# Are there any great female aquascapers?



## George Farmer (18 Sep 2008)

I'm on the eighth part of my PFK Great Planted Tanks series.  

Whenever I get a spare moment or two, I trawl the various forums for aquascapes that I think would make a good feature for the PFK readers.  So far I've had UK, European, Asian, American....  But all male aquascapers.  

I know I'm not sexist, but there simply doesn't seem to be many decent female aquascapers out there.

Question 1.  Can someone point me in the right direction?  I'd like to feature a female's aquascape.
Question 2.  Why is this hobby so male dominated?


----------



## Tom (18 Sep 2008)

How about Karen Randall, a.k.a. the AGA judge? I've never seen any of her tanks but she seems knowledgeable on design etc. 

There was also someone on APC that caught my attention but the name doesn't come to mind... although I'm not sure if it was for her tanks or avatar!   

Can't think of an answer to question 2: I always thought gardening was always a female-dominated thing! (watch me get picked on now!!) Maybe thats just round here though...

Tom


----------



## George Farmer (18 Sep 2008)

Karen's 'scapes aren't rated from what I remember.  Steven Chong published a couple on PT after being peeved at a low AGA ranking where she slated him...

I think 'pro' gardening is also male dominated isn't it?  That's the impression I got from Neil Hepworth who's heavily involved in the gardening world.


----------



## Voo (18 Sep 2008)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> I think 'pro' gardening is also male dominated isn't it?  That's the impression I got from Neil Hepworth who's heavily involved in the gardening world.




Charlie Dimmock


----------



## Tom (18 Sep 2008)

> Steven Chong published a couple on PT after being peeved at a low AGA ranking where she slated him...



I can imagine that actually    Oh dear


----------



## George Farmer (18 Sep 2008)

Voo said:
			
		

> George Farmer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Titchmarsh, Donn, Thrower....


----------



## mick b (18 Sep 2008)

Just IMO,

Blokes seem more happy (generalising wildly  ) with all the widgets/pumps/valves/chemicals/etc etc required to run the tank and without the tank, no scapes!

Gardening again IMO, tends to be;

Flowers, appearance, the whole experience - - - - Female

Giant Veg, huge leeks, competitive lawn issues - -- compost heaps (shed and lots of tools) -  Single-focus   - Male

HTH   

Cheers,  Mick B


----------



## Dave Spencer (18 Sep 2008)

See if this one is up to spec, George.

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/foru ... ebelt.html

The comment I  made on this tank seems poignant in light of this thread.  

Dave.


----------



## Egmel (18 Sep 2008)

You mean to say my scape isn't good enough  Only joking, I would be mortified if anyone suggested publicising any of my testing grounds!

I think it's because most women end up doing other things, something as time consuming as planted tanks means there's several other hobbies you don't have time (or money) for. 

Honestly though, I don't know, as a female who's spent most of her adult life in male dominated environments my perspective is probably skewed. (I have a house share at the moment and the 2 tool boxes in the house are owned by the 2 girls, the 3 blokes only have techy tools.. not a hammer or a hacksaw to their names!)


----------



## bugs (18 Sep 2008)

I think you'll find most males do it to show off their prowess to others, whereas women will do it primarily for their own pleasure. Same as many things... Hence why you find a lot of males in forums showing off their tanks, cars, woodworking skills, computer skill, etc, etc, etc...


----------



## Joecoral (18 Sep 2008)

Thats a very sweeping generalisation bugs!


----------



## bugs (18 Sep 2008)

Sweeping observation.


----------



## Joecoral (18 Sep 2008)

my humblest apologies


----------



## George Farmer (19 Sep 2008)

Dave Spencer said:
			
		

> See if this one is up to spec, George.
> 
> http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/foru ... ebelt.html
> 
> ...



Nice one, Dave.

bugs has a good point also.  Thanks.


----------



## jay (19 Sep 2008)

Too busy washing their hair and applying a bit of slap....

*waits for the barrage of 'sexist pig' comments*

 

Think it's exactly what bugs said, us blokes just like showing off and this seems like its just another niche market for us to stroke our ego's.

Good ain't it. hehe


----------



## PM (19 Sep 2008)

Are there any great female aquascapers?

No.


----------



## Tom (19 Sep 2008)

Is Amano married?


----------



## George Farmer (19 Sep 2008)

Well, I'll be featuring Jessie from APC.  Her 125G is superb.

Thanks to Dave for pointing me in the right direction.


