You aren't signed in · sign in · register
 
Add new topic

Recent discussions

More...

Only show discussions in English
Archive

Archive


Leo Goudzwaard, at 2015-05-26 10:29:34, said:
Acer pseudoplatanus

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2015-05-26 10:28:27, said:
malus soort, maar weet niet welke

Martin Tijdgat, at 2015-05-25 23:23:05, said:
Hai Han,

Mooie boom, maar het is een Cupressus macrocarpa, als ik het goed zie.

Groet, Martin

Leo Goudzwaard, at 2015-05-26 10:24:04, said:
ja Cupressus macrocarpa

Nardo Kaandorp, at 2015-05-25 20:30:36, said:
Platanus occidentalis? Ik zie op de foto met de bladeren een paar keer een eenzaam vruchtbolletje. Ben niet zeker hoor. Gr, nardo

Han van Meegeren, at 2015-05-25 21:53:01, said:
Nardo

Dat was ook mijn eerste gedachte toen ik de boom zag. Maar het blad is zo vreemd voor een plataan. ????


Martin Tijdgat, at 2015-05-26 03:11:43, said:
Hai Nardo en Han,

Een plataan is het niet. Blad en schorsstructuur doen mij meer denken aan Corylus colurna. Maar daar ben ik niet zeker van. Zal eens kijken naar exemplaar in Oranjepark in Uithoorn of het klopt.

Groet, Martin


Leo Goudzwaard, at 2015-05-26 10:21:10, said:
hallo allen,

het is een plataan, ws de gewone P. x hispanica


Leo Goudzwaard, at 2015-05-26 10:21:48, said:
het blad is net aan het uitlopen vandaar dat de vorm nog niet op een volwassen blad lijkt.


TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2015-05-25 18:51:00, said:
With its rapid growth and ideal adaptation to the Scottish climate, Abies grandis is the first of the giant conifers from the American north-west to rival in cultivation the sizes it reaches in the wild. Measurements since 1956 suggest that this tree on the Murthly Castle estate was planted around 1880; it is no beauty but is now sheltered by other conifers almost as tall and continues to grow as fast as ever (with 50cm leaders in 2015), making it probably now the most massive tree in northern Europe. The trunk is partly obscured by the retained low branches but hardly seems to taper to the first fork at 24m.

Using the American points system to compare big trees, 301" girth, 187' height and 40' average spread give this tree 498 points. Compare 491 points for the largest known in the USA in 1988 (251' x 19' 1" x 43' by Duckabush Creek, Washington).

Conifers, at 2015-05-26 09:26:19, said:
The US 'points system' is very misleading as it gives great emphasis to open-grown trees with very wide branching. In height and girth, this tree is nowhere near as large as the old-growth native specimens which developed in natural forest habitats.

Han van Meegeren, at 2015-05-25 15:59:56, said:
A kind of elm????
Conifers, at 2015-05-26 09:22:17, said:
Platanus × hispanica
Conifers, at 2015-05-26 09:23:06, said:
PS what's a "dorpsplein"? I don't think they have them in Ireland!

Guilda, at 2015-05-26 02:23:52, said:
Impresionante.

Guilda, at 2015-05-26 02:23:30, said:
bellisimo.

Guilda, at 2015-05-26 02:21:23, said:
simplemente hermoso.

Han van Meegeren, at 2015-05-25 18:42:19, said:
Acer pseudoplatanus???

TheTreeRegisterOwenJohnson, at 2015-05-22 17:39:59, said:
Hello Rob,

I suspect that this willow is the older clone 'Salamonii', which grows better in the north than 'Chrysocoma' does. The crown is less weeping and lacks the long hanging streamers of 'Chrysocoma'. However in a shorter growing-season a 'Chrysocoma' might fail to grow these long streamers so I'm not 100% certain. The critical difference is that the young twigs of 'Chrysocoma', at least where they get the sun on them, are quite a clear yellow (making the tree look blond in winter), while all the young twigs of 'Salamonii' are a dull grey-brown. I'm sure you can decide on this.

Owen


Empty photograph lists and "max_user_connections" issue
Visible for everyone · permalink · de
Tim, at 2015-05-19 14:22:53, said:
Hello,

most of you have encountered the "User monumentaltrees already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections" issue lately and I have gotten quite a few mails about this.

