Hello I am a bit confused about those conifers ( right?) Pinus sylvestris -Scots Pine Picea abies - Norway Spruce Abies - fir tree I am interested in the european variants I have to reproduce them in 3d program and I am not sure to understand the difference in their leaves types and branch types , since I have to reconstruct them in 3d I have to know the difference .... I coudl use the same texture for the small leaves parts or there is a substantial difference? May be can you help me to have a better idea of those 4 main features? 1 leaves types differences 2 bark types 3 disposition of branches , density and array of the leaves 4 overall silohuettes? Thanks a lot for any help :) ....
Thankyou , but there is not much visible information , I mean they look all the same that I can just make a tree and call it pine tree? or they are significantly different and woudl require different modeling?
I mostly need to get a shape reference but all the ones I get in internet or are not precise about what they show or may be they loook very similar then couse I tought fir tree was conic but then I find some looking more like the spruce and spruce that look conical and soon ... so what are the three main shapes difference do you have any reference picture to show?
They are variable depending on growing conditions, storm damage, etc, etc. When young and growing fast, both are slender conical, but as they get older, individual variation in shape shows up. This variation is impossible to forecast when they are still young.
so how you recognize by the shape if the variation is so much ? apart when young that they all look conical so what's the difference in look when mature?
Take a look through the pics here; there's enough of each to give a good idea of the range of variation: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Pinus_sylvestris http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Picea_abies http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Abies_alba
AH yeh I woudl but I lost my camera -_- I am looking for it still lol .. U may use a phone tough ... ill see what I can do :) Oh btw I coudl post some pics of my garden trees and get them identified by you guys? That woudl be cool to know what I do have in the garden :) ... Btw now a bit off topic but what kind of trees are those in this picture ? Was wondering about that ... http://www.shockya.com/news/wp-content/uploads/the-hobbit-hobbiton-village.jpg
Pinus nigra. Cedrus libani. Chamaecyparis lawsoniana or C. pisifera or possibly Cupressus sempervirens. Can you get a close-up of the foliage?
Wow I was pretty sure they where Norway spruce trees..... I have some close up of the "cedrus" Branch http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/6258/19852176.jpg Bark http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1888/39344280x.jpg bt now I wonder if I woudl be able to use pictures of the needles and branches for the other trees I need ot do ... and another picture of the other trees ... http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/9783/83818445.jpg Btw woudl a branch for a fir tree , a norway spruce or a scots pine be very much different? After all they seem all the same with needles and all woudl change much or just how the branches are assembled around the fust? Or even the single sub branches? Sorry but I yet didn't find a typical silohuette for those trees only for the Scots pine but not the others ...
Yes, do add more photos of the leaves (and cones if present) of the trees you want identified, it's the best way to identify them.
Maybe I missed it, but how detailed will the 3D be? Will people be able to zoom-in on individual needles or not? Because if the view is not close, then the needle shape may not matter, whereas the color may. If it's detailed 3D, then there will be a lot of difference and you will be at this for quite some time.
Its detailed but not on needle level , I ammostly concerned about the silouhettes and the Branches shape and arrangements other than the small needles arrangement ... Anyway I created here a small comparison chart for the silohuettes that may be you can tell me if it is plausible and right ... http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/8015/silouhettespiceaabiespi.jpg Now As it seems to me the Norway Spruce on left has tips that seem to grow toward the sky on top and more horizontal on center to bottom and the tips of each branch seems to be pointy toward sky too and also the shape of the branch seems to be like a central that has diramation on sides all pointing toward down like a cascade ...the top of the trees seem more full and the mid to lower less dense or scarsely covered with more bare branches with no needles ... while the Fir tree is instead a more conical shape , more filled with branches , not many or very few banches without needles and the overall brnach shape is more radial compared to the norway spruce , plus it doesnt have tips pointing up but all the branches seem to radially point toward down following the conical shae so a classic Xmas tree... The Silvester pinus is totally different in silouhettes and branches that seem to drow like puffy groups of needles instead than a branch covered with needles and diramation ... what do you think about this?
I enjoyed the links you provided. The Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris) is probably the number one forest tree around Sweden from what I've observed. Well, that is, right next to Björk (Birch). The tree is almost always tall and slender with clean trunks due to close competition conditions. The needles and cones are small, almost pinyon-like, though it is a very tall slender tree. There is not much in the way of any old growth examples anywhere here that I have observed with regards any species of trees. Like the rest of Europe, Sweden practices industrial forestry. Most of the trees in any forests here are like tightly packed together pencil sticks. At most, trees are no more than a foot or two in diameter. Very tall and leggy. They are devoid of any real type of healthy wildlife. The point is that when you visit here, don't expect any of the bohemoth examples you folks have over there in the Pacific northwest. People here have never seen such a thing. Perhaps such trees wouldn't exist in your woods either if mankind had existed and empire built there for a few thousand years as well. On the top link there regarding Pinus sylvestris, it mentions a record Scots Pine in a city called Ulriceham. I'll actually be there in February and 'IF' I can find it I'll take a photo and post it here. I met some people from Ulriceham two weeks ago at a party and inquired about just such a record breaking tree. No one knew anything about it, but I'll do some further research before I go. 4.49 meters in diameter seems like an awfully big tree for a specimen in Sweden. But we'll see. Here's the quote from your link below:
Happy Xmas and New year everyone and thankyou for the informations ..... I am from Italy so we have a huge variety of climates here from very temperate down to very cold in Alpine areas and central mountain dorsal that are usually covered in snow ... My task is portray a Typical Generic snow environment from Europe , may it span from Italy to Siberia .... the typical and generic trees that I found could be present in most of the areas from Italy to Siberia , Scandinavian peninsula included are: Among Deciduous About Evergreen I was unsure about any kind of Cedar tree evergreen ... Also themore I cut the number of trees to make the better it is as is less time consuming and work ... I was thinking eventually to remove the fir tree as it seems a lot similar to the picea abies .... anyway what about my description of the branches for the trees in the previous post ? Is my guessing right about them ? I talk as a complete neophite about the argument ... oh and the flora to be portrayed has to be european ... Here some other trees I took pictures of : Tree n 1 http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/3636/img0915kx.jpg http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/4158/img0916k.jpg http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/603/img0917pn.jpg Tree n 2 http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/2868/img0918cn.jpg http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/6882/img0919s.jpg http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/4114/img0920zv.jpg http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/9140/img0921bf.jpg http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3067/img0922to.jpg http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/8279/img0923b.jpg Tree n 3 http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/491/img0924gw.jpg http://img808.imageshack.us/img808/2940/img0925uy.jpg http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/7905/img0926v.jpg Tree n 4 http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/4782/img0927zx.jpg http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/3479/img0928hx.jpg I guess is a quercus the last one ...
So no norway spruce? Gah they all look sosimilar ... It woudl be possible to have some big pics of a norway spruce tree with branch and leaves arangement?