----------



## Garuf (19 Sep 2008)

What about "waterfaller1" over on Planted tanks, her pair of cubes are pretty neat.


----------



## bugs (19 Sep 2008)

Garuf said:
			
		

> ...her pair of cubes are pretty neat.


Ur so bad...


----------



## Garuf (19 Sep 2008)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/ ... /9708a.jpg


----------



## Joecoral (20 Sep 2008)

Garuf said:
			
		

> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/waterfaller1/9708a.jpg



That is indeed a nice pair


----------



## Graeme Edwards (21 Sep 2008)

Heres my opinion.

Speaking generally. Women are social creatures, they seem to get excited about seeing friends, catching up on the gossip or watching TV. Maybe it comes from childhood, where the girls are groomed into thinking, they must be pretty act nice and do house things,where as us boys run around shooting people with very branch looking Uzi 9mm's, building dens and rooting around for bugs, fish and other odd things. I think its nurture rather than nature. Im sure they are very capable of creating great scape's. But remember, this hobby is still relatively new to the west, so its perhaps just a case of them not knowing about it. 

To summarise, I think its nurture rather than nature,its possible its too time consuming given that women are more social animals than us men, its to practical at times for them, again this could be down to nurture, tom boys may not have any problems.
I think hobbies in general are very male dominated. I think us men need things to do, its the hunter gatherer in us I think. We need to be creating, thinking, and using our hands.I don't know of many men who like to sit around in front of the box every night, where as I know plenty of women who do.

Good debate, but I think unless we have access to social experiments and behavioral studies, we will only be guessing.

Cheers.


----------



## misscaretaker (21 Sep 2008)

Personally I think Graeme has a good point, most girls are assumed to want "girly" things and are led i that direction, whereas boys are assumed to want macho things and again, led in that direction. Like egmel, I've spent my working life in male dominated jobs, in fact while working in the maintenance dept of a hospital I was the only female amongst 84 men (wahay!)!
However, I've always been a practical person (I get tools for xmas!) and many women are too reliant on men for practical things as that's how they've been taught to be. As a good planted tank can't survive for long (I may be a noob, but I've worked this much out!) without a fair amount of practicality I think many women who may take it up are frightened off. Also, many women are still "housewives" or have jobs _and_ a house to run so the time isn't there either. There is still a large majority of men who leave most of the housework to the women and therefore have a nice amount of leisure time with which to indulge hobbies! I know this is very sweeping and does not intend to include all men or all women! All I know is that I work 37 hrs per week, look after 2 dogs and train them for agility twice a week (including competitions some weekends), look after the 2 tanks and the garden and do the majority of the housework and shopping. My husband is on long term sick and is at home all day except for the many hospital appointments, but can't walk far so it's all down to me. He could still put the dishwasher on occasionally though  ...


----------



## Joecoral (21 Sep 2008)

I just like playing with gadgets and other technical things!


----------



## beeky (23 Sep 2008)

IMO, girls are happy with what they like, but blokes are more competitive and are therefore always pushing themselves to be better. I don't necessarily mean competitive with other people, but with themselves aswell. That's why the top people in gardening (Titchmarsh, Donn, Beardshaw, Swift, Thrower, Hamilton etc), cooking (Ramsay, Turner, Oliver, Blumenthal etc) and other areas are blokes. You do get fantastic women doing stuff but they are in the minority and yet you'll probably find that overall the majority of people doing these pasttimes are women, they just haven't pushed themselves to the top because they don't feel the need.

Have you seen Heston Blumenthal's creations? You wouldn't find a girl doing that! They've far more sense.....


----------



## ulster exile (23 Sep 2008)

Hmm.  If you look at the traditional perception of an "artist" most people will automatically think of Da Vinci, or Picasso, Monet, Degas etc.  Where are the women there?  I can't think of one great female artist.  In fact, the only woman artist that springs to mind as I sit here is debatable (in my mind at least as I don't appreciate her work) - Tracy Emin.

Does this mean that women aren't capable of being artistic?  I don't know, although historically they may have struggled more than men to express their art or even receive any artistic training/encouragement because of their perceived role in many societies keeping them with babes in arms or busy keeping a home.  Frankly, I don't see why a woman can have a natural artistic talent, so I think that there must be something in the nurture over nature argument, even if I don't agree with how Graeme has expressed it (I certainly am not a frilly creature who gets excited at the thought of socialising  )

If you look at the opposite side of the coin, I firmly believe that to be a great aquascaper one must also understand the science of a tank.  Time and again we are told that women aren't "naturally" good at sciences and this is where boys traditionally excel.  So girls tend to veer away from science subjects and I hinestly think that this hinders th understanding of how to make plants grow and how to make them grow well.

