# What is the basic difference?



## dougbraz (19 Jan 2021)

Just a question from a newbie here: what is the essential difference between an aquascaped tank with some small fish and a planted tank with small fish? Is it just that the first one is just that – more deliberately/carefully set up? What I mean is, can you call a simple relatively heavily planted tank with rock and wood aquascaped, or is there a line to be crossed before you actually have a proper aquascaped tank? CO2 doesn't really come into this doubt as you can have fairly beautiful aquascaped low-tech tanks. I leave Iwagumi style tanks out of this context as they are works of art!


----------



## cbaum86 (19 Jan 2021)

I think the two terms are being used largely interchangeably, especially in the more mainstream social media areas but I agree with what you've said. For me, an aquascape should be a deliberate or conscience decision with a philosophy or 'story'. However, I'd never say to someone "that's not an aquascape", but when someone asks "how do I improve my scape" I always ask what they were trying to achieve as I think it helps to have a concept before you focus on things like the composition. Suppose it's a bit like the difference between doodling and drawing.

It's also possible that an aquascape is more concerned with how the livestock is used as part of the overall aesthetic where a planted tank has the potential to be a more traditional 'fish tank' with plants my LFS had in stock if that makes sense.

Saying that, I don't think there needs to be a level or skill to achieve before it becomes an aquascape - just a consciousness about what you're trying to implement. So yes, you could call a simple, heavily planted tank with rock and wood an aquascape as long as you chose to place those elements for a reason rather than literally just closing your eyes and dropping them in the tank. You could also have a hardscape only aquascape.

In the end, I'm not sure that it matters what label its given, or at least not to me. As long as the creator likes it, feels a sense of achievement, wants to learn and we spread the hobby I'm good.


----------



## zozo (19 Jan 2021)

That's a rather elusive criterium that needs a keen eye and a basic understanding of the proportional arrangement to create a realistic depth effect in a certain style.

This is achieved with knowing and using a golden ratio, rules of 3thirds etc.

If it doesn't have this, it still is in a sense a scape but then rather poorly setup may be a good try for those who see the tensions in it.  And if you don't see it, it still might be the most attractive scape you've ever seen.

You can compare it with photography... Where the photographer is using the background to complement what he likes you to see. A poorly chosen background can also work as a distraction that draws your eyes away from the centrepiece... But then the end product still is a Photo... The one with the carefully chosen background is simply more appealing to look at. It follows the same rules as in aqua scaping...


----------



## Nick potts (19 Jan 2021)

zozo said:


> That's a rather elusive criterium that needs a keen eye and a basic understanding of the proportional arrangement to create a realistic depth effect in a certain style.
> 
> This is achieved with knowing and using a golden ratio, rules of 3thirds etc.
> 
> ...



For me an aquascape is simply one that was somewhat planned to have a certain look, Bit that a single rock to a full diorama.

While the rule of thirds etc are useful to help create a layout, for me they have no bearing at all on if something is an aquascape, I wouldn't call a scape that wasn't using them "rather poorly setup" and it is only by breaking the established "rules" that you get new idea's.


----------



## zozo (19 Jan 2021)

Nick potts said:


> For me an aquascape is simply one that was somewhat planned to have a certain look, Bit that a single rock to a full diorama.
> 
> While the rule of thirds etc are useful to help create a layout, for me they have no bearing at all on if something is an aquascape, I wouldn't call a scape that wasn't using them "rather poorly setup" and it is only by breaking the established "rules" that you get new idea's.



That is precisely why I wrote it's a rather elusive criterium...  It's all in the eye of the beholder... Whatever you do it is in a sense always scaping it simple as that... WHat's in the name after that? Take a pick and if you ask for opinions you might not always like the answers. 

Tho imho recreating a natural scenery has little room to use abstraction... If you want to have a sense of depth for example you need to follow certain rules... As in realistic paintings or taking photos.


