Terms - peloric
Keith Benson DVM
I have heard the term used with Phal equestris varieties - what does it
mean??
thanks for any info,
Keith
--
Keith Benson DVM
Resident, Zoological Medicine
University of California - Davis
Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital
www.geocities.com/rainforest/2011
Dan and Marla Nikirk
the lip in shape and color.
Marla
Mick Fournier
A peloric orchid is one suffering the mutation in which the basic structure
and coloration of the flower's lip is duplicated in the petals also.
In looking at a peloric flower you get the feeling you are looking into a
three glass pane kaleidoscope. Of the dozen or so I have tried to use in
orchid breeding, none of have produced seed. it is a mutation seldom
reproducible... the Cattleya intermedia Aquinii might best be considered a
peloric type mutation that is reproducible.
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/equgino1.jpg
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/intaqhel.jpg
Mick
HBI, Producer of Fine Orchids in Flask
www.OrchidFlask.com
--------------------------------------
Keith Benson DVM <kgbe...@davis.com> wrote in message
news:37E5AC6F...@davis.com...
Al
be applied to any orchid flower which showed any type of deformity...not
just petals mutated into lips, which is a very pretty type of deformity
because it contains 'balance' and 'symmetry', two components in what you
humans call 'beauty'. Phal equesrtis is famous for producing the three
lipped deformity and, I have heard it said that progeny of the clone
'Riverbend' demonstrate this mutation in large numbers. In cattleya the
'splash petals' are considered a peloric mutation. In this case it is the
color from the lip that is carried over onto the petals.
There can be many other deformities and mutations, not all of them so
pretty. Are these not peloric also? And what about another balanced,
symmetrical mutation in Phals. The one demonstrated by World Class 'Big
Foot' JC/AOS. In this case the lip has mutated into a petal and not the
other way around. Is this considered a 'peloric' also?
I have had many knowledgeable people correct me and tell me the term only
applies to petals which show 'lip' characteristics. However, I am also in
the company of many knowledgeable people who think like I do: the term has
a broader definition and applies to any flower mutation.
Many breeders I have talked to have had the same experience as Mick:
Pelorics do not happen by design....yet.
Al
Dan and Marla Nikirk
large dark pink with orange spotted lip callouses on both lower sepals and
normal petals, so it is not symmetrical but still very nicely balanced.
Marla
Al
lip. In the center of both petals is a partially formed yellow callus that
makes these bright yellow spots and enhances the yellow in the lip. I gave
it the clonal name 'Lily Munster' Very pretty plant. I have a three lipped
white Phal Zuma's Chickadee which I have given the clonal name 'Marilyn
Munster'. I have two Phal. Memoria Amy Watkins which are three lipped
yellows with red lips and spots. One has more spots and the other more
stripes. I call them 'Uncle Fester' and 'Cousin It' Both of these have
malformed columns and do not produce pollinia except rarely. I always keep
the 'pelorics' whenever I find them in my stock. I have about six different
ones now. I will continue my theme of naming them after famous monsters and
one day I will have enough to put up a 'monster' photo page for halloween.
Al :-)
Dan and Marla Nikirk wrote in message <37E644EB...@concentric.net>...
knis...@my-deja.com
Thank you for the pictures!! I liked the phal best-very pretty. Now
I can finally see what everyone's been trying to describe.
Too bad all "monsters" aren't this attractive :)!
Karen
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Wendy
Cheers Wendy
Al <A...@OrchidExchange.com> wrote in message
news:7s5jl7$l0n$1...@winter.news.rcn.net...
Al
Wendy wrote in message ...
>Hello, Al could you please explain about "clonal names" I am confused,
'Clonal name' is the wrong term. Sorry. I looked up the meaning in "The
Handbook on Orchid Nomenclature and Registration". The correct term is
'Cultivar epithet'. It identifies an individual plant of a hybrid or
species. It is a fancy name, not a Latin or botanical name. It is always
enclosed in single quotation marks. Example:
Phal. equestris 'Riverbend', AM/AOS
Phal. Mem. Amy Watkins, 'Cousin Itt'
Anybody can give their plants cultivar epithets if they want to. Usually
they are given only to individual plants which the owner believes have
distinct and remarkable characteristics or which are in some way superior to
their siblings. 'Cousin Itt' is one of two individual plants from the grex
registered as Mem. Amy Watkins that blooms with peloric flowers. Unlike the
grex name a cultivar name is not registered. An exception occurs if the
individual plant wins an award. Then the cultivar epithet is required by
the RHS and precedes the award, as in the example above.
Would you not have been confused if I used the right term in the first
place? :-)
Al
yet another sleepless night in soggy Virginia.
Ken Woodward
then?
_________________
__ Ken Woodward ___
____Newton, MA___
Al <A...@OrchidExchange.com> wrote in message
news:7s7bh9$7dv$1...@winter.news.rcn.net...
Wendy
didn't know that one could give an orchid an extra name. Cheers Wendy. Hope
it dries up in Virginia so you can get some sleep.
Venger's Orchids
>
> Wendy wrote in message ...
> >Hello, Al could you please explain about "clonal names" I am confused,
>
> 'Clonal name' is the wrong term. Sorry. I looked up the meaning in "The
> Handbook on Orchid Nomenclature and Registration". The correct term is
> 'Cultivar epithet'. It identifies an individual plant of a hybrid or
> species. It is a fancy name, not a Latin or botanical name. It is always
> enclosed in single quotation marks. Example:
> Phal. equestris 'Riverbend', AM/AOS
> Phal. Mem. Amy Watkins, 'Cousin Itt'
>
> Anybody can give their plants cultivar epithets if they want to. Usually
> they are given only to individual plants which the owner believes have
> distinct and remarkable characteristics or which are in some way superior to
> their siblings. 'Cousin Itt' is one of two individual plants from the grex
> registered as Mem. Amy Watkins that blooms with peloric flowers. Unlike the
> grex name a cultivar name is not registered. An exception occurs if the
> individual plant wins an award. Then the cultivar epithet is required by
> the RHS and precedes the award, as in the example above.
>
> Would you not have been confused if I used the right term in the first
> place? :-)
>
> Al
> yet another sleepless night in soggy Virginia.
'Clone' or 'Clonal name' are acceptable in ordinary conversation. When I
talk Orchids, I always act as if the people I'm talking to have minimal
Orchid education. That means keeping the terms simple and monosyllabic.
