# critique needed on iwagumi



## samc (2 Feb 2009)

i will soon be setting up an 12x10x8 iwagumi (or two  )and have got some dragon stone which i could'nt resist trying some positioning out. this is my first iwagumi so my rock positioning isnt that great althought im learning. 

here are a few iv been trying out:







(1)






(2)






(3)






(4)






(5)
which one do you like?
they are some of my ideas at the minuet if anyone has any ideas or how to improve any let me know


----------



## Stu Worrall (2 Feb 2009)

out of those pics i'd go with 1 personally if it was mine


----------



## samc (2 Feb 2009)

i like that one the best personally too, it was my first idea


----------



## George Farmer (2 Feb 2009)

No.3 for me, especially if the left supporting stone was moved forward.

Nice rocks, by the way.


----------



## Dan Crawford (2 Feb 2009)

3 for me too


----------



## StevenA (2 Feb 2009)

3 or 4 I just can't decide which one  :?


----------



## Garuf (2 Feb 2009)

I've got the same tank as you're suggesting and I think you might find the rocks too overpowering, I'm finding it difficult to get a good balance between power of composition and planting.


----------



## samc (2 Feb 2009)

i was thinking they might be ill have a think about it, if so i might just get a slightly larger tank


----------



## Mark Evans (2 Feb 2009)

for me, 4 follows the ideas of iwagumi more than the others. i'm not doubting the other lay outs as there good also. it's just 4 works better.

you may want to consider just using 3 stones. 

1 x main stone.
1 x sub
1 x supporting/backbone

unless of course your using a bigger tank, then more stone.

ultimately it's your preference


----------



## George Farmer (2 Feb 2009)

saintly said:
			
		

> you may want to consider just using 3 stones.


Good point.  Sanzon-Iwagumi suits smaller tanks.

This was my first ever Iwagumi, using this principle - http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org/2 ... ol=0&id=22


----------



## Garuf (2 Feb 2009)

I've been looking at the ada nanos from their gallery and most if not all break their own rule and use 1-2 stones and rarely  4-5. I'm looking at doing something like those but I'm finding my rock collection insufficient.


----------



## Mark Evans (2 Feb 2009)

rules can be broken. but then rocks are not always about iwagumi and its rules. i reckon some of those nano scapes at NA gallery are not supposed to be iwagumis. some maybe but not all.

in my latest edition of aquajournal amano sets up a 60cm with just 3 stones. it has TONS of impact

NA book 1....30cm tanks 2 stones visible. the smaller you go the less stone


----------



## samc (2 Feb 2009)

i thought the same as know that a 'real' iwagumi should use three stones and like garuf i looked at ada nanos for inspiration and they break the rules. strange.


----------



## samc (2 Feb 2009)

saintly said:
			
		

> i reckon some of those nano scapes at NA gallery are not supposed to be iwagumis. some maybe but not all.



i was just thinking the same mark.


----------



## zerosimon (21 Feb 2009)

Can you build someting like this
* /  \ *
with the rocks


----------



## samc (21 Feb 2009)

iv put this stone in my nano now which is in the position similar to no.3


----------



## Graeme Edwards (22 Feb 2009)

I much prefer layout 4. If you enphasized the change in direction of the rock at the bottom right, and follow the lines of the main rock from top right hand corer, down to the bottom left hand corner, you will have an aquascape with much more impact. Scape 3 doesnt sit well with me. Having two large stones leaning the same way makes it look unbalanced and as if its ready to fall over to the right.

Cheers.


----------



## samc (22 Feb 2009)

i put the the left rock leaning slightly in the other direction so it has a v


----------

