HelpMeFind Roses, Clematis and Peonies
Roses, Clematis and Peonies
and everything gardening related.
Member
Profile
PhotosFavoritesCommentsJournalMember
Garden
Member
Listings
 
scvirginia
most recent yesterday SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 30 MAY 16 by Rose_Insanity
Absolutely one of my favorites. Love the color, the bloom form and the robust vigor of the plant. Lauren has a definite character that I would describe as "elfin cheerfulness", lol. For me she blooms nearly continually, especially if I can keep up with dead heading her, but it's not necessary in order for her to keep pumping out blooms. She is rapidly approaching 5'x3' as a third year plant. Bone hardy in zone 7 (two winters down to 0 degree F. By the way, she spent her first winter forgotten in a pot, sitting in a frozen puddle most of the winter. Sorry Kim!). Supposedly she's hardy to Z2. Lauren would be worth trying anywhere. I'd love to see a hedge of Lauren. It would be spectacular, and she's well suited to it.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 2 posted 4 days ago by scvirginia
John, is your 'Lauren' still about 5' X 3', or is she larger by now? I'm trying to figure out how large my plants might get. I read that it can get quite large in California, but am guessing your conditions are more like mine.

Thanks,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #2 of 2 posted yesterday by Rose_Insanity
Hi Virginia,
Sorry to take so long to answer. The debacle over at Houzz/GardenWeb has kept me busy answering emails, lol.

Lauren has actually shrunk a bit, with some mysterious die back this Spring. I would suspect downy mildew, but the symptoms didn't quite match. She lost a LOT of twiggy growth. I had a few other roses suffering the same fate, but they're all putting out new growth now. I'm hoping Lauren returns to her full glory. She's a sight to see in full flush.

Last year she was finally beginning to bulk up, not necessarily getting broader, but more full. Right now, she's probably 4'x3.5', and if not for the die back would probably be larger in both directions. She's a wonderful rose, but I do have to spray her for BS in the Spring. Once it really heats up (like now....sheesh! 95F in June????) she does just fine without spray.
REPLY
most recent 5 days ago HIDE POSTS
 
Initial post 6 days ago by Margaret Furness
I have an own-root plant 8 or 9 years old, now 1.8m high. My other plant has more competition and is smaller.
I don't think the flowers are high-centred enough to match the early photos of Francis Dubreuil, unfortunately.
REPLY
Reply #1 of 13 posted 6 days ago by scvirginia
I did think that I saw a strong resemblance between this illustration http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.314493 and your photo of KE stems in a vase here: http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.222484 . Especially the buds on the left of both "photos" with the strappy sepals and a bit of a swan's neck effect.

I didn't have the impression from reading references and looking at old illustrations that FD was unusually high-centered.

But Bob may be right that KE isn't tall enough to be a good candidate? In the 1931 article by Mr. Knight, he seems to say that old plants of FD could get to be 8-9' tall... more like 2.5m. Do you think your KE could eventually attain that size with time?

Thanks,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #2 of 13 posted 6 days ago by Margaret Furness
The parent plant was growing under a big camellia, and therefore stunted (and the Renmark plants were constantly deadheaded by David R). I haven't seen the old plants growing in other states - others may be able to comment. I think it could get bigger with time.
REPLY
Reply #3 of 13 posted 6 days ago by Patricia Routley
"Kombacy and its synonym plants, all have a definite S-bend pedicel, or swan neck.
Virginia - take a look at the 1906 and 1896 illustrations of 'Francis Dubreuil'. They look a bit high-centered to me. I am never going to be able to help with the height of "Kombacy Elyena", as my plants just do not grow all that well in this cool and acid soil. But I struck another two plants in 2016 and now have three in different locations to watch.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 13 posted 6 days ago by scvirginia
From the 1906 Gardening Illustrated:
"As a pot-Rose Francis Dubreuil has one failing, and that is a peculiar weakness in the stalk, which causes the blooms to bend at the neck and appear on the plant quite distorted."