"Spike" not "Inflorescence", "Clone" not "Epithet". It just makes life
easier on everyone. No one is going to impress me by babbling. Practical
knowledge from experience is much more impressive. -Rod-
Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids
http://www.vengers.com/
Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pat Brennan
Venger's Orchids <ven...@vengers.com> wrote in article
<37E834...@vengers.com>...
>
> 'Clone' or 'Clonal name' are acceptable in ordinary conversation. When I
> talk Orchids, I always act as if the people I'm talking to have minimal
> Orchid education. That means keeping the terms simple and monosyllabic.
> "Spike" not "Inflorescence", "Clone" not "Epithet". It just makes life
> easier on everyone. No one is going to impress me by babbling. Practical
> knowledge from experience is much more impressive. -Rod-
>
hmmmmmm But using the word blue instead of coerulea is a lie? Talk about
babbling!
Pat Brennan
Venger's Orchids
Semantics, Pat. If a plant is labeled V. coerulea then that's what it
is. but I won't advertise it as "blue". "Blue" is a description.
"coerulea" is generally taxonomic. Best! -Rod-
Pat Brennan
Venger's Orchids <ven...@vengers.com> wrote in article
>
> Semantics, Pat. If a plant is labeled V. coerulea then that's what it
> is. but I won't advertise it as "blue". "Blue" is a description.
> "coerulea" is generally taxonomic. Best! -Rod-
>
Ron,
If a plant is labeled C. labiata var. coerulea, anyone with a "minimal
Orchid education" would know this to be the blue form of C. labiata. I am
not sure of semantics, but in this case I think coerulea is in fact a
description. But whatever. In honor of this thread, I will bring some C.
labiata var. coerulea for my sales table at the EOC next weekend. Mention
R.G.O. and I'll knock 25% off the marked price.
Pat Brennan
Venger's Orchids
Aren't we back to square one? The premise I make is that the color is
not truly blue. A plant label is meaningless, totally. It's completely
reliant upon a long paper trail, a growers honesty and education, even
whether or not he or she is too lazy to write the information out
completely. Eyesight and marketing play a part too. Sure, I have some
nice stuff around here that I "could" market as blue, and why not?
There's a definite following for "blue" plants. But I won't. I don't
believe they are truly blue. Labeling them as such doesn't make it so. I
for one won't stoop so low as to take a plant that sorta looks blue-ish
and market it as such. To do otherwise would make me nothing more than a
thief. This game isn't just about labels and colors, it's about ethics
and reality. To the best of my knowledge, "blue" does not exist in any
Orchid genome. There's a few people out here holding Ph.D's that would
agree. -Rod-
Pat Brennan
Barbara Andrewjeski <Orc...@OrchidCloset.com> wrote in article
<37EE92AD...@OrchidCloset.com>
> . . .
> Was just watching the Packers vs the Vikings and thought ... "What if I
tweaked
> the hue thingy on the TV just a little bit..." Yeah, there it is! A
lovely shade
> of coerulea on those "other" guys... LOL That would be Minnesotia
vikingii var.
> coerulea... :)
>
> Barbara
> ~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
> ...Orchid Auction: http://OrchidCloset.com/cgi-bin/auction.cgi
>
Hey Barbara,
Was just wondering what color genes you had to add and/or remove from the
Minnesotia vikingii genome to convert it to the blue form (Minnesotia
vikingii var coerulea). Inquiring minds want to know.
Pat Brennan
Venger's Orchids
>
> So we know you don't think it's nice to market "blue" orchids. You dislike the
> judging system and do not market plants based on awards. Anyone who disagrees or
> competes with you is scum on your shoes... Big Deal. I think the real point here
> is that coerulea forms of some orchids exist. We call them that because we can
> see the difference. No, they are not Navy blue, or sky blue or baby blue, but
> compared to the "normal" coloration of the species, they are blu-er, maybe just a
> different shade, more toward lavendar. Blue is not always your version of it.
> Let it rest...
>
> Barbara
Once again you've jumped in on another's conversation to settle a
personal score. While anyone is welcome to join this thread, leave it to
you to go and start in on ME, and forget about the subject at hand. You
talk about "let it rest"? I'll say again, Miss Stalker, "Hell hath no
fury like a woman scorned." Someday, you'll grow up, get fixed or
something. -Rod-
Venger's Orchids
>
> Oh, oh here we go again. This is so "sad" it makes me cerulean!
Too right Wendy. But I won't allow Barb to put footprints on my back. If
she wants full disclosure, I can do that. I've protected her for 3
years, even as she's come right here, time after time, and twisted the
knife. No more. That's nothing more than self-abuse. I think Barb better
lie low for awhile. -Rod-
Keith Benson DVM
Venger's Orchids wrote:
>
> Wendy wrote:
> >
> > Oh, oh here we go again. This is so "sad" it makes me cerulean!
>
> Too right Wendy. But I won't allow Barb to put footprints on my back. If
> she wants full disclosure, I can do that. I've protected her for 3
> years, even as she's come right here, time after time, and twisted the
> knife. No more. That's nothing more than self-abuse. I think Barb better
> lie low for awhile. -Rod-
Soooo - what on earth does any of this have to do with the term
"peloric"? Amazing how just about any thread over 5 messages long
degrades into this sort of thing.
Keith "isn't this whole orchid thing supposed to be just a fun pastime
anyhoo?" Benson
PS - It doesn't take a genius to change a header to a more appropriate
description
Venger's Orchids
Howdy Keith,
It's oddly appropriate, as Pelorics are mutants. As is this thread :)
I'd prefer to let sleeping dogs lie, but that's out of my hands. If
anyone thinks I'm enjoying this, they're mistaken. I have much more
important and pressing problems to deal with. I simply will not be trod
upon. Here's hoping that it dies here.... -Rod-
Wendy
news:37EED0...@vengers.com...
> Barbara Andrewjeski wrote:
> >
> > Venger's Orchids wrote:
> >
Barbara Andrewjeski
Venger's Orchids wrote:
> Wendy wrote:
> >
> > Oh, oh here we go again. This is so "sad" it makes me cerulean!