Perhaps I'm looking at it from my personal point of view since I struggle with the science aspect.  Unfortunately, I also have little artistic talent and although I wasn't bad at art at school, I had no inspiration; I could only copy things (i.e. still life).  It's probably this which has frustrated me to the point where I have pretty much given up on keeping anything other than a tank with fish and plants.  I could never call it a 'scape.

Still, it would be nice to have an inspirational female aquascaper out there.  There *must *be tanks owned by women which I have admired without knowing that they have been created by a woman.  Unfortunately, offhand I can only name Zoe's jungle tank as one which has inspired me.


----------



## bugs (23 Sep 2008)

Just another train of thought... Define "great aquascaper". I see many variations on what Amano has popularised. I'm not really in to studying his form but he seems to have something original and personal in many of his scapes which many tend to copy. There's nothing wrong with copying but it does beg the question re greatness in this respect?

I'm not very good with names but I think it is Zig(?) that's seems to demonstrate something original - are we in the presence of greatness? I think Oliver Knott has something going on too.

I'm not really a big fan of the overly manicured mini-world/"Bonsai"esque, "Mounains in the Mist" etc type scapes. A bit like magicians to me - "Wow! OK, I'm bored now..." Given that's what is currently in vogue, I'm perhaps wide of the mark with my examples above, but I think you get the picture.

So... what is meant by "great"?


----------



## George Farmer (24 Sep 2008)

bugs said:
			
		

> So... what is meant by "great"?



Good question!  Of course, individual interpretations of 'great' will vary according one's own taste.

For me it is an aquascape that is appealing on many levels i.e. composition, pleasing textures, colours, hardscape selection (if used), fish choice, viability, sustainability, creativity, innovation etc.

So a great aquascaper is one that demonstrates the highest levels of the above criteria in their aquascapes.  The greatest demonstrate these qualities at the highest levels, time and again.  Amano is the obvious, for me.  Others off the top of my head, in no particular order - Sabat, Senske, Navarro, Chong, Cheng, Lo, Chow, Deki, Law, Hui, Lazaveric (one to watch out for), Shiga.  There are plenty more, and plenty more developing into great aquascapers as we speak.  

And our very own Tom Messenger, Graeme Edwards, Dan Crawford and Peter Kirwan (zig) I would consider have produced great aquascapes - and will no doubt continue to do so.  For instance - check out Graeme's latest thread about setting up a tank for Unipac.  For an instant aquascape - that's pretty great!

And in the context of the OP - all of the PFK Great Planted Tanks featured so far are quite unique and do not follow this 'Bonsai-esque' style that you mention.  All of them have innovations and this combined with their aesthetic appeal, for me, makes them inspirational and great for the PFK readers.


----------



## bugs (24 Sep 2008)

I'll check out the PFK thing that you mention. Sounds like it could be interesting.


----------



## Dan Crawford (24 Sep 2008)

bugs said:
			
		

> A bit like magicians to me - "Wow! OK, I'm bored now..."


Thats fair enough to have your opinion on it but in a "great" aquascape i find that being bored is the last sensation I feel. Staring at a decent 'scape keeps me and i'm sure many others captured for hours.
With my own aquascapes i've found that people get transfixed by them and end up staring at the for quite some time and then going back for another look throughout the night or whatever. I had Graeme Edwards doing just that last weekend, with such varied textures and complexity it's hard to find boring, i'm not saying that my 'scapes are "great" but they certainly seem to draw in, and hold an audience for longer than the average "fish tank".


----------



## Tom (24 Sep 2008)

No-one looks at mine Dan! lol they're far more interested in my pufferfish or boring old hermit crabs!! 

I get:
"oh that tank (Iwagumi) only has one plant in it. It's a bit boring!" 
"Why have you got glass pipes? They look a bit silly!"


----------



## a1Matt (24 Sep 2008)

I've been following this thread with interest.  

I agree with all of George's comments on what makes a scape\scaper great. Yet at the end of the day I think it can all be encapsulated inside Dans comment...



			
				Dan Crawford said:
			
		

> Staring at a decent 'scape keeps me and i'm sure many others captured for hours.



This is the mark of a great tank\scape for me and what I aim for on a personal level with my own tank. 