It might be difficult to find Teas that have been left alone to grow 8-9' these days?

Mr. Knight was a fan of 'Francis Dubreuil' for Australian gardens, and I think his nursery was in the same part of Sydney as Rookwood Necropolis. I would have expected at least one 'FD' to have been planted at Rookwood, and there has been at least one "KE" found at Rookwood. That's not proof, but it is a nice correspondence.

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #8 of 13 posted 6 days ago by HubertG
Have any of the Tealadies seen the collected plantings of old roses at Rookwood cemetery in Sydney?
I haven't been there for a number of years but I do remember seeing a distinctly red Tea (maybe Tea-China) which just from memory doesn't seem to be anything I've seen on this site. Virginia's point about George Knight being close to Rookwood is a relevant one.
REPLY
Reply #9 of 13 posted 6 days ago by Margaret Furness
The Tealadies spent quite a bit of time on and off with Barbara May at Rookwood in their research years (and checking out what all the Aus nurseries sold as Teas). The references say that there were at least three plants of this rose at Rookwood. It was also in Melbourne General Cemetery and other locations in Melbourne, in WA and in Queensland. The colour would make it popular as a mourning rose, and it's clearly a survivor, but you could even wonder if it was ever used as an understock.
One reference says it's a little difficult to strike from cuttings, which isn't what I find.
The current list of what Teas and near-Teas are around, and some of the names they're sold under, are on the HRIAI website, under Resources / Tea/Noisette/China Collection (I can't access the website at present).
REPLY
Reply #4 of 13 posted 6 days ago by Patricia Routley
Afterthought. Actually the height/habit of "Kombacy Elyena" may be quite important.
I note Esmond Jones in 2004 wrote to me (see 2014 comment)
"The only P d S. that I ever saw looked to me to be the same thing as Stephi's red. One characteristic was it's ground hugging horizontal growth."

"Stephanie’s Red" (NSW) is the same as "Kombacy Elyena (Vic.)"

Margaret, do you recall the approximate habit of the original "Kombacy Elyena"?
Then would you read through the references for 'Friedrichsruh' and let us know what you think. Read from the bottom up.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 13 posted 6 days ago by Margaret Furness
My larger plant of "Kombacy Elyena" does have a branch walking along the ground. Otherwise it is fairly vase-shaped.
I can't comment on the original plant, but given that it occurs in almost all of the mainland states, there must be other possible input. It isn't regarded as an HT.
The Freidrichsruh references don't mention a white petal nub or paler reverse.
REPLY
Reply #7 of 13 posted 6 days ago by Patricia Routley
Thanks Margaret. I did find a fairly good habit description in my private correspondence, but I can't share that.
The height seems to be the main characteristic against 'Friedrichsruh' (18") for "Kombacy Elyena". (54")
REPLY
Reply #10 of 13 posted 6 days ago by Margaret Furness
Mine is 72".
REPLY
Reply #11 of 13 posted 5 days ago by HubertG
My two cents worth: just looking at the photos here of Kombacy Elyena, it does have quite a silvery-pink reverse and it doesn't strike me as quite matching the early colour descriptions of 'Francis Dubreuil'.
Also its foliage is quite striking and again doesn't quite fit the darker blue-green descriptions of FD's foliage, but then I'm only going by the few photos here. For those who grow it, is it generally velvety ?
REPLY
Reply #12 of 13 posted 5 days ago by Patricia Routley
Thanks Margaret. (Yours is bigger than mine!)
Sorry Hubertg, I can't really remember, but I wouldn't have thought "Kombacy Elyena" blooms are velvety.
REPLY
Reply #13 of 13 posted 5 days ago by HubertG
Kombacy Elyena does sound to be a better match to 'Mlle Christine de Noue'. That was one of the other roses Knight mentioned as making a big bush, and the 1905 reference here does describe silvery petal reverses.
REPLY
most recent 6 days ago SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 12 FEB 16 by true-blue
Soupert & Notting 1909-10 catalogue p.23