>
> Too right Wendy. But I won't allow Barb to put footprints on my back. If
> she wants full disclosure, I can do that. I've protected her for 3
> years, even as she's come right here, time after time, and twisted the
> knife. No more. That's nothing more than self-abuse. I think Barb better
> lie low for awhile. -Rod-
>
Rod,
That's the tack that most abusers take with their victims... "Shut up or
I'll make it bad for you." There is nothing to disclose. There are no
buttons to push. You have nothing over me, so stop being a bully.
Barbara
Mick Fournier
Die? Oh no... this will be your worst nightmare.
Mick
>
> It's oddly appropriate, as Pelorics are mutants. As is this thread :)
> I'd prefer to let sleeping dogs lie, but that's out of my hands. If
> anyone thinks I'm enjoying this, they're mistaken. I have much more
> important and pressing problems to deal with. I simply will not be trod
> upon. Here's hoping that it dies here.... -Rod-
Mick Fournier
> > Barbara
>
> Once again you've jumped in on another's conversation to settle a
> personal score. While anyone is welcome to join this thread, leave it to
> you to go and start in on ME, and forget about the subject at hand. You
> talk about "let it rest"? I'll say again, Miss Stalker, "Hell hath no
> fury like a woman scorned." Someday, you'll grow up, get fixed or
> something. -Rod-
>
> Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids
> http://www.vengers.com/
> Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
> Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
=====================================================
Venger's Orchids <ven...@vengers.com> wrote in message
news:37EEEE...@vengers.com...
> Wendy wrote:
> >
> > Oh, oh here we go again. This is so "sad" it makes me cerulean!
>
> Too right Wendy. But I won't allow Barb to put footprints on my back. If
> she wants full disclosure, I can do that. I've protected her for 3
> years, even as she's come right here, time after time, and twisted the
> knife. No more. That's nothing more than self-abuse. I think Barb better
> lie low for awhile. -Rod-
>
> Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids
> http://www.vengers.com/
> Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
> Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
======================================================
Rod,
These are two very strange letters from you indeed.
My dictionary describes scorned as meaning, "reject or dismiss as
contemptible or unworthy".
I recall you also using the words "woman scorned" a few weeks back in the
Sanders & Denise thread to describe Barbara. When I hear the word scorned I
think of the woman scorned as in a love affair... that is the most popular
association with the "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" reference that
I can think of. Is this the illusion you are trying to paint by innuendo
for RGO to believe? Are you indeed a Don Juan Love-Machine and women fall
head over heels for you after stalking you? Must you then scorn these women
in order to remain faithful to your one true love in life (ie your
computer)? Please correct me if I have interpreted your assertions
incorrectly, but I do believe it would be timely for you to explain to RGO
just exactly what you are trying to say about Barbara in more detail.
I am just so confused, Rod. I have seen the most recent photos of you and
other than one or two twisted swampwomen (from the Florida swamps) I can't
imagine any woman getting scorned by you. Help me here... am I missing
something? Unless of course you are "carrying" 15 lbs out of your miserable
129 lb carcass in the "you-know-where" department... is that it Rod? Are
you really a ladies' man "scorning" women left and right? Come on you
little rascal... you can tell the Mickster... is that it? Are you really
"packing" the big one "down there" and just beating the women off?
Hubba-hubba!
But, I don't think so... 15 pounds "down there" would only leave 2 ounces in
your head... and we know that's not true... you have 4 ounces in your
head... or what's left of it. Have another smoke.
And she should grow up you say? I am under the impression she is over 21
now and indeed a grown-up... do you know something about her that we don't?
Is she not grown-up? And fixed... how should she be fixed? What is fixed?
Is fixed a euphemism for terminated? Should Barbara be terminated? How do
you do that, Rod?
You have "protected" Barbara for 3 years... protected her from what? Why
does she need a poor-excuse of a man like you to protect her? Protect her
from ringers on the internet? Protect her from that nasty Evila Denise
Johnson? Did you protect her from Denise Johnson? If you didn't then why
did you not protect her? Where were you then?
And has Barbara really been twisting the knife in your back? Well, if so
then please have the decency to show us those pictures also... but no butt
shots... all right? Your last set of surprise photos kept most people awake
in nightmares for two weeks... your butt shot will probably keep 'em up for
another two weeks in complete horror.
Rod, I have been watching Barbara's postings to you for the last year. It's
been a little dig here or a little dig there, but nothing like the killer
shots you've suffered under other more brutal hands. Why the attack on
Barbara? Were you one of those third grade bullies in school that used to
beat up on the little girls? Come on... we're all friends here, you can
tell us. Is Barbara an extension of one of those third grade girls that
finally stood up to you and kicked your whimpy ass in front of your
classmate buddies? Just what is it that drives you to attack her with
veiled threats? Or, are you "really" just looking for a good
"housecleaning" by a woman? Is that it? Are you drumming up candidates for
that kinky job? You are one confusing shell of a man... I just can't figure
you out.
I am so confused. I need to write more after I get my thoughts better
organized.
I'll be back.
Mick
PS... the Atlantic Ocean has just heaped the Antirod (ie Mick) back on
shore... I can breathe again... my "blue" fingers are coming back to life.
You know I just live to squelch you and your ilk when you personally attack
anyone on
RGO.
Venger's Orchids
>
> Venger's Orchids wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Oh, oh here we go again. This is so "sad" it makes me cerulean!
> >
> > Too right Wendy. But I won't allow Barb to put footprints on my back. If
> > she wants full disclosure, I can do that. I've protected her for 3
> > years, even as she's come right here, time after time, and twisted the
> > knife. No more. That's nothing more than self-abuse. I think Barb better
> > lie low for awhile. -Rod-
> >
>
>
> That's the tack that most abusers take with their victims... "Shut up or
> I'll make it bad for you." There is nothing to disclose. There are no
> buttons to push. You have nothing over me, so stop being a bully.
>
> Barbara
Nothing to disclose? Then I won't go into the fact that you're a common
stalker..that you once threatened to force me to remove files from my
system if I didn't treat you and your friends better...If you'll recall,
I went ahead and immediately removed the files. And you you claimed to
have forced me to do so. And there's more. Nothing to disclose. There's
nothing I want to disclose. I want to let it die. But you keep coming
back, sticking the knife into me. If you want to disagree with ANYTHING
I say regarding Orchid culture, go right ahead. But for the last 3 years
you've made each such statement a personal one. No more. I COULD go thru
the archives and pull each and every one of them up and refresh
everyone's memory. Would you like that? I wouldn't. That's the
difference between you and I. You like to torment, I do so only in self
defense. -Rod-
Venger's Orchids
> Rod, I have been watching Barbara's postings to you for the last year. It's
> been a little dig here or a little dig there
> I am so confused. I need to write more after I get my thoughts better
> organized.
