscape painting/drawing for a long time, and yet we still love the new works that come out; even when often enough each new work is "standing on the shoulders of giants."

For me, choosing to be an aquascaper as opposed to a painter or graphic artist, is the sacrifice of quite a bit of freedom, for an equal or greater amount of potential intensity and vibrance to my work that results from aquascaping being dynamic and literally alive. In other words, I think it best to appreciate aquascaping for what it is, and not try to force is to be something it isn't.

Aquascaping is an art with limited room for creativity-- but I guess that means that those who stand out in that limited room are even more so the true geniuses. eh?


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

what!? how'd I double post!? Can a mod delete this please! :lol:


----------



## ranmasatome (Aug 5, 2005)

i think "limitations" cause more creativity..
And there are way more scapes out there than T.Amano...
If you spend enough time in the forest or in natural areas.. you'll get sooooo many ideas you cant have enough tanks to finish/test them all out... probably one of the reasons why people suffer from MTS.

I already agree with most of the pointers mentioned here so i'll shut up.


----------



## Steven_Chong (Mar 17, 2005)

well it works both ways-- limits stimulate creativity, but then limits ARE limits. 

I totally agree with you ranmastone that you can get so many scape ideas at once, and never have enough tanks (I've been/am there too) lol.

But the cynical side of me has to wonder how much difference a person who knows nothing about aquascaping will see. It may look different to us, but if they all look the same to the untrained eye, than the creativity we proclaim doesn't amount to as much as you'd hope.

Don't get me wrong, some things can only be understood by those who are good at it. I was pretty serious about wrestling in high school and think it is the ultimate sport, but unless you really know it, you just can't enjoy it much as a spectator-- especially the matches between really high level guys when both players are cautiously playing to read for weaknesses so far in advance that even the coaches have trouble following it.

Ok that was a bit off topic, but I mean yeah-- there are some higher goals that only those with similar goals can appreciate, but since aquascaping is a visual artform, it would be nice if what creativity we proclaim to exist could also be appreciated by those outside the aquascaping world.

I mean, I post the aquasketches on deviantart.com and most of my views are from people from these forums. That's because, while people (who are other artists) wander onto my site, and see my work, they don't feel like they can comment on it.


----------



## ranmasatome (Aug 5, 2005)

starry starry night??


----------



## valleyvampiress (Feb 18, 2006)

SnakeIce said:


> If any portion of this post is helpful for further development feel free to use and expand on this.
> 
> What I have gathered from this thread as to the reasons people fail to realize the reality of the vision their efforts work towards fall under one of the following:
> 
> ...


Out of this entire thread, this is the best post. Why? Because instead of trying to figure out why someone is "bad" at aquascaping, this actually trys to HELP the people who are seeking ways to better improve their skills at designing aquariums. To me, the thread has felt kind of negative up until this point. I feel like, enough already with trying to figure out why someone is "bad" or "good". A better approach would have been to say something like, "For those who feel lost or unsure about their aquascaping skills or just for those who want to brush up on their skills, here are some tips to help you out."

If someone likes the way their tank looks, I don't think they really care too much about what anybody else thinks. But for those who feel there's room for improvement, those are the ones you should be talking to. If these are the people you're talking to, wouldn't a better approach be trying to help them out instead of trying to figure out why they might not be so good at aquascaping than others?

Anyway, I'm not here to offend anyone, I'm just speaking on what I was looking for when I opened this thread.


----------



## bastalker (Mar 11, 2006)

If you are dedicated to this hobby, eventually you will get it. Some people want to learn the aquascaping process, others dont really care as long as they like it.

For the ones who want to learn the art of aquascaping, it is a matter of practice IMO. The more scapes you try an produce, the better they will become. All the jaw dropping scapes that we see now didn't come from people brand new to the hobby. It came from people who have done it for awhile and know how to grow plants without algae issues. They have learned how plants grow in thier tank. They have learned how to prune plants to give the tank depth. They have done several scapes with each one better than the first.

Aquascaping does require some kind of vision. A blank canvas waiting to be painted doesn't get a brush stroke on it until there is a vision. A vision can not be realized unless the painter knows how to use the brush.