Francis Dubreuil (Dubreuil 1895) cramoisi pourpré velouté, reflets cerise et amarante, fl.tr.gr......vig.
(crimson, velvet purple, cherry and amaranth reflexes, very big flower, vigorous.)
REPLY
Reply #1 of 11 posted 13 FEB 16 by Patricia Routley
Thank you
REPLY
Reply #2 of 11 posted 10 days ago by scvirginia
Bob, you wonderful Canadian...

Is there any possibility that you could get your hands (or eyes) on a copy of the 1914 Annual of the Rose Society of Ontario? There is a color photo of a bouquet containing 'Francis Dubreuil' along with four other roses.

There is an online scan at Biodiversity Heritage Library, but the photo is blurry and leaves much to be desired.

I hope you are well,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #3 of 11 posted 7 days ago by true-blue
Wow what a find!

Unfortunately I can't have any access to that.

But if it's any consolation, I doubt if the original copy would be any better.
I tried to extract the image but it's blurry as you said....
REPLY
Reply #4 of 11 posted 7 days ago by scvirginia
Thanks, Bob- I thought you might have a "magic source", so I delayed posted that photo until I knew you didn't. You're probably right that the photo's likely to be blurry in all of the annuals.

I think I've mentioned this before, but my favorite candidate for the real 'Francis Dubreuil' is the Aussie foundling, "Kombacy Elyena". A lot of similarities (at least I think so), including some controversy over fragrance.

Cheers,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #5 of 11 posted 7 days ago by true-blue
No more magic source.

I checked Kombacy Elyena. Intriguing rose, though the size doesn't seem to correspond to the six feet or more height, if memory serves me right....
REPLY
Reply #6 of 11 posted 6 days ago by Margaret Furness
I've added a comment under "K E".
REPLY
Reply #7 of 11 posted 6 days ago by billy teabag
Which of these roses do you think is 'Francis Dubreuil', and which 'General MacArthur'?
REPLY
Reply #8 of 11 posted 6 days ago by HubertG
I think 'Francis Dubreuil' is the sole dark red rose at the bottom. The flower amongst the white ones could be General MacArthur, or perhaps a Chatenay which is a bit in shadow as it looks a bit dark pink and scrolled, but I don't think it's FD. It would be a hand coloured photo, so the value is in the form more so than the colour. What do others think?
REPLY
Reply #9 of 11 posted 6 days ago by billy teabag
That's my opinion also. I think the only 'Francis Dubreuiul' bloom is the lower, deeper coloured one.
General MacArthur tends to open like the red rose on the right, with the central petals standing up while the outer petals reflex so that for a time there is this separation between the central and outer petals.
REPLY
Reply #10 of 11 posted 6 days ago by scvirginia
from The 1914 Annual of the Rose Society of Ontario, p. 31:
"The Lumiere Plates
The heartiest thanks of the Society are due to Sir Edmund Osier, M.P., and to Mr. J. T. Moore of Moore Park, for their great kindness in allowing Mr. Freemantle, who prepared the slides, to show the lovely lumieres or sun-taken color photographs of flowers grown by Mr. Allan in Sir Edmund's conservatory at Craigleigh, and of roses grown by Mr. Bryson at Moore Park. They elicited the warmest admiration and were shown by request on more than one occasion. By the kindness and generosity of Mr. Moore, four of those in his possession appear in this Annual. This intricate and wonderful process was exemplified in its highest development by Mr. Freemantle's skill and the flowers were most realistic in the truth of their colors, painted by Nature herself. We have gone far in photographing in natural colors, and Mr. Freemantle has brought the art to something undreamed of only a few years ago."