You said it. Where's the confusion? -Rod-
Mick Fournier
<CLIP>
</CLIP>
> It's oddly appropriate, as Pelorics are mutants. As is this thread :)
> I'd prefer to let sleeping dogs lie, but that's out of my hands. If
> anyone thinks I'm enjoying this, they're mistaken. I have much more
> important and pressing problems to deal with. I simply will not be trod
> upon. Here's hoping that it dies here.... -Rod-
>
> Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids
> http://www.vengers.com/
> Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
> Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rod,
I wanted to ease off a bit on you but everytime I see that happy face symbol
in your above note I feel.... well, I feel I owe you one more good shot if
you know what I mean?
Let's go back and dredge up some more of your similar RGO schtick... you
know the type I am sure... you lob a molotov cocktail at someone then
retreat to a safe haven and say, "let's have a truce and call it bygones"...
kind of like the crap you're trying to pull in the above note. Know what I
mean?
Let's dredge up the "Rod versus Jerry in the $5000 fertilizer
competition/grow-off".
Remember back when you said....
Venger's Orchids <ven...@vengers.com> wrote in message
news:37DC4...@vengers.com...
| Mick Fournier wrote:
|
| [SNIP]
|
| > 7. The contest is two years long for 10 plants. Each month on the 4th
day
|
| I've already refused. But 10 plants is a joke. 1000 would be more my
| speed. My original experiments utilized 96 plants for each group. Jerry
| provided the fertilizer, free of charge, knowing I was going to run
| these tests.... No matter. I definitely have other plans. -Rod-
|
| Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids
| http://www.vengers.com/
| Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
| Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You'll recall I made a polite reply to that note of yours... but I was lying
then. I need to confess up now and clear my conscience... otherwise I won't
be able to sleep during my nap this afternoon with full peace of mind.
This following note has been setting in my draft box and truly reflects what
I really wanted to say on 9/12/99... but didn't:
Rod,
Your speed is 1000 plants, Ha! You probably don't have 5,000 plants in
that entire shack you call a greenhouse behind your garage. How many plants
do you have? And, just how big is your greenhouse? 40' x 40'? 60' x 60'?
1000' x 1000'?... a football field-size greenhouse? A garage? I think we
all know, but it would be nice to actually hear the specifics straight from
the horse's mouth and not second-hand. A greenhouse picture might be nice
also. Got any we can see?
You should cut the phony illusion, your real persona is not even 1/10 the
bluster you would have RGO newbies believe. So tell you what you big "busy"
man with so many other important plans.... Let's get Jerry to agree to
growing 4 chosen plants, you take your best 4 plants from a million plants,
winner takes $5000, and two years. Even a slacker like you should be able
to handle that task easy enough just growing a half dozen orchids
close-at-hand in your kitchen window with daily attention whilst you're
washing the dishes.
For 2 years Jerry Grow lovers have put up with your biased warped test
results on this fertilizer and I am sure they are thoroughly fed up with
hearing over-and-over your continual warped test reports. I know I am.
Jerry gave you a fair gentlemen's opportunity to put your money where your
mouth is... Or where your mouth was.... or where you mouth should have
been.... er.... will be. And today (ie 9/12/99) like the snake you are you
declined to put up or shut up and now you're slithering back into that hole
you hide in when the heat is turned up on your sorry
mis-informing/fact-bending butt.
You are the most loathesome type of human being there is, a deceiver and a
back-biter with no courage to stand up for his principles to even make a
half-hearted attempt to defend your "position" in a fair test of
fertilizers. You're pathetic.
Mick
---------------------
Rod,
I feel so much better now that I have been able to get this previous lie off
my chest. Thanks for letting me take you away from your otherwise "busy"
plans to vent my true feelings. This has been troubling me for several
weeks and now I feel much better. I hope you do also.
Thanks again,
Mick
PS... Hey about those Minnesota Vikings in the last 12 seconds. Wow... that
was some game!
Mick Fournier
> Mick Fournier wrote:
>
> > Rod, I have been watching Barbara's postings to you for the last year.
It's
> > been a little dig here or a little dig there
>
> > I am so confused. I need to write more after I get my thoughts better
> > organized.
>
> You said it. Where's the confusion? -Rod-
>
> Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids
> http://www.vengers.com/
> Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
> Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
Rod,
Well, after seeing this mini-post by you I am no longer confused... I
thought you might want to contest a few items, but I see you agree with
everything. All the confusion has vanished in a flask... er... flash. (But
seriously folks, for all your flashing needs go to: www.OrchidFlask.com ).
That's admirable... you're finally becoming a man and facing reality.
Congratulations Rod... that's a step in the right direction. Now I think
you should apologize to Barbara via RGO and we will all go back into
"normal" mode. I trust you will be a gentleman in this regard and I look
forward to your prompt response back to this thread.
Mick
Venger's Orchids
>
> You are the most loathesome type of human being there is, a deceiver and a
> back-biter with no courage to stand up for his principles to even make a
> half-hearted attempt to defend your "position" in a fair test of
> fertilizers. You're pathetic.
>
> Mick
True to form, Mick. Re-read my post. I did the experiments with JERRY's
full knowledge. Two years ago. At the end of the experiment I sent him
the URL of the results so he could take a looks-see for himself. He had
NO reply. Only now does he decide further tests are needed? Whaffor? I
have no "position" on Jerry's goo. Only that it is not right for my
conditions. If you'll look thru the test results, you won't find one bad
word regarding Jerry's goo, nor even a good one about Dynagro. I only
presented the results. Those results can be seen at:
http://vengers.com/culture/trial.htm
The fair test has been run. The only deceit going on here is your
throwing gasoline onto a smouldering fire. I note that YOU haven't taken
up the challenge. I lost interest when the tests were finished,
satisifed that what I was doing was correct for my conditions. If you're
so interested, why don't YOU do it? Or, and we all know this is really
the case, your post was just intended to stir the kettle. Talk about
loathesome. BTW, my docs have given me a clean bill of health. No
cancer, none expected. Sorry to disappoint. You still want me to die
you'll have to come and help. If you have the courage. We know the
answer to THAT don't we? -Rod-
Mick Fournier
Now how could I challenge Jerry?... I already use his fertilizer. It would
be a Jerry's Grow versus Jerry's Grow contest. There would be no winner.