----------



## dougbraz (19 Jan 2021)

loved it!


cbaum86 said:


> literally just closing your eyes and dropping them in the tank.



so zozo, in essence you are saying an 'aquascape' per see is more deliberately artistic than a straight forward planted tank. OK, I can see your point. 
FWIW, I am also a photographer..


----------



## zozo (19 Jan 2021)

dougbraz said:


> so zozo, in essence you are saying an 'aquascape' per see is more deliberately artistic than a straight forward planted tank. OK, I can see your point.
> FWIW, I am also a photographer..



Wel then as a photographer you might have the same question valid "When is what a photo?" It actually always is. even tho there are terms for what you are trying to depict and determine a good or a lesser one.

In the beginning, we all had aquariums, this slowly developed in terms of artistic scaping them...  What would thi sbe without any rules... Then it's back to the beginning just an aquarium. Or in simple terms a community tank,no rules and do what you like, put in a pot a coconut-shell and a fake human skull... Then you still scaped it... But!?


----------



## dougbraz (19 Jan 2021)

Nick potts said:


> For me an aquascape is simply one that was somewhat planned to have a certain look, Bit that a single rock to a full diorama.
> 
> While the rule of thirds etc are useful to help create a layout, for me they have no bearing at all on if something is an aquascape, I wouldn't call a scape that wasn't using them "rather poorly setup" and it is only by breaking the established "rules" that you get new idea's.


OK, I'll agree that it should be more deliberately planned than a simple planted tank - even though that is a fine line as pretty much you have to plan all aquariums - except bare bottom ones - to a certain extent. But yes, understood. The reason why I was asking was that I started with a deliberate hardscape and then added plants in a more or less organized placing, then added more sort of haphazardly to see if they would grow and I now have a 'jungly' sort of messy look (which I kind of like) but is a far cry from a neat and tidy layout (kind of like my rock garden in the garden that I mixed around and created a sort of controlled chaos with colour and textures). In the tank the idea is to play with leaf textures given that in low tech you are relatively limited to colours, relying more on leaf shapes - in my humble opinion.



zozo said:


> Wel then as a photographer you might have the same question valid "When is what a photo?" It actually always is. even tho there are terms for what you are trying to depict and determine a good or a lesser one.
> 
> In the beginning, we all had aquariums, this slowly developed in terms of artistic scaping them...  What would thi sbe without any rules... Then it's back to the beginning just an aquarium. Or in simple terms a community tank,no rules and do what you like, put in a pot a coconut-shell and a fake human skull... Then you still scaped it... But!?


..trying to picture a tank with a pot, a coconut and a fake skull... hahahahaha


----------



## sparkyweasel (19 Jan 2021)

A purist would use a real human skull.


----------



## Wookii (19 Jan 2021)

sparkyweasel said:


> A purist would use a real human skull.



. . . after eating his liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti!


----------



## glasscanvasart (19 Jan 2021)

I would say that a planted aquarium, becomes an aquascape when the layout creator makes conscious artistic/aesthetic decisions. It doesn’t mean they’ve done a good job of it. Some top Aquascaper have aquariums they use as plant holding systems and these ‘planted aquariums’ can be more aesthetically pleasing than others’ ‘aquascapes’. I think it’s about intent rather than execution.


----------



## alto (19 Jan 2021)

Not Aquascape



Aquascape



Both of these tanks have other videos (the Altum Jungle Aquarium once had quite different plants, you can follow its progress (I linked many of the videos in order elsewhere) over the years)
Filipe Oliveira YouTube has other AquaFlora showroom tanks that have evolved over time (also his home tanks ... I think one ran for 3 years)


----------



## alto (19 Jan 2021)

A very different Aquascape style (though I think this has been simplified for more novice aquascapes)


----------



## alto (19 Jan 2021)

And then there is Green Aqua style (they have several set up videos where these points are discussed)


----------



## dougbraz (20 Jan 2021)

alto said:


> Not Aquascape
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for all the info, alto - much appreciated! I am tending toward the 'jungle style'!


----------