About Lumieres: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autochrome_Lumière

These were color photographs, and it seems that the color reproduction was very good. There may have been some color "touch-ups" by the photo-engravers for the purpose of publication, however.

I agree that the dark red bloom near the bottom is 'Francis Dubreuil', and am on the fence about the bloom surrounded (and obscured) by the white roses.

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #11 of 11 posted 6 days ago by HubertG
That's fascinating about the Lumiere slides. Imagine if there were still more of those slides in the possession of one of the families of those mentioned, and there was a cache of Francis Dubreuil ones.
REPLY
most recent 10 days ago SHOW ALL
 
Initial post 11 MAR 17 by Andrew from Dolton
A few minutes walk from where I live, deep in the woods by the river Torridge is the remains of Dye Cottage. Abandoned 100 years ago, today I discovered by the entrance a couple of shoots of a rose. It has small pointed prickles on the older wood but is very unlikely that it will flower this year. It produces suckers. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what it could possibly be? Needless to say it has been rustled!
REPLY
Reply #1 of 38 posted 11 MAR 17 by Nastarana
Whatever it might be it does have attractive foliage.
REPLY
Reply #2 of 38 posted 11 MAR 17 by Andrew from Dolton
Indeed, I will just have to wait to see it in flower although it might not be until next year.
REPLY
Reply #6 of 38 posted 30 JUN by scvirginia
Well, great- now we're ALL impatiently waiting for blooms. Yes, the foliage is quite fine; I like those reddish margins, but have no idea what they might indicate, ancestry-wise.

A nice find.
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #7 of 38 posted 30 JUN by Andrew from Dolton
When it stops tipping down with rain outside I will take some better pictures. I don't care if it is something common-place, what fascinates me is just discovering the name of an unknown plant. I would say I have a reasonably good eye and knowlege, but it does not look like any rose I can put my finger on. Just 10 minuites on foot from my door step, I found, 'Paul Lede', 'Turner's Crimson', R carolina 'Plena' and this rose. Then a short drive away a massive multiflora type rose by the side of the road with white flowers and very pretty deep pink buds. And Rosa dumalis, growing in the hedges, when most books say it only grows in the north. Of course none of these are lost, believed extinct or new but they are not common roses, just a few specialist nurseries are selling them. Interesting roses are all around us, where ever we live.
REPLY
Reply #8 of 38 posted 30 JUN by Andrew from Dolton
Here are some new pictures. Dye Cottage was abandoned by World War I so I would estimate that for a variety of rose to have been bred, marketed and found its way to a remote part of Devon it must have been raised just at the turn of the century or earlier. The people living at the cottage would never have had the money to buy a plant, it would almost certainly have been aquired as a cutting or sucker. I could of course have been an understock, but in the U.K. you only really see laxa or 'Alba Simplex'.
It suckers from the roots and has quite a distinctive row of good sized prickles running along the mid-rib on the back of the leaf and incredibly healthy, not a hint of blackspot on it any where.
The very second a flower opens I will post a picture here.
REPLY
Reply #9 of 38 posted 1 JUL by scvirginia
With foliage that clean and pretty, it almost doesn't matter what the flower looks like... though I guess it might help with finding an ID. Assuming it ever had a name, and wasn't a no-name volunteer?

I am jealous of your R. carolina plena. It is not in commerce in the U.S., as far as I can tell.

Virginia

PS There was a period when Manetti was used in England for rootstock, but I don't think that's what you have there?
REPLY
Reply #10 of 38 posted 1 JUL by Andrew from Dolton
Yes, it is similar to 'Manetti', and similar to other roses too!
Sorry Virginia, I made a mistake, it was cinnamomea 'Plena', not carolina. There is a lots of it growing in a hedgerow where a cottage was until 1900, Patricia helped me identify it last year. If the import/export rules were different I could send you "any amount" of this rose!

http://www.helpmefind.com/gardening/l.php?l=2.46690.2&tab=1
REPLY
Reply #3 of 38 posted 11 MAR 17 by Give me caffeine
"Needless to say it has been rustled!"