I am probably biased in that one of my hobbies is relaxation\meditation, of which there are many styles\definitions of.  One definition is 'the ability to focus on one object singlemindedly for a period of time'.  For me great scapes have this 'meditative quality' to them.


----------



## Tom (24 Sep 2008)

> one of my hobbies is relaxation



  Same here. Some people just call me lazy     No I know what you mean. When I first got Amano's books I sat and "read" them for hours. Still do sometimes, but now it's mainly CAU. Prefer the newer styles.

Tom


----------



## bugs (24 Sep 2008)

LOL - We've moved from great aquascapers to great scapes... (For which I am partly to blame with my reference to scapes). There's a difference in my mind, despite both being valid.


----------



## Tom (24 Sep 2008)

So what makes a great aquascaper as opposed to the great aquascape itself?

Innovity? Creativity? Consistency? Experience? Photographic ability?


----------



## Mark Evans (24 Sep 2008)

Tom said:
			
		

> So what makes a great aquascaper as opposed to the great aquascape itself?
> 
> Innovity? Creativity? Consistency? Experience? Photographic ability?



all of them!


----------



## bugs (24 Sep 2008)

Tom said:
			
		

> So what makes a great aquascaper as opposed to the great aquascape itself?
> 
> Innovity? Creativity? Consistency? Experience? Photographic ability?



Someone could create one great scape and one hundred not to great scapes. Not a great aquascaper in my opinion...


----------



## Mark Evans (24 Sep 2008)

bugs said:
			
		

> Someone could create one great scape and one hundred not to great scapes. Not a great aquascaper in my opinion...



so if a musician writes one hit only, does that make him a bad musician? i think not. a bad scape might be good to someone else


----------



## Tom (24 Sep 2008)

> so if a musician writes one hit only, does that make him a bad musician?



One hit wonders! In ten years time everyone laughs at them! Either that or its a classic    "if it haaadnt been for cotton eyed joeeee..."  :?


----------



## Mark Evans (24 Sep 2008)

Tom said:
			
		

> if it haaadnt been for cotton eyed joeeee..." :?



 some get through the net, the point is someone somewhere has written, produced distributed that anoying song. and yes some great one hit wonders. theres still a talent there somewhere.

im still trying to find mine in music and scaping  :?


----------



## a1Matt (24 Sep 2008)

bugs said:
			
		

> LOL - We've moved from great aquascapers to great scapes... (For which I am partly to blame with my reference to scapes). There's a difference in my mind, despite both being valid.



lol. Yep, I saw the thread veering off and just went with it!

It looks like we've meandered back to aquascapers, then eventually we might get back to female aquascapers   

I'm not the man to do it though as I'm off to go and fiddle with my tank in search of that zen like scape........


----------



## Garuf (24 Sep 2008)

Lemon jellies album was amazing for a one hit wonder...
I think what makes a good aquascaper is someone that not necessarily has a good eye on the lens because I know a camera can lie, I despise the fact that people feel a photo needs to be photoshopped to represent reality when what they are actually doing is manipulating the truth and not showing  reality, I know its to show it at its best but I always find that the setting of the tank photo to show more about the aquascape than a close up edited photo. Someone who can take a raw idea and match it with exactly how they saw it in there head is also a good aquascpaer even if the out come isn't great, it shows that they have the skill to manipulate the hardscape and the plants to the full remit of their imagination. Yes, there will always be compromise but then that's just how things are in the real world. I love Cau but I can't liken myself to them, I've always felt they exude a sense of self superiority that either rightly or wrongly is not necessarily what I think is good. They lack the imperfection and the rule breaking that they actually pride themselves on. Anyone can become stuck in a creative rut, My favourite band pig destroyer haven't done anything radically different in years and I'm now bored of them,that's how I feel with cau, they lack the different elements that has made many western aquascapers in my opinion superior. 
my apologies for the incoherence but I think people should get what I mean.


----------



## Tom (24 Sep 2008)

> I despise the fact that people feel a photo needs to be photoshopped to represent reality when what they are actually doing is manipulating the truth and not showing reality, I know its to show it at its best but I always find that the setting of the tank photo to show more about the aquascape than a close up edited photo



Depends on the extent of the photoshopping. I can't see a problem with colour balance, colour temperature, contrast, saturation, sharpening etc. The problem only comes when people start digitally moving things about in a picture. I have deleted the odd swimming shrimp from a picture, but I don't see the point in doing any more. 

There we go, nicely off topic!