----------



## Clone (Mar 9, 2005)

Why do hobbyist fail as aquascapers? Perhaps it is because most hobbyist have no intention of being an aquascaper and do not consider what they do art. Do not get me wrong sometimes it may lead to that and there is nothing wrong someone in the hobby to consider themselves an artist. Although I am willing to bet that most hobbyist see what they do as a peaceful activity that they can indulge in to get away from the hassles of life for a while, and message boards like this one is a place for individuals of an obscure hobby to get together. Nothing more, nothing less. 

-Jake


----------



## Aquaspot (Jan 19, 2006)

In our opinion, we really think that aquascaping is something a person should enjoy doing. Not for prizes, not for attention but purely for leisure. 

And no matter how good you are, an aquascape can always be improved. There will always be details you can add to a scape from time to time. 

Just remember that at any stage, you are always learning and growing with this wonderful hobby.


----------



## Faruk Gençöz (Nov 4, 2005)

Aquaspot,

Could you elaborate a bit more on your points?

How could you differentiate the aquascapers who aquascape for prize and attention from the ones who do it for purely leisure? What is the function of this differentiation? Which group does fail to improve?


----------



## erik Loza (Feb 6, 2006)

Faruk Gençöz said:


> Aquaspot,
> 
> Could you elaborate a bit more on your points?
> 
> How could you differentiate the aquascapers who aquascape for prize and attention from the ones who do it for purely leisure? What is the function of this differentiation? Which group does fail to improve?


If aquascaping (however one chooses to define that term) truly is art, then its appreciation is solely in the eye of the beholder. If you are object is to compete in the area of design, layout, etc., then you would be well served to follow the lead of others who have gad good luck being judged by these criteria.

If your goal is to appreciate it at a personal level, then an aquarium with fluorescent pink gravel, rainbow rocks, and the bubbling treasure chest could be just as viable an aquascape as one that would more commonly be seen in a store-bought book. What is "right" or "wrong"? Only what you choose to like and what you don't. I see some aquarists' tanks on this forum that just don't talk to me, and I'm sure there are many members for whom my aquarium wouldn't work, but that's not the point. Information is given and ideas are shared, we take what we find useful and leave what we don't, compliment those who contributed and not correct or criticize.


----------



## Aquaspot (Jan 19, 2006)

Faruk Gençöz said:


> Aquaspot,
> 
> Could you elaborate a bit more on your points?
> 
> How could you differentiate the aquascapers who aquascape for prize and attention from the ones who do it for purely leisure? What is the function of this differentiation? Which group does fail to improve?


We are not saying who's right and who's wrong. In fact, there is no right or wrong. We are just stating our opinion.

A person who does a scape purely for leisure would enjoy it more, due to the lack of pressure. It's just our opinion and any groups will improve with practice.


----------



## Faruk Gençöz (Nov 4, 2005)

I think when the emphasis is on the "improvement" inevitably the aquascaper should compare himself against others. When the aquascaper needs an improvement he should direct his performance in a certain direction. This is the point where right or wrong starts. To go in the right direction with purpose of improvement aquascapers are also in need of feedbacks. That's why there are contests and forums in the field.


----------



## erik Loza (Feb 6, 2006)

Faruk Gençöz said:


> I think when the emphasis is on the "improvement" inevitably the aquascaper should compare himself against others. When the aquascaper needs an improvement he should direct his performance in a certain direction. This is the point where right or wrong starts. To go in the right direction with purpose of improvement aquascapers are also in need of feedbacks. That's why there are contests and forums in the field.


Would it be right for you, me, or anyone to tell somebody how they "should" do or "who" they should be compared to? And does this person really want to improve, however that would be quantified? In other words, we are all where we want to be. There are aquarists for whom the fluorescent gravel, rainbow rocks, and plastic plants is perfection. And there are others, like yourself, who might measure their success by comparing it to others. Who am I to tell someone where to find pleasure and satisfaction?