Are you saying there was a rustle in the bushes?
REPLY
Reply #4 of 38 posted 11 MAR 17 by Andrew from Dolton
There was a certain amount of rustling bushes involved and a covert night time operation as the whole area is a nature reserve.
REPLY
Reply #5 of 38 posted 11 MAR 17 by Give me caffeine
You'd better hope MI5 doesn't have this site under surveillance. ;)
REPLY
Reply #11 of 38 posted 30 MAY by Andrew from Dolton
The rose is flowering now, every shoot carries buds. I think it is 'Manettii' but the description says "thornless or almost" and this is very prickly.
REPLY
Reply #12 of 38 posted 30 MAY by scvirginia
I can't tell from just the one photo, but do you think it could be 'De la Grifferaie'?

Just a thought,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #13 of 38 posted 30 MAY by Andrew from Dolton
Thank you Virginia, I'll take more pictures at the weekend when more of the flowers are out, it is very free flowering.

Best wishes, Andrew.
REPLY
Reply #14 of 38 posted 13 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Here is a picture of the whole plant, it had all flopped over and I had to stake it up so it looks a bit strange whilst the shoots turn around toward the light.
REPLY
Reply #15 of 38 posted 13 days ago by scvirginia
The stakes make it look like a HP, but could it be a climber if it's that floppy?

The flowers are really beautiful, but too double, I think, for 'Manetti'? Is the color closer to the magenta in the photo of the one bloom above, or more of the mid-pink in the whole plant photo? Lighting, flowers and cameras don't always tell the whole truth... Since she's prickly, I'm wondering about 'Climbing Caroline Testout', or even 'Climbing American Beauty'... I don't think you've mentioned fragrance?

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #16 of 38 posted 13 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Hello Virginia,

The blooms just above my satellite dish are very typical, if anything they are a stronger pink than in the picture (almost 'Zéphirine Drouhin' pink) with distinctive paler backs to the petals and they fade as they age making more of a contrast between new and older flowers.
It could possibly be a climber. Every leaf node produced a shoot with flower buds, not just on the stems that bent over but on the shorter upright ones as well.
The cottage was abandoned by the first world war so I imagine it would have had to have been bred before 1900. The people living there would not ever have gone to a nursery and bought a plant or even have had one given to them. They would have been very poor and Dye Cottage would have been, and still is to some extent, very remote. The rose sends up suckers around its base and this is how they would have acquired it.
The flowers are mildly scented. I will post a more detailed picture when it's light tomorrow.

Best wishes, Andrew

edit. The sepals are long and twisted together
REPLY
Reply #17 of 38 posted 12 days ago by Patricia Routley
"Dye Cottage" is a very lovely find, Andrew.
The leaves, long sepals, and suckering remind me of the Australian foundling "Mrs. Something". However, I believe it is not the same because
"Dye Cottage" does not have enough petals, is only mildly scented, and does not have the mass of balling buds at the tip of the canes.
I agree with Virginia, it is not Manetti (either the U.S. or Australian versions)
I suspect it is not 'Mme. Caroline Testout' because I am not seeing the center ball of petals evident in Testout and the leaf seems different.
I don't have 'de la Grifferaie' but you might like to have a look at the 2011 reference for that rose. A photo of the stipule will definitely confirm if it is, or isn't ''De la Grifferaie'.