Unless you could ship some of your BS over to Florida... now that just might
be capable of beating Jerry's Grow fertilizer.
Mick
Pat Brennan
their post?
>Venger's Orchids wrote:
> . . . While anyone is welcome to join this thread, leave it to
> you to go and start in on ME, and forget about the subject at hand.
While in fact Barbara did address the subject of "our" thread.
> Barbara Andrewjeski wrote:
> . . . I think the real point here
> is that coerulea forms of some orchids exist. We call them that because
we can
> see the difference. No, they are not Navy blue, or sky blue or baby
blue, but
> compared to the "normal" coloration of the species, they are blu-er,
maybe just a
> different shade, more toward lavendar. Blue is not always your version
of it.
While what Barbara wrote about the subject on hand is something I think we
could both agree, it missed the reason I posted in the first place. I
posted because I thought it was very hypocritical of you to talk of the
virtue of keeping the terms simple and monosyllabic in one thread while
being so critical of the use of the word blue for coerulea in another
thread. The existence of coerulea forms of species is not in question.
They exist. Over history taxonomist have fought over whether these plants
were unique species or just subvarities of a species. Whole books have
been written on the subvarities of a single species. Often there are more
than one coerulean form of a species, some mutations effect only the
flower's lip while others effect the whole flower. The mutated gene that
caused the flower to be coerulean is often recessive and when crossed with
another species with the same mutated gene creates hybrids that show the
same coerulea coloring. We all know these flowers are not truly blue, it
is just the desire to keep words simple that blue is used instead of
coerulea. DA! no lies, no thievery, no label conspiracy.
Boy, I hope the topic of 'red' phals does not come up.
Talking about labels, do you really consider the labels in the plants you
sell to be totally meaningless or were you so busy babbling that you did
not take the time to think about what you wrote? I have found labels to be
pretty accurate in this business. Most growers I know pride themselves on
their accurate labeling of plants and will make good on any mistakes.
Now to the 'back stabbing' and 'knife turning'. Just what were these
personal attacks that lead to your sexist and vicious attack on Barbara?
> Barbara Andrewjeski wrote:
> > So we know you don't think it's nice to market "blue" orchids.
Well isn't that clear from this thread. "Don't think is's nice" is more
polite than using words like lie and thief.
> Barbara Andrewjeski wrote:
> > You dislike the
> > judging system and do not market plants based on awards.
Well? Haven't we read this in the past?
> Barbara Andrewjeski wrote:
> > Anyone who disagrees or
> > competes with you is scum on your shoes.
Hmm, maybe a bit strong but after watching you for over 6 years I must say
you can be rude and condescending to other experienced growers.
> Barbara Andrewjeski wrote:
> > Big Deal.
And I think that is exactly the question. Just what is the big deal that
caused these flames of yours?
Pat Brennan
Mick Fournier
>From: Venger's Orchids
>To: Mick Fournier
>Sent: Monday, September 27, 1999 6:49 PM
>Subject: Re: Rod versus Jerry in the $5000 fertilizer competition/grow-off.
>I'm waiting for my doorbell to ring. C'mon, Schmuck, come and try and
>realize your wildest dreams.
>Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids http://www.vengers.com/
>Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
>Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rod,
I have had some time to review your latest Email note to me and narrow my
"wildest dreams" down from 3 to 1 dream as you suggest.
I will make the trip to Colorado provided you agree to honor my most wildest
dream.
Here's my dream:
I ring your doorbell. It's almost midnight. The house is dark but I hear
soft ballet-type music coming from your candlelit parlor room.
You answer the door dressed in your brand new Fredericks of Hollywood
matching "blue" bunny panties and bunny brassiere under a light blue
transparent teddy. The panties must have that fuzzy bunny cotton tail in
the back or it's no deal.
I immediately notice your fuzzy blue bunny rabbit high heel slippers and
begin looking upward passing over your fuzzy Fredericks of Hollywood
ensemble. My eyes reach your face... you're wearing one of those Daffy Duck
bill masks over the lower portion of your face... your eyes are painted blue
like Mimi's eyes on the Drew Carey TV Show.
I count to 3, you start dancing across the room in ballet leaps and
pirouettes... I snap 20 quick digital photos with my trusty Sony camera and
race full speed back to Florida to post them all on my website for everyone
in RGO to see... and enjoy.
That's it. That's my wildest dream. If you agree to get the "outfit" I
will buy the tickets to Colorado for me & my crew and to buy those cute
little fuzzy bunny high heel slippers for you... and the Daffy Duck bill
mask for you also. What size shoe do you wear? What size of mask do you
wear?
Mick
PS, In my dream you also apologize to Barbara like you should have done
earlier today.
Mick Fournier
Rod,
You ask what's holding me up? Are you going to put the Fredericks of
Hollywood bunny outfit on or not so I can take the "wildest dream" bunny
pictures of you for my website? You gotta' tell me that first.
But you know.... it is very strange that you seek to have someone snuff you
out. It is almost as if you are wailing the Shakespearean cry for death in
one ear... and yet in the other ear one hears the Shakespearean line, "Me
thinks the Lady doth protest too much".
Indulge me for a minute whilst I let my mind run free with a few
off-the-wall random new ideas.
You want to commit suicide to end your miserable worthless life, but such an
action would invalidate your life insurance policy and your wife would be
left with basically nothing... owing to the fact your very rich father
disowned you several years ago. Am I getting warm? Do I at least have the
right basic premise?
You love your wife beyond all measure and you desperately want her to be
financially safe when you do depart this world. If you could incite someone
to such a degree that he/she would wipe you out in a fit of rage then your
wife could collect all the money on your life insurance policy "legally"
along with perhaps a little money from your father's estate based on some
strange condition making a payout possible to her on "your" death. Am I on
the right track Rod? At least give me a hint.
Why don't you just fake an automobile accident over a high cliff? You live
in the mountains! Do you still have a driver's license? Can you still
operate a car? Wouldn't that be easier? Rod, Rod, Rod.... you know I am
not going to be bothered with trapsing all the way up into the mountains for
such a task... I hate the cold. And don't you people in Colorado live in
igloos anyways? I couldn't handle such a cold task. Geez... what do you
think I am? A cold hearted killer? My God... get out of the house once in
a while Rod... see a movie or take in a concert or something. You're losing
touch with reality.
