I am not sure I follow what you are saying Frankie.

Do you mean that leaving a blank space is a way to break up the monotony of a bank of plants that are similar in shape and size?

Sort of.

Blank is not actually the word--it is more air-space among plants. Space you could walk on if it were low enough and of the right material, and space you could be "in" among plants if it were higher.

The patio laag imaged into the kitchen window thread was the springboard for the concept.

The idea is all around us in the arrangement of trees, understory trees and lower plantings; to some extent I'm taking it down to a smaller level in a bed or border proper to describe how that makes a garden more interesting even in its smaller-scale iterations.

This is not a new idea--it is just one that I am seeing how to execute better than I had before.

Frankie, I think that know exactly what you are saying and it is a new idea to me. I think "air-spaces" add a feeling of depth and an invitation to see/experience the garden from within, even if you don't actually go there. I hope that we can get input and clarification from the pros here to understand it better and apply it more.

Then what you must be talking about is a closer or more intimate notion of enclosure Frankie isn't it, the summum being a secret garden. Don't let me put words in your mouth but am I on the right track? Read what the guy in Ireland writes about his property and his approach to getting his head around perhaps too many holes or too much space and see if this is not the other side of how to deal with it.

It sounds to me as if Frankie is talking about layering/staggering of plant heights within a garden/garden bed, but not in the classic shorter at front, taller at back sense. This is a useful design device to give the eye more interesting things to see in a complex garden, and certainly is more visually stimulating that looking at a uniform height of perennials in a mixed border, where the individual plants and their individual qualities are often lost in the mass effect. Variation of heights of plantings will tend to accentuate the perception of greater depth, as opposed to a mass planting of similar plants of similar heights, which will visually read as flatter and/or smaller in depth. This concept is all around us in nature, as a forest floor will typically have this quality of greater depth from a variety of plants at different heights, and is often an ecological response to differences in light levels and/or soil types and moisture levels.

Even classic, formal gardens may take advantage of this effect, and a very simple illustration might be a boxwood hedge enclosing a bed with ground cover such as Vinca or Ivy, and interplanted with perennials such as Foxgloves or Delphiniums, and perhaps an overhead story of Azaleas or Roses trained as single trunked trees. The plants are intentionally selected for the variety of heights of one species compared to the other, which also changes over the seasons as the perennials do their thing, yet keeps some constancy with the boxwood, ground cover and the shrubs trained as tree standards.

If you emphasize differences in texture between the different layers, and also use different forms and color variation of foliage, the effects of this vertical placement of garden interest carries more visual weight.

If you carry the analogy a bit further, and consider how plants often grow vertically in the tropics to take advantage of better growing conditions, you will be able to appreciate how lianas growing up into trees, and epiphytic orchids, bromeliads, mosses, etc growing in the tree branches are another type of vertical gardening. I know this is an approach I have taken myself with some of my California gardens, where I add drip irrigation and misters to the trees to be able to attach and grow such epiphytes in trees, along with hanging mossed wire baskets with cascading plants to be hung from the tree branches. This approach is especially suitable to feature plants that may have the underside of the leaf being the most colorful, or for plants that are too subject to slugs and snails if planted in the ground, or develop their best form if allowed to cascade unimpeded. It may not seem as appropriate in a dry summer California climate, but is easily seen while hiking in shaded, creek side canyons where mosses and ferns grow epiphytically on trees such as Coast Live Oaks and California Bay Trees.

Seasonality of foliage can play a big role in creating such voids in the garden, and large leafed plants such as Acanthus mollis or Darmera peltata can be used for height in their season of growth, (Darmera goes winter dormant here in California after giving a minor show of fall color, as well as shooting up 18 inch tall flower spikes before the leaves come up), and Acanthus, which can remain evergreen here if well watered, often will go dormant by mid summer, and return with the fall rains and bloom in May/June before dying down again. Pink Naked Ladies/Amaryllis belladonna, is another classic plant of this type, which is a winter foliage plant here, and then blooms on naked stems without any foliage in July/August. Each of these plants has their uses for creating a varied effect of massed foliage and texture in season, alternating with a void when dormant. Another plant that comes to mind for such applications here in California is the beautiful Peruvian Lily, Alstroemeria 'Ligtu Hybrids', or the evergreen one, Alstroemeria psittacina.

I thought I might add a link to a garden with photos that illustrate some of the principles discussed in the preceding post. These are photos from a garden tour in northern California, which Zonal Denial Michelle took. You might also enjoy browsing the rest of her blog and photos. Here's the specific link to a garden that I helped design, with the layered/textured look I was talking about:

http://deviantdeziner.blogspot.com/2008/07/david-feix-designed-garden-in-oakland.html

Frankie,

You have just invented the foliar garden grotto!!

ink, it is a little more like the "voids" concept and DEPTH (the opposite of the flat face presented by too-regularly staggered plantings, or no staggering at all)-- than enclosure, since I was focusing on bringing this idea down to a smaller scale of small sections of a garden.

But enclosure would be certainly be the deal when executed on the larger scale.

bahia has given some delicious descriptions.

What is going on in my mind is the thud of translating one or more principles into something I might actually do. For whatever reason, I may have read about or seen examples of this before and noticed I liked it, but somehow could not see how to bring it into being.