> I love Cau but I can't liken myself to them, I've always felt they exude a sense of self superiority that either rightly or wrongly is not necessarily what I think is good. They lack the imperfection and the rule breaking that they actually pride themselves on.



If you look through CAU, there are plenty of innovative scapes to look at. They are not all neat and manicured either. They have a right to have pride in what they do. Just look at competition results - they clean up the prizes on their own. I expect the 2008 AGA will be largely dominated once again by the CAU. Having said that, there's plenty of good coming out of non-Asian countries at the moment. 

Tom


----------



## bugs (24 Sep 2008)

Tom said:
			
		

> > so if a musician writes one hit only, does that make him a bad musician?
> 
> 
> 
> One hit wonders! In ten years time everyone laughs at them! Either that or its a classic    "if it haaadnt been for cotton eyed joeeee..."  :?



The debate is not about what makes a bad aquascaper. Taking your example, one "hit" scape does not make a "great" aquascaper. One musical hit does not make a "great" musician. Greatness goes beyond the ability to competently complete the task in hand in a credible manner (IMO...)

On the subject of photoshop... Unless you shoot in RAW it's worth remembering that a digital camera does it's own version of Photoshopping to process the image. Sometimes tinkering can restore the original image.


----------



## George Farmer (25 Sep 2008)

I think that there is likelyhood that some aquascapes are 'great', but the aquascaper may not be.  

There is an element of luck involved with aquascaping, for beginners at least that may just place their plants/decor here and there without any real foresight or vision.  They may accidentally stumble on a wonderful composition without actually realising how it happened until it does, unlikely as it sounds, it does happen.  

Also beginners that slowly evolve their aquascapes into something that may be perceived as great in the end, but were average to start.  I can think of plenty of examples there.  This doesn't make the aquascaper a great one, but the aquascape may well be.

As I pointed out in my last post, a great aquascaper creates top class aquascapes time after time with consistancy.  These guys will have their own individual style too, but they also won't be afraid to implement innovative ideas to push the boundries.   That makes them great, in my view.


----------



## hellohefalump (25 Sep 2008)

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/foru ... scape.html

this might interest you.

I'm a girl, but I'm rubbish because i've only just started so you won't be interested in me.  I've kept fish for years, but this is my first attempt at a planted tank.  I'd say I'm quite competitive.  And I'm also quite handy with tools.  When I was 12 my stepfather got me some tools for my birthday (including power tools!) and taught me to use them.  I like the technical side of things - I find it all facinating.  Science was one of my best subjects at school.  And art was what I was best at at school.  I paint scenery for theatre now.


----------



## Dave Spencer (26 Sep 2008)

hellohefalump said:
			
		

> I'm a girl, but I'm rubbish because i've only just started so you won't be interested in me.



Us blokes rest our case.   Crikey heffalump, or whatever your name is, the more women in the hobby the better, I think. I am sure that with enough women in the hobby, a distinctive style, separate from those done by men could develop. It`s usually easy to distinguish a house furnished by a woman, than that done by a man.

Women seem to have a more fussy, attention to detail style than men. I don`t see why this couldn`t translate itself in to an aquascape.

I find the word "great" to be very subjective, and very overused. When I think of science, I think of Newton and Einstein for being "great" for the way they changed things. There are plenty of geniuses such as Galileo, but only two "greats" IMO. As for aquascaping, I can think of plenty aquascapers that are talented, but only one that can be called "great" for his influence and how he has changed things.

People may be able to dig up some aquascaping names from the past, mentioning how Amano copies them, or was influenced by them, but how often are their names bandied around the hobby? Most great people have stood on the shoulders of those that preceded them, to help them see further.

Dave.


----------



## sari (27 Sep 2008)

I'm a female also, used to keep fish for about 5 years until I came to England about 10 years ago and recently came back to the hobby because I just couldn't be without an aquarium anymore. I always had densely planted tanks, but with no extras what so ever. No ferts, co2, ammonia, nitrite or other tests (except pH) and had no algae issues and echinodoruses reaching mammoth sizes. I think the plants saved many a fish lives since the filter sponge got washed in tap water etc so my tanks were mini cycling a lot of the time and NH3 and NO2 spikes were quite inevitable.

I am now getting interested in more high tech aquariums but am not really competitive so I'm aiming to make my tanks pleasing to me and whoever visits me but with lush plants and a healthy mini ecosystem for my fishies. But as time goes by and I'm getting more into this hobby, I feel my mind starting to change and scaping is getting more and more appealing. If I only had a lot of money to fulfill all my desires...


----------