In the meantime, if there is still a bud to photograph, a side-on shot will help.
Watch the bush for any hip set.
The signature for "Dye Cottage" seems to be that every leaf node produces a flower.
REPLY
Reply #18 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Thank you Patricia, how exciting.
It is definitely not 'de la Grifferaie', the older blooms do go paler but not to that extent and I can not see much multiflora in it if at all. The sepals are wrong for 'Mrs Something' and it does not have such sophisticated shape as Testout and I'm pretty sure it will only flower once. Yes, producing a flower at every node is one of its most distinctive features. I still think it looks like 'Manettii' , although I have never seen that growing in the U.K., if it was commonly used as a rootstock here I would have thought it would have been more well known or it would be more common as a found rose.
I have to say how disappointed I am in my fellow British countrymen. We are supposed to have some of the world's best gardens, we are passionate gardeners, we even have a rose as our national flower! Yet our contribution to this website is very tardy at best. In Australia, for example, you have a population of less than London yet you manage to find dozens of incredibly interesting found roses. In two years and just minutes walk away I have found five roses. so over the country as a whole there must be hundreds awaiting discovery if only people bothered and spent a little time and effort.
REPLY
Reply #19 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Buds.
REPLY
Reply #24 of 38 posted 11 days ago by scvirginia
Patricia, can this discussion be moved to the comments section for the new rose record? And, regardless of whether the discussion can be moved, shouldn't the photos be reassigned?

How to proceed?

Thanks,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #20 of 38 posted 11 days ago by scvirginia
I guess the color is too blue-ish for either of the roses I named. Also, they do rebloom, and I'm not sure yours does?

I think Patricia's right, that "Dye Cottage" (or whatever foundling name you'd prefer) should have its own page, so that it can easily be found, and I think (maybe?) that she can move this discussion to the comments section of the new page?

Speaking of the cottage, was this rose planted near the building... as in, could it have been a climber growing on the cottage?

It's certainly a lovely thing, but that doesn't rule out the possibility that it could be a chance seedling. Still, if it suckers a bit, that could explain how a named cultivar might have ended up in the garden of folks without money for plants. That really makes more sense than the leftover rootstock theory, since that implies that someone purchased a grafted plant at some point.

It's a lovely find.

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #21 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Thank you Virginia. I'll try and get time to post some more pictures this evening. I might even walk down to the river and take a better picture of Dye Cottage, the rose must have grown for almost a hundred years in dense woodland and probably didn't flower for decades. It was near enough the house to have been climbing on the wall, actually near the front door. Just 100M away across the stream is an old derelict mill. I found 'Paul Ricault' growing there and also a rambler that at first I thought was 'Turner's Crimson', but it is not that. It looks like 'Excelas' but the flowers are bigger and darker. I'll post pictures of that too.
It would be great if 'Dye Cottage Rose' could have its own study page, thank you for that.
It grew those canes all last year but only flowered on them this spring so I am making a bit of a guess about it being once flowering. There are masses of new shoots coming from the base but none from anywhere else except to produce a flower. It could too have been spread around by cuttings too, 'Paul Ricault' and the rambler rose struck very easily.
REPLY
Reply #22 of 38 posted 11 days ago by scvirginia
You can post your photos here:
http://www.helpmefind.com/gardening/l.php?l=2.81504.0

Please look it over to see what I've omitted or gotten wrong. If you know more about the cottage itself that might be helpful. You said it was abandoned before WW!, so I gave the date as before 1914, but if you know that it was abandoned well before that...

I don't know if I can move this discussion, but I'll give it a try...

ETA: No, I don't think I can move it.

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #23 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
That's great Virginia, thank you.
REPLY
Reply #25 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
I've posted pictures on the "Dye Cottage Rose" study profile.
REPLY
Reply #26 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Marlorena
Hi Andrew,

Just wanted to say what a gorgeous rose you found there, and if I might take a guess as to its identity, what struck me when I first saw it was that it looked like a Bourbon rose, and the one closest to it, I think, is 'Bourbon Queen'.... have you considered that at all?... let me know what you or Virginia think about it...

Hi Virginia, hope you're doing o.k. nice to 'see' you here again..
REPLY
Reply #27 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Hello Marlorena,

I was just thinking today when I was taking the pictures that the stems were like 'Boule de Neige' and yes I think you are right it is very similar to Bourbon Queen', look at this picture from orsola, http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.203435
Well that solved that little mystery, thank you.
Are you enjoying this warm sunny weather? My roses, and garden in general, have never looked healthier!

