One or more site guests believe this photo is incorrectly labeled or inaccurate !
-
-
|
I believe this photo is for the other 'Amazing Grace' rose, seen here:
http://www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=2.18889.3&tab=1
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 8 posted
23 JUL 15 by
jmys
|
Thank you for pointing that out but my rose is Amazing Grace and much bigger than that. I purchased it from Heirloom.
Johanna
|
REPLY
|
|
Michael is right. You have your photos in the 1973 'Amazing Grace' file.
I too believe they should be in the 1990 'Amazing Grace' file. There were three roses with this name:
'Amazing Grace' 1973 bred by Anderson which was a rich pink, high centered rose of 40-45 petals
'Amazing Grace' 1990 bred by Cocker, light pink. Have a look at similar photos to yours in this file. I note your rose has 72 petals.
'Amazing Grace' 2007 bred by Chapman, white.
Would you like us to move your photos for you?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 8 posted
23 JUL 15 by
jmys
|
Yes please move the photos to the right Amazing grace. My apologies.
|
REPLY
|
|
Whoopsie - I forgot. I have trouble in moving photos from file to file. I have never been able to find out why, but I know they disappear off the face of the earth when I do try. Perhaps it might be better if you delete your photos and reload them into the correct 1990 'Amazing Grace' file. Sorry for the false offer.
Patricia
|
REPLY
|
|
Nice! I live near Heirloom!
I knew which Amazing Grace by the foliage. Roses that have Arthur Bell's foliage type, which is one of the grandparents, are really easy to spot! :]
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#6 of 8 posted
23 JUL 15 by
jmys
|
You should be able to use the Reassign button to move your photos - it worked for me.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#8 of 8 posted
23 JUL 15 by
jmys
|
Thanks everyone, I moved the photos to the 1990 Amazing Grace, And it's pretty amazing Michael could tell by the foliage.
|
REPLY
|
