The deciduous magnolias do come in a number of different cultivars, with varying mature heights and varying shapes. I have a 'Jane' (I think, the tag is long gone), one of the Little Girl series, which after 5 years in the ground, from a 1-gal. pot, in very good, built up soil in a flower bed, well watered, etc., is now about 10-12 feet tall and maybe 5-6 feet wide. It has a heavy crop of dark purple-y flowers in spring (now) before the leaves, and sporadic flowers throughout the summer. I THINK it is supposed to mature at less than 20 feet, but will have to wait and see. I have another of the series, possibly 'Jacky'?, which stayed in its pot for another year, and is planted in relatively unimproved clay with less watering. It is about 5 feet tall, 3-4 feet wide, with pale pinker flowers, only in the spring so far. A friend has another one (unknown variety and age) which is probably 15-20 feet high and about the same wide, with pale pink flowers. So if Marystem looks carefully, she can select the shape and size of magnolia that will fit her planned spot. But, I agree with Picea that the magnolia foliage may not stand out too well, since the deciduous foliage, in my experience, tends not to be as shiny as the evergreen ones. I am not sure a gingko is the best alternative, as the ones I have seen as youg trees are not overly attractive; in fact I think calling them gangly is being kind. Since 3 of them are growing for me, I am not against them, just saying they take a while to become attractive. But, mine are of unknown parentage, just generic gingkos, so some of the selected cultivars may be very good, even at a young age. Certainly, the fall foliage should be spectacular against the oaks! However, as far as the eventual height goes, unless there are shorter cultivars of gingko, I would be reluctant to plant anything that I KNEW would be too big. Eventually SOMEONE will have to deal with it, even if it's the next owner of the property. There must be some species/variety of tree that will grow sufficiently fast to make a statement in a reasonable length of time, without coninuing to grow beyond the desired height. I admit to being slightly inconsistent in this, as I am quite happy to plant short lived things like dogwoods, and not be too upset at the idea that I will have to take them out in 20-30 years for reasons of old age, but it really bothers me to think of taking out a perfectly healthy tree, just because it has now grown too tall for where it was planted, when I KNOW I will have to do this. And I get even MORE bothered at the idea that someone would then top a tree because it is too big! Just a personal idiosyncracy...

The 'ridiculously big pot' could be the problem, as well as the type of potting mix you've used. Generally speaking, an over sized container can create a situation where the plant is growing in a lot of stagnant medium. Roots rot in this situation, or, at the very least, won't continue to develop properly. Result: wilting. The plant and the container need to be in good proportion to each other; as the plant grows, it can be potted UP. This problem can be mitigated if the potting medium is a VERY porous one, consisting (say) of mostly pine bark fines, perlite, Turface MVP, or similiar ingredients. Regular bagged potting medium contain too much peat and not enough coarse material to be especially suited to long-term container growing. Of course, top soil should never be used. If this were my young plant, I'd make a good potting mix (or amend a store-bought one), de-pot the tree and trim the roots back a bit to generate new root development, and replant in a smaller container. I can't speak to the leaf spot problem, other than to say that when plants are in serious root stress, they cannot allocate energy resources to fend off diseases and/or insects. I'm guessing that your tree will begin to defoliate if the container/medium situation isn't resolved.

"Is that true?" No, most trees (and ginkgos do qualify) can be transplanted just about anytime the ground isn't frozen. There are better times (late winter to very early spring, and fall) and worse times (summer). "Is there a way to put it in the ground now, or is that just too great a risk?" By all means, if you do dig it up now, plant is ASAP!!! Keeping it potted or B&B is just going to add greatly to the poor thing's stress! "Any clue as to how deep I'll have to dig?" This link should give you a pretty good answer: Generic Rootball Size Guide "Is it a big deal if it's the kind that has the fruit with the rotten bad smell?" Not to me. As long as I don't pick the fruit up, get it on my shoes or hands, etc, the smell doesn't bother me. Some people are more sensitive to smells than others. Do avoid planting female ginkgos near sidewalks, driveways, or windows that are left open for fresh air. "Dig now and I give it a 1% chance of surviving." If the job is done correctly and proper aftercare is given, I think the chances of survival are actually very good, even if done now. The problem is that moving it now is going to increase the amount of effort for aftercare (watering) AND the tree is pretty big and will require significant effort to dig up and move.

I would plant this much seen, pleasant looking cultivar (at link below) unless stated ultimate size is a deal breaker. Or the branching needs to be quite horizontal. Here the common appearance - at this time - is a small vase like tree with a similar general structure to various Japanese flowering cherries. (Jacobson, North American Landscape Trees (1996, Ten Speed, Berkely) says it has an "oval upright crown"; the 2014 edition of The Hillier Manual of Trees & Shrubs (Royal Horticultural Society, London) calls it "broadly conical"). http://www.monrovia.com/plant-catalog/plants/1322/autumn-gold-maidenhair-tree/ Otherwise if you can wait for it to size up 'Mariken' probably has the shape you are after. This past spring one of the independent outlets here bought what was obviously a grower's stock plant - it even had their sign still stuck in the top of the hefty soil ball - and despite years of snipping at it the top was maybe 6 ft. across. Double that and you've got 12 ft., and so on - it definitely looked to me like it was going to reach the small tree (15-35 ft.) size range in time. Same as Pinus strobus 'Nana' and probably countless others.