Rod... I bust my chops keeping you in the RGO limelight and now you want to
dump this "new" task on me? You gotta' find someone else living closer to
Colorado... can't you just hire a couple of Denver skidrow bums for that
job? I mean really... I have given you enough help over the past year...
you can't continue to keep imposing on me... it's not fair! I'm sorry...
but that's my final word. That is, if indeed my random off-the-wall
hypothesis "holds water".
Mick
PS, Regarding private Email... tsk, tsk... I don't have "inviolable"
agreement with you.... to all others on the RGO, I have such an agreement.
PS1... if you do decide to "check out" early, please apologize to Barbara
first.... it would mean a lot to her, she's real sensitive you know.
Thanks. Mick
_____________________
----- Original Message -----
From: Venger's Orchids
To: Mick Fournier
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 12:49 AM
Subject: Re: Rod's strange attack on Barbara
Mick Fournier wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> >From: Venger's Orchids
> >To: Mick Fournier
> >Sent: Monday, September 27, 1999 6:49 PM
> >Subject: Re: Rod versus Jerry in the $5000 fertilizer
competition/grow-off.
>
> >I'm waiting for my doorbell to ring. C'mon, Schmuck, come and try and
> >realize your wildest dreams.
>
> >Rod & Susan Venger, Venger's Orchids http://www.vengers.com/
> >Current Listing: lis...@vengers.com
> >Our IRC (Chat info) http://www.vengers.com/page.htm
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>You've certainly proved to everyone where your ethics lie, ie, you have
>none. Email is supposed to be inviolable. In otherwords, stupid,
>private. A bunch of people are going to be scrambling trying to figure
>out WHERE that note was posted and then they'll realize the truth. You
>broke the trust and posted a private email publically. Your weird
>conditions say much about you. You can forget that. You're just a
>coward. A psycho with an email address. You have a dream...that I should
>die. You have an address. I have a doorbell and only two hands. Surely
>you can handle me. What's holding you up? -Rod-
Susan Francis
Mick Fournier wrote:
> I like blue.... and so do my friends in Brazil. Premier orchid breeder
> Jorge Alejandro Paulete Scaglia sent this photo to me this morning. Would
> you not agree it is a very pretty Cattleya gaskelliana var suavissima?
>
> http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelsuavissima.jpg
>
> I seem to recall the word "Thief" was mentioned somewhere in the thread
> above.... well, that's the magic word for today and you know what that means
> boys and girls... yessirree kids... ole' Uncle Mick is going to have to run
> another commercial plug for The Orchid Thief book (and soon-to-be-movie)
> down these red hot cyber wires.... so get ready.... heeeerrrrrreeee it
> comes:
>
> http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/susan.html
>
> Mick
> HBI, Producer of Fine Orchids in Flask
> www.OrchidFlask.com
--
MZ
PALS
> Its a pretty PURPLE ORCHID.It is definitely not blue.
>
> Mick Fournier wrote:
>
> > I like blue.... and so do my friends in Brazil. Premier orchid breeder
> > Jorge Alejandro Paulete Scaglia sent this photo to me this morning. Would
> > you not agree it is a very pretty Cattleya gaskelliana var suavissima?
> >
> > http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelsuavissima.jpg
We're talking LILAC, LAVENDER, etc., etc. certainly NOT BLUE.
Venger's Orchids
I looked. I'll admit that not everyone sees the same thing. Our eyes are
different. But, it looks lilac to me. It's pretty, regardless. -Rod-
Mick Fournier
Yes, I see your point of view. A Cattleya gaskelliana var coerulea
would/could be more blue... you are right.
Still I rather enjoy doing an A to B flip-flop comparison with the
suavissima and a regular gaskellaina... it's kinda' neat to see the
difference.
Cattleya gaskelliana var suavissima
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelsuavissima.jpg
Cattleya gaskelliana (regular)
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelliana.jpg
Mick
------------------------------
Susan Francis <susan....@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:37F10A79...@sympatico.ca...
Its a pretty PURPLE ORCHID.It is definitely not blue.
Mick Fournier wrote:
> I like blue.... and so do my friends in Brazil. Premier orchid breeder
> Jorge Alejandro Paulete Scaglia sent this photo to me this morning. Would
> you not agree it is a very pretty Cattleya gaskelliana var suavissima?
>
> http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelsuavissima.jpg
>
Susan Francis
lilac to be a pale purple.
Mick Fournier wrote:
--
MZ
Wendy
it comes to orchids but I do know my colours. It is lavender & the other pic
is pink. I read or someone told me that there is not a true blue in orchids?
Cheers Wendynews:37F137DC...@sympatico.ca...
Al
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelsuavissima.jpg
Cattleya gaskelliana (regular)
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelliana.jpg
Okay, I would say that one of them was blue and the other was purple. Not
BLUE blue, maybe not even REAL blue, but blue none-the-less. This is the
best I can do; my color definitions have always been limited to the primary
colors. My dream to write copy for fashion magazines was dashed long
ago...yet I hope no one is confused about which of the two I would call
blue.
I'd be happy to bloom either one of them.
Al
http://www.orchidexchange.com
Al
side and compared the differences in color that way...
Al
Venger's Orchids
You're a step ahead of me, Al. Not only the differences in monitors, but
the trueness of the color of the photo and it's scan. I wonder how the
photo compares to the flower? -Rod-
Venger's Orchids
I wonder....surely there's a professional artist among us with a
detailed knowledge of color. Even a pro photographer... -Rod-
knis...@my-deja.com
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/gaskelsuavissima.jpg
I wonder....surely there's a professional artist among us with a
detailed knowledge of color. Even a pro photographer... -Rod-
Rod, would a watercolorist do for you?
I'll take the plunge and join the discussion.
First,the point about the color showing true on our monitors, or even
photograghing true, is well taken. I have a particular iris which is
"blue" (please hold your arguments on this one for now :)). BUT,
whenever I photograph it, the flower in the pictures looks "purple". I'm
beginning to think this is why so many people have trouble believing in
"blue" orchids; it may be something you have to see in person for the
"blue" to be seen. It's an elusive hue and just won't be captured on
film...I've noticed this when I've worked with scanned images of my own
watercolors. The "blue", lavender, lilac, purple shades just never look
the same on my monitor-no matter what I do with color balancing. The
color of the original painting seems to defy capture. I can get close,
but...