Andrew.

Ps. my comments above about the British and roses wasn't aimed at you.
REPLY
Reply #33 of 38 posted 10 days ago by Marlorena
Hi again Andrew, nice to talk to you, I'm so thrilled about your found rose, and such a romantic and historical location to find it.

I'm also pleased that you think my suggestion maybe close to the mark, and no problem about the British, I couldn't agree more, and I blame t.v. to some extent - gardening programmes now seem terrified to mention roses, you wouldn't think anyone grew them here if your only source was television... they even get a scant mention on the Chelsea Flower Show... It's all about landscaping today I think...

Incidentally, we all grew up in a Cob cottage back in the 50's/60's.. still standing today... most of my family lived there from 1904-1960's... all rather quaint and old worldly...

Yes great year for roses, one of the best I've had.... not much rain about either to spoil the effects...
Enjoy your roses today Andrew, talk again soon..
REPLY
Reply #31 of 38 posted 10 days ago by scvirginia
Marlorena, you are very clever to see the resemblance to 'Bourbon Queen'.

I was looking at 'Champion of the World' as a possibility, but it is thornless, apparently, so no go there. I hadn't thought of 'Bourbon Queen', though. It is described as having a strong, sweet fragrance, but we all know that fragrance is variable, as is our ability to perceive it, so that's hardly a deal-breaker.

Hope your summer garden is all abloom,
Virginia
REPLY
Reply #34 of 38 posted 10 days ago by Marlorena
Hi Virginia... thanks so much, I'm delighted you think I was on the right track..

Roses in full bloom here, I'm almost swamped but I rather like it that way... I hope all is blooming in SC...we miss you at the other place... take care, talk again soon..
REPLY
Reply #28 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Patricia Routley
Thank you Virginia. The new page for "Dye Cottage Rose" looks good. Andrew, are you happy with the word Rose? I am thinking if there may be another rose found at Dye Cottage later on.
I have tried to move a photo out of this comment and into "Dye Cottage Rose". It was the initial one of the old cottage in the forest.
However, there is a problem which Admin has not quite got to as yet.

(ADMIN - You need to add that image type (eg bloom, leaves, hips) to photos added to comments.)

So...Andrew, I thnk it best if you just re-add your wonderful photos in this comment, direct into "Dye Cottage Rose".
I won't copy and paste all the comments, (thinking here of the doubling up of HelpMeFind's data) but will glean them for pertinent points and add material to "Dye Cottage Rose".
REPLY
Reply #29 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Thanks so much Patricia, yes just "Dye Cottage" is fine. However I think Marlorena might have solved the identity as 'Bourbon Queen'.
REPLY
Reply #30 of 38 posted 11 days ago by Patricia Routley
I will respond further in "Dye Cottage Rose".
REPLY
Reply #32 of 38 posted 10 days ago by scvirginia
Thanks, Patricia- I'd thought that the problem with being able to reassign photos had been fixed, but apparently not. I didn't try it myself, but assume that if you can't, I can't.

Please feel free to "flesh out" the skeleton of the record.

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #35 of 38 posted 10 days ago by HMF Admin
Hi Virginia,

The plant photo tab will now include photos which do not have any image type designation but they should be edited to include the appropriate image type attributes.
REPLY
Reply #36 of 38 posted 10 days ago by scvirginia
Thanks- I've moved the photos, and designated the image types.

Virginia
REPLY
Reply #37 of 38 posted 10 days ago by HMF Admin
Thank you for your participation, and patience, on HMF.
REPLY
Reply #38 of 38 posted 10 days ago by Andrew from Dolton
Thank you Virginia and Patricia from me as well.
REPLY
© 2018 HelpMeFind.com