|
|
Recent Questions, Answers and Comments
-
-
Initial post
15 MAR 10 by
kev
|
again the picture here does not fit the rose described .the rose is a white/pale pink. the picture here is that of a bright rose pink type there are so many like this here. that i doubt the professional objectivity and research savy of those who built this site. to say the least i am disapointed.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 6 posted
15 MAR 10 by
Jeff Britt
|
I believe that the photo is one of a plant sold as or labeled as Madame Dubost. You will note on the description page that the roses photographed may have a different identity. HMF actually HELPS identify roses mislabeled in commerce or public gardens. There are many old 19th century roses in collection and commercial nurseries with incorrect names. Most people here recognize this. Just the same, until the plant is correctly identified, isn't it better to identify it as it is sold or seen? What else should we call the photographed rose? If you have any better ideas, please offer them. The point is to confuse as few people as possible while working to correctly identify old roses. And this site had done much to accomplish that.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 6 posted
15 MAR 10 by
 Robert Neil Rippetoe
|
Here here!
HMF is the most comprehensive and up to date collection of rose information ever assembled, most FREE to the public.
Many roses exist mis-labeled in old collections and arboretums as seems to be the case here.
We're all doing our best to make heads or tails of the information being presented. It is through the generous efforts of those donating time and energy that the site exists at all.
It's very easy to criticize and much more difficult to be constructive in terms of making the information presented as accurate as possible.
Much thanks to all involved.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 6 posted
15 MAR 10 by
Cass
|
Thanks for the votes of confidence. There's nothing like criticism to motivate us to find more old rose references. In this case, those references disclose a range of color descriptions from dark bright pink to pinkish white with bright pink center. Somehow, over time, those descriptions have been distilled to two words: "light pink." Two similar rose names further complicate the task. After reviewing contemporaneous sources, I do not share the the anonymous poster's certitude that the color of this rose is pale pink.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#4 of 6 posted
15 MAR 10 by
jedmar
|
It seems that you have not fully understood the nature of HMF. Photos can be posted by every member, References by administrators. It happens that photos are not in line with the descriptions. This can be an indication that the rose in commerce or in gardens is incorrectly identified. The following process of comparison and discussion leads to better insights.
I also believe it would be more honest to have your criticisms posted under your name, and not anonymously.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 6 posted
5 APR 21 by
Michael Garhart
|
HMF is a volunteer system, which means you can also add insight. It improves year by year. When I first joined HMF, when it was new, the only other thing that existed were a few small online listings and places like bulbnrose. I joined HMF when it was new, and I have contributed to it every year. Many of us have. It's a mostly selfless act. You should too :D The more accurate, the better.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 6 posted
today by
johnm99
|
Stumbled upon this just now. HMF is a truly astonishing phenomenon. There is an unbelievable amount of information here, and I use it almost every day. Some of the major contributors have devoted so much time and effort to this it is hard to believe! Being an open system anyone can post anything - but the number of errors is a minute percentage. Just amazing.
kev - if you are still there - you should apologize.....
Thank you for all your work, contributors. I really enjoy it!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
yesterday by
Louis Galarneau
|
I had two beautiful one and lost the two of them this year from dye back ! " Did this happen to someone else with that rose ?
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
yesterday by
Robert Neil Rippetoe
-
-
Initial post
2 days ago by
HubertG
|
The reference to 'Bardou Job' being triploid seems to come from the 2016 publication, but in that they record their source material as coming from the Loubert Rose Gardens, and that presumably coming from Loubert. The Loubert website shows a double rose which seems to correspond to the "Bardou Job - in commerce as" in Europe, or the "Alcatraz Red Climber" in the US (are they the same? I can't tell), but in any case it doesn't appear to be the authentic variety.
I'd suggest the real 'Bardou Job', as found in Australia, is probably tetraploid.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 2 posted
yesterday by
jedmar
|
Moved the reference to 'Bardou-Job - in commerce', thank you!
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 2 posted
yesterday by
HubertG
|