Second, we do, of course, all see color differently. Looking at the
two photos, I immediately said "blue" to describe "var suavissima".
Compared to the regular version of C. gaskelliana, there's no question
to my mind that the variation is blue.
Third, color theory. I'm hearing lots of references to "lilac",
"lavender", etc.-all shades of purple, right? How do you make purple?
By mixing the primary colors of red and blue (Al, are you with me
here?). There's a tremendous range of hues you can achieve doing this.
Maybe I tend to focus on the underlying tone when I see color-"var.
suavissima" definately has very "blue" undertones. Many of you are
calling it "lilac" or "lavender" because you're seeing "purple" whereas
the "blue" undertones in the purple are what stand out to me. Remember
the old optical black/white optical illusion where you were asked what
you saw in the picture, a candlestick or two people looking at each
other?
So, just my two cents worth. I think I could stand blooming either
one myself, but my first choice would be suavissima :).
Karen
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
knis...@my-deja.com
I thought of an idea to illustrate my point on underlying tones.
Imagine this: We all agree to get together in person. After signing
our wills and setting our personal effects in order, we fly off to the
agreed upon locale, preferably someplace like Maui where we can study
the color "blue" up close and personal. We bring with us a color swatch
we define as "blue". When we meet, we lay the swatches together on a
table. What now? Are all the swatches the same? Probably not. Some
will be lighter or darker, of course, but some will most likely lean
towards "red", others towards "blue" or "purple". This is the
underlying tone I'm talking about. Separately, it may be hard to
distinguish, but put all the "blues" together, and it becomes more
obvious.
The same thing works for "red"-think of all the red shades in
lipstick- or green.
Does this make any sense to anyone but me? Please excuse the rambling
and "off topic" nature......:#
Also, having trouble posting this morning-hope this doesn't end up
being a "repeat".
Ken Koellner
Forget making judgements on color when looking at scans on your monitor.
Unless the person doing the scan took exacting steps to color correct the
scanned images and you've taking exacting steps to color correct your monitor,
you absolutely can not be sure that the colors you are seeing are exactly the
colors of the original image.
Al
>By mixing the primary colors of red and blue (Al, are you with me
>here?). There's a tremendous range of hues you can achieve doing this.
> Karen
>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
Yes I am with you. I even got out my box of crayolas so I could follow
along. There are only eight colors in this box, so be gentle...
Al
Susan Lee
ven...@vengers.com wrote:
> I wonder....surely there's a professional artist among us with a
> detailed knowledge of color. Even a pro photographer... -Rod-
I am a semi-pro artist. (I hav'nt quit my day job yet though.) I'm quite
handy with colors. I make this proposition with a greedy gleam in my eye, and
a tongue in my cheek.....Send me one each of the Cattleya gaskellianas in bud
or bloom. I will happily render an opinion as to the hue of each.
Susan
(Interested people may view some of my work here:
http://www.geocities.com/~marylois/Susanpix.html)
knis...@my-deja.com
follow
> along. There are only eight colors in this box, so be gentle...
>
> Al
>
out, hmmm?
BTW, if you really want to make your head spin with the subjective
nature of color identification, check out some dictionary definitions
like I did. (I'm supposed to be cooking and cleaning, but this was more
fun.)
lilac: a variable color averaging a moderate purple
lavender: a variable color averaging a pale purple
purple: any of various colors that fall about midway between blue and
red in hue
blue: portion of the color spectrum lying between green and violet
violet: any of a group of colors of a reddish blue hue
I will stop now, but see my point? VERY subjective subject here, even
coming up with a theoretical definition. Throw in the problems
associated with color reproduction in photography and viewing on our
computer monitors and things really get muddy.
(Which would be any of a group of colors of a brownish hue......)
Al, we're going to have to get you a bigger box of crayons :)
Karen
knis...@my-deja.com
Let me know if you get any takers here, will you :).
(Why didn't I think of this?)
Pat Brennan
of 8 like Al or the box of 64 with the shaper in the back. When I saw the
picture I thought it looked like the same color I painted my bedroom in my
early teens 'grape sherbet'. When I was looking for peach colored paint
for my house I when through countless number of different paint chips and
tried 5 different quarts before I found the shade I was looking for. If we
were looking for the paint that closely matched the color of the photo I
think we could find near matches in the set of blue chips, the set of
lavender chips, AND the set of gray chips. RHS has developed and sells a
standard set of color chips for use in describing flower colors. I have
seen AOS judges trying to use these chips to describe flowers. Sure enough
two judges were having an argument over which chip matched the flower they
were describing. :)
Pat Brennan
Al <A...@OrchidExchange.com> wrote in article
<7st1s2$qth$1...@autumn.news.rcn.net>...
>
> >By mixing the primary colors of red and blue (Al, are you with me
> >here?). There's a tremendous range of hues you can achieve doing this.
>
> > Karen
>
knis...@my-deja.com
(audible giggles here) My "crayons" are tubes of watercolors, but I
do work with under a dozen. I like to work with a limited number of
pigments and mix my own colors.
I was thinking about the paint chip idea after my last post and was
interested to hear you talk of the judges trying to use the RHS chips
for judging purposes. I don't know if we will ever be able to totally
nail down some of these colors. It seems to me that there is a lot of
*interpretation* involved in color identification and our
interpretations say as much about who and what we are as they do about
anything else.
Still, it's fun to talk about it :). For myself, I don't worry too
much about coming up with a hard and fast name-I just go with what looks
good to me. They'd probably never let me judge orchids...
Prem Subrahmanyam
>
> First,the point about the color showing true on our monitors, or even
> photograghing true, is well taken. I have a particular iris which is
> "blue" (please hold your arguments on this one for now :)). BUT,
> whenever I photograph it, the flower in the pictures looks "purple". I'm
> beginning to think this is why so many people have trouble believing in
> "blue" orchids; it may be something you have to see in person for the
> "blue" to be seen. It's an elusive hue and just won't be captured on
> film...I've noticed this when I've worked with scanned images of my own
> watercolors. The "blue", lavender, lilac, purple shades just never look
> the same on my monitor-no matter what I do with color balancing. The
> color of the original painting seems to defy capture. I can get close,
> but...