----------



## dennis (Mar 1, 2004)

Aquascaping as an art is in it infancy. When we discuss "improvement", "perfection", "technique", "beauty" or even "art", I think we need to remember this. As someone who aquascapes while viewing it as an artform, I definately say there are techniques and aspects of design that make for a good composition. This is true for any art form. I dare someone to go to true art college or apprentice with someone who is a master in their field and get away with "my art is my art so I can't possibly be wrong".

Anyone, artist or not, is free to do whatever they feel is beautiful and I am inclined to say that they are free to think about the prefection of their work without my input or criticism. However, and this is a big however, anyone who asks for criticism, feedback or encouragement must be willing to accept that feedback or criticism. Any artist, past or present, who is successful and well-know; Divinci, Pollock, Degas, etc, etc; is always classically trained and regardless of how original they became, or how far fetched their work may seem in comparision to others, their work was always *based* on proper technique and rules of composition. Only once you fully understand, fully master and appreciate, the rules and techniques of your chosen artform can you start bending and breaking them to suit your own purpose.

This hold true for any art form, music, dance, painting, sculpture, graphic, collage, voice, furniture making or aquascaping. I don't understand why we are always arguing about this with regards to 'scaping. If you want to view it as an art, art has rules. You can choose to break them once you know them, but the rules are there. Why do we follow the rules of arcitecture and design the Greeks used thousands of years ago; because some things are just right!

Its time we agree to this in aquascaping also. If I want my work to be judged its my buisness how or why. People who don't want their work critiqued need to respect that some of us do and we want to learn *why* something is good and what rules or techniques will get us there. To me, the "who are we to judge" line of thinking is hypocritical. Don't judge me for wanting to be judged; if you don't want to care, stop caring.


----------



## erik Loza (Feb 6, 2006)

dennis said:


> Aquascaping as an art is in it infancy. When we discuss "improvement", "perfection", "technique", "beauty" or even "art", I think we need to remember this. As someone who aquascapes while viewing it as an artform, I definately say there are techniques and aspects of design that make for a good composition. This is true for any art form. I dare someone to go to true art college or apprentice with someone who is a master in their field and get away with "my art is my art so I can't possibly be wrong".
> 
> Anyone, artist or not, is free to do whatever they feel is beautiful and I am inclined to say that they are free to think about the prefection of their work without my input or criticism. However, and this is a big however, anyone who asks for criticism, feedback or encouragement must be willing to accept that feedback or criticism. Any artist, past or present, who is successful and well-know; Divinci, Pollock, Degas, etc, etc; is always classically trained and regardless of how original they became, or how far fetched their work may seem in comparision to others, their work was always *based* on proper technique and rules of composition. Only once you fully understand, fully master and appreciate, the rules and techniques of your chosen artform can you start bending and breaking them to suit your own purpose.
> 
> ...


No disagreement with that. I think that respecting each person's motivations is just as important as respecting what they happen to produce. If your motivation is to be judged by your peers, then that's great. If mine were to have the most day-glo tank in the neighborhood, then good for me.


----------



## ChrisC (May 15, 2006)

Hiy all,
I'll have to confess - I haven't read the whole thread, so if this point has been covered before just point me in the right direction and shout. 

Is there a good scource of info on the "basics"? i.e. creating focal points etc etc, preferably a website.

Thanks,
Chris


----------



## dennis (Mar 1, 2004)

Chris, there are a few articles in the APC library and tons of info in the Aquascaping forum, especially in the earlier threads.


----------



## Copious (May 30, 2006)

I don't get the whole concept of a bad aquascape. If the plants or fish are unhealthy, if the water looks bad, or if the person who lives with it is unhappy with it I can see calling it a failure. Most of my favorite aquarium pictures are of aquariums that a lot of people would call overgrown and poorly manicured.


----------



## ChrisC (May 15, 2006)

dennis said:


> Chris, there are a few articles in the APC library and tons of info in the Aquascaping forum, especially in the earlier threads.


Cheers Dennis, still working my way around this forum, as you may have guessed I don't frequent it. Need to start coming here more! 

Thanks,
Chris


----------