I wanted to let you know that I am aware of this, and I am thinking of a solution. In the meantime, some image lists might not contain photographs. The photographs are not gone, they are just not listed for the moment.

Details for those interested:

The mean reason is that at any given moment only a limited number of users can connect to the database behind the website, and lately, due to increasing visitor numbers there are more connections, but also (which I only discovered recently) due to an increasing number of registered species and photographs some calculations (the ordering of the images) takes up more and more time, causing connections to be locked and blocking access for other visitors.

I have already prohibited access for Chinese bots, and I'm thinking of a complete rewrite of the way these long running calculations are done.

The result would be is that the site will be faster, and have less of these "max_user_connections" errors. To avoid the errors for now, I have disabled these long running calculations that determine which images (and in which order) should be shown in the lists. So until I rewrite this, some lists might remain empty and others will not be updated.

Thank you for your patience.

Kind regards,

Tim


Frank Gyssling, at 2015-05-22 08:22:31, said:
Hallo Tim,

um eine Überlastung der Webseite zu vermeiden, rate ich allen Nutzern die Fotos nicht in voller Auflösung hoch zu laden.

Wir sollten die Fotos auf eine maximale Kantenlänge von zum Beispiel 1300 dpi begrenzen!

Das lässt sich mit jeder, auch Freeware-Software leicht mit wenigen Klicks machen.

viele Grüße Frank


Tim, at 2015-05-22 08:38:39, said:
Hello Frank,

the size of the images does not matter. The number of bytes transferred is not the problem. Big photos do not stress the system. It is the number of connections made to the database and that can only be influenced by me (by making code changes) or by having less visitors. Please continue to upload photos in the largest resolution you have. In another 5 years photos uploaded now of say 3 MB or less can be impractically small.

Kind regards,

Tim



WiPe, at 2015-05-16 15:27:25, said:
Hello Baumsucher,

how did you mesure this tree? According to the list, the tree has been mesured at 1,30 m. As this is a double stemmed tree, which of the two stems did you mesure?

I have the idea that 2,78 m at 1,30 m is rather much for this tree.

Baumsucher, at 2015-05-16 17:03:28, said:
Hello Wipe,

the tree has a sum of all the diameter of 278cm.

No. 1 has 138 cm and stem 2 has 140cm, together 278 cm Total Length of the tree.

Karlheinz, at 2015-05-22 08:08:44, said:
Hallo Baumsucher,

bitte schau mal nach im Menü unter "Mehr" / "Baum-Umfang messen". Dort findest du die Regeln, wie wir hier messen. Diese sind nicht immer identisch mit den Messregeln der Forstwirtschaft. Als Beispiel findest du dort eine Skizze, die genau deinen Fall abbildet. Demnach nehmen wir als Stammumfang weder die Summe noch den Mittelwert beider Stämme, sondern den Umfang des größeren Stammes.

Auch wird bei Hanglage nicht vom höchsten Erdbodenkontakt aus gemessen, sondern vom Schnittpunkt der Stammachse mit der ursprünglichen Geländeoberfläche (vermuteter Keimpunkt/Pflanzpunkt).

Leider wird nicht überall nach diesen Regeln gemessen. Daher können die Werte aus verschiedenen Baumdatenbanken voneinander abweichen.

Grüße

Karlheinz


Contributions of members
Visible for everyone · permalink · nl
Wim Brinkerink, at 2015-05-20 20:29:33, said:
Apparently Tim has introduced a new way of doing. Since a few days I cannot see the contributions of my preferred members Jeroen Philipponna, Rainer Lippert, and more... .It is broader than that. If I go to the south of Holland I take notice of what Han van Meegeren or Nardo Kaandorp have posted. If I go to Great Brittain I have a look at Owens contributions. It is all made impossible by a single measure ..... Or is it a mistake? A jeopardy of the software?

Tim, at 2015-05-22 06:17:53, said:
See: http://www.monumentaltrees.com/en/discussion/1891/

Do not worry, the photographs are not gone, the lists with photographs are currently just not filled in.



Wim Brinkerink, at 2015-05-20 19:59:26, said:
Deze boom is in mei 2015 niet meer aanwezig. Kennelijk gesneuveld?


More...
 

Main page · Top of page · Share/Bookmark

© MonumentalTrees.com · disclaimer · also available in · Castellano · Deutsch · Français · Nederlands · translate?