I like this forum because I can be trying to figure something out and not "get" it--someone may have even posted very similar things, or given a good explanation, but my brain was not ready-- and then when least expected, a random discussion will bring something into focus.

Here's a series of overlapping holes in my garden.

{{gwi:43527}}

Perhaps I am being thick but I still don't get it.

I understand forms and textures play off one another to create harmony or rhythm. This is beautifully explained by David and shown in Jo's photo but what I don't understand is what you see as 'holes'. Perhaps I am being too literal or too dense

Holes being voids, negative space, areas that open up within the landscape and read as clearings...

Ding!

An example of holes or voids that I find interesting in a garden is a small tree that has a canopy starting at 4-5' above ground. In the forefront to one side (right) would be a flowering plant 3-4' high. Perhaps on the other forefront a plant 2-3' high. This leaves a void in the middle and just over the top of the left and right plants and under the canopy where you can see the tree trunk all the way to the ground (or ground cover). Your eyes can explore this open space and experience a different feeling of depth rather than just various heights of foliage/color.

That's my attempted description, I hope it contributes

Frankie, I think you have articulated the reason why a lot of us DIYers remain active on this forum even as we have our own gardens done or mostly done; it's for something that goes on in the brain. The "thud moment" - I like that.

My contribution to understanding the concept you're working out is to bring up the issue of time, although actually Bahia has alluded to it with the issue of seasonality, and this has been mentioned in a few threads lately. When you know how plants behave through the seasons, you can create view corridors within and through beds and canopies and so stage little shows (even when just for yourself) that showcase things when they merit the attention. This came to my mind in the view from the kitchen thread, where the OP seemed averse to planting an overhead canopy on the basis that it would block the view of the bed. For me, that canopy would represent a hole in spring, and an opportunity to prune it so that each layer created a hole in which the others could exist. I'm not sure if I'm just paraphrasing your original post, and you may have in mind actually leaving a space empty where I, like nature, abhor a vacuum!

Saypoint, that is a nicely crafted view.

KarinL

Oh, man, I was thinking, finally we could all just conclude, ink, you ARE thick! Oh well.

stevega, that is a good example, and one that I might accentuate by even lower plantings--the carpet of tiny bulbs beneath the tree to make a skirt of breathing space instead of shrubby things right up against it, for example.

By discussing plant behavior, karinl brings up the possibility of the occurrence of holes-that-did-not-happen-as-intended. That is part of my eureka moment in garden revisions. That some of the areas with which I am less satisfied are those in which the plants grew differently than expected and things look flat, and some of the fun areas are ones in which the same thing happened in reverse and created an unexpected little room or depth-view.

Frankie, your thread caught my attention, passing through,
since I just made the kind of hole I think you're talking about.
Your general drift is similar to some recent fierce pondering of my own.

This picture is less than a week old, the slovenly "plant soup" on top
was really getting me down. It was overdue for weeding, yes, but
that wasn't what was bugging me, it was the lack of shape, structure,
frame, whatever it is that stops the dull buzzing of non-stop vegetation.

I was actually going to take the pine down, the white pine weevil having
already pruned the top off.
As I stepped back from limbing it, to get at the trunk, two things hit home:
A: everything in it's shade will fry, and
B: I rather like this tree with its pants off, I like the AIR.

Had I known it wasn't coming down, I might have waited with this til November,
but I'm kind of glad I didn't.

A lot more is going to happen in this spot.

Sorry about the low res.

Here is a link that might be useful:

Thanks, KarinL. I've been meaning to put something of interest at the end of that cross-axis for five years, but haven't found it yet.

Saypoint--that is lovely. I love the overlapping "holes" you've created. Intriquing, too.

Is your property deep--or is that an illusion created by the overlapping "hoely" layers?

It's fairly large. That view is from the driveway (which is behind the house), across the main garden area. The arbor is for supporting the roses only, not meant to be walked through, there is a gate further up for entering.
Here's the main garden, with the arbor visible about halfway down on the left.
First you look across this garden
{{gwi:25090}}
and then the sight line continues across this grassy area, but from right to left
{{gwi:43528}}
through to the other side of it where a smaller grassy area and solid "wall" of ancient yew trees, junipers, pines, and other shrubs screen the street out front from view completely.

You can do the same thing to good effect with a small area, too. I've seen some interesting things done in very small gardens with hedges or arbors, even small terraces with steps, that actually don't lead anywhere. The opening gives the impression that something lays beyond, even if it is back up by a wall of foliage a short distance away. Or filled with a mirror, or a gate that doesn't open.

On a smaller scale, and more in line with the intent of this thread, I think, anything that creates a sense of depth in a planting or design adds interest that would be lacking in a totally flat-looking composition.

Jo--your landscape is really coming along. As a dear "friend" of ours once commented GAWJUS.

I popped in (after two weeks at the beach) to say something about "negative space" but see that has already been covered. ;^)

The beach was awesome...as it always is. Talk about "negative space"...

Howsomever...two weeks without human presence must have been the invitation the deer were seeking...even though I sprayed repellant before I left. Thank goodness the roses LIKE the occaisional pruning.

I hate Bambi and his buddies.

melanie

Carry on! ;^)

Frankie-you are right on to add the small items or blooms to discover in the depths of the space that is created. It (exploring the depths of the garden setting) is one of the things that I find most enjoyable in an arboretum or any garden.