|
|
'Magic Lantern' rose Reviews & Comments
-
-
Initial post
18 SEP
|
* Posted by unregistered site guest: Pending HMF administrative review. *
|
|
-
-
|
Listing average HT's as, "thornless (or almost)", really does a disservice to the whole website.
I hope it's something HMF can get sorted out for the future.
Thanks, Robert
|
REPLY
|
|
I am sure we have broached this subject before and it is difficult one. But just for the exercise, how would you do it Robert?
I can’t help noticing in one of your comments about ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ you said: It's mostly smooth. Any branches that produce prickles should be pruned away. I've only had one branch produce a few prickles here and there
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks for your reply Patricia.
Just to broach another. "sticking point", we really should be calling them "prickles" to be botanically correct.
Since there is such a huge variation of prickles within this genus, in my opinion the default should not mention prickles at all unless we can be specific. (Granting there could be variation within species.)
You grow my, 'Bohemian Rhapsody'?
It is a good case in point. It's mostly smooth, but I feel it could be listed as, "thornless (or almost)".
Since I bred that one, I've created many roses here which are totally smooth including the back of the mid-rib of the leaves.
These could be listed as totally smooth if any ever make it to market.
There will be totally smooth roses in time whether I've created them or someone else does.
The website should be prepared for them regardless. I'd hate to think they get lost in the morass as there are people who truly would like to seek them out.
Best wishes, Robert
|
REPLY
|
|
“sticking point“. Love it.
No I don’t grow ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ I am afraid. I just saw your comment about its prickles.
If there are any roses that you see need tweaking, please do tell us. I am very hesitant about this sort of thing as I have a hybrid tea or two in my garden that will put up a new cane contrary to the older canes.
|
REPLY
|
|
I think it better not to make mention of prickles at all unless one can be more specific.
As a default saying, "prickles variable", would certainly be more accurate than saying, "thornless (or almost)".
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I am searching for a source from which I can purchase Magic Lantern Gr. rose. Does anyone know of such a source?
|
REPLY
|
|
Besides the nurseries listed on the "Buy From" tab you will find HMF can help you locate a source several different ways - see the How Do I button for details.
|
REPLY
|
|
Douglas,
This rose, unfortunately, is not available anywhere in the states yet. It is currently under patent protection, which makes it harder to get since the patent is owned by J&P. I have been tasked with getting some plants to Roses Unlimited in order to get this into commerce, but that will still be quite awhile until plants would be ready.
|
REPLY
|
|
Any luck with that? I'd like to buy one.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
I have grown this rose in my Idaho garden for about 15 years, and have never had a bloom as small as 2.75" (as detailed in the rose description average size). I estimate my average bloom to be 4.5"; sometimes larger. Perhaps it is smaller in other climates? Does anyone think 2.75 is a reasonable average size for this rose?
|
REPLY
|
|
Thank you. I've updated the plant characteristics from the US patent and added the MR 12 REFERENCE.
Smiles,
Lyn
|
REPLY
|
|
Thanks Lyn. I see that this is a sport of Gold Medal, which lists an average bloom of 4.5" also, so this seems to be correct for Magic Lantern.
|
REPLY
|
|