Apparently, the introduction of a fair amount of pink into the photography
of a "blue" flower is a common problem. There is a species of lily-like
native flower growing here in northern Florida, the blue spiderwort.
However, when you try to photograph it, it comes out bright pink...
apparently, the UV light reflected by the plant tends to expose the
dyes on the film differently than what your eyes see. The commonly offered
trick to getting a truer blue for this flower is to photograph it on an
overcast day, using a UV filter on your camera. To further muddy the mix,
there is apparently a pink spiderwort native to these same regions, but I
have never seen one personally.
It is often quite hard to get a scan to give you exactly the right color,
owing to the way the CCD chips used in scanners sample the color...what I
do is take the scan into a paint program, like Fractal Design Painter or
Corel Photopaint, and adjust the hue of the colors until they more closely
match the actual color. NOTE: this is fairly subjective, as my monitor
may have a different color response than someone else's.
And just to add another flower to the debate, the dayflowers that grow here
in northern FL have VERY blue petals...there could be absolutely no debate
when viewing these that they are indeed blue. I've also heard that a few
terrestrial orchids from Australia are truly blue, as opposed to purplish.
> Second, we do, of course, all see color differently. Looking at the
> two photos, I immediately said "blue" to describe "var suavissima".
> Compared to the regular version of C. gaskelliana, there's no question
> to my mind that the variation is blue.
> Third, color theory. I'm hearing lots of references to "lilac",
> "lavender", etc.-all shades of purple, right? How do you make purple?
> By mixing the primary colors of red and blue (Al, are you with me
> here?). There's a tremendous range of hues you can achieve doing this.
> Maybe I tend to focus on the underlying tone when I see color-"var.
> suavissima" definately has very "blue" undertones. Many of you are
> calling it "lilac" or "lavender" because you're seeing "purple" whereas
> the "blue" undertones in the purple are what stand out to me. Remember
> the old optical black/white optical illusion where you were asked what
> you saw in the picture, a candlestick or two people looking at each
> other?
Perception of color is dependent on a number of factors. First, it's
possible that a viewer has a mild form of color blindness that might
cause a different perception of color. The lighting under which someone
views a flower might also influence their perception of the color, due to
the frequency makeup of the light...in sunlight and incandescent light,
reds are more prominent, while under fluorescent lights, reds are somewhat
muted, and "blue" flowers look much bluer. Then, there is also the
psychological perception of color...I tend to see the blue undertones
in a flower and call it "blue" as well...my wife sees it and calls it
"purple".
Personally, I don't think it would be lying to call a flower what is commonly
accepted in the parlance as "blue". Perhaps the inclusion of quotes and some
sort of footnote explaining that in the seller's opinion, that the flowers
aren't completely blue, but instead are a bluish shade of purple would help
even more. It is certainly a strong statement to call anyone who sells a
"blue" orchid a liar and thief.
--> Prem
===================================================================
Prem Subrahmanyam <pr...@noblestar.net> or <pr...@nettally.com>
- Animator, programmer, and orchid and fossil nut extraordinaire...
- DNRC Title: Minister of Lightwave 3d Plugin Design Foolishness
- Home - http://www.PremDesign.com
"Insert witticism here..."
Venger's Orchids
Karen,
An immediate problem comes up. If we all meet in Maui, who's going to
want to look at swatches? We'll all be raiding greenhouses :) -Rod-
knis...@my-deja.com
No one here would ever RAID greenhouses, would they?!
Anyway, if we're ALL in Maui, there won't be any of us left to raid
the greenhouses...
Is there anyone in the group who would pass up a trip to Maui and the
fourm on color identification to raid greenhouses, hmmm?
knis...@my-deja.com
We have the dayflowers here, too, and they are VERY blue. As to the
problems retaining blue hues in photography, different light, etc.-I
think different light probably does affect the amount of blue we see in
a flower. Think of photographing an opal, or mother-of-pearl. I think
it would be hard to really capture the range of colors you might see in
person. I'm thinking the "blue" shades in some of these orchids must be
the same.
What do you think of the Maui idea as brought forth in another part of
this thread? Pick out your swatch and I'll see if I can come up with a
travel agent and a babysitter-we'll all head out to ponder "blue" :)!
Mick Fournier
Your analysis is perfect. Blue orchids must/should always be shot on an
overcast day with a UV filter if your are outside.
I never use or allow fluorescent lights to be used in my photo work.. they
will corrupt the final shot too much.
Fluorescent light will turn the "flashy" Leptotes bicolor lip blue...
incandescent lighting will give you the proper color.
http://www.gate.net/~fourmick/flasks/leptotesbicolor.jpg
I enjoyed reading your observations. Well done.
Mick
----------------------------
Ref:
Prem Subrahmanyam <pr...@noblestar.net> wrote in message
news:37F23F4E...@noblestar.net...
> knis...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
Venger's Orchids
>
> Rod,
> No one here would ever RAID greenhouses, would they?!
> Anyway, if we're ALL in Maui, there won't be any of us left to raid
> the greenhouses...
>
> Is there anyone in the group who would pass up a trip to Maui and the
> fourm on color identification to raid greenhouses, hmmm?
>
Karen,
You set up the table and swatches, I'll drop in if I can :) -Rod-
Wendy
looking for the true blue. *grin* Cheers Wendy
<knis...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7su3j6$q5n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Prem Subrahmanyam
>
> In article <37F150...@vengers.com>,
> ven...@vengers.com wrote:
>
> > I wonder....surely there's a professional artist among us with a
> > detailed knowledge of color. Even a pro photographer... -Rod-
>
> I am a semi-pro artist. (I hav'nt quit my day job yet though.) I'm quite
> handy with colors. I make this proposition with a greedy gleam in my eye, and
> a tongue in my cheek.....Send me one each of the Cattleya gaskellianas in bud
> or bloom. I will happily render an opinion as to the hue of each.
>
Here, here...as a digital artist, I play with color a lot, too. I think
I could render a professional opinion on the "blueness" of a flower. If
one could toss in a few nice blue Vanda-types as well, I'd be even happier.
I especially like V. coerulescens with its small growing habit and its
grape-scented flowers.
Prem Subrahmanyam
>
> Prem,
> We have the dayflowers here, too, and they are VERY blue. As to the
> problems retaining blue hues in photography, different light, etc.-I
> think different light probably does affect the amount of blue we see in
> a flower. Think of photographing an opal, or mother-of-pearl. I think
> it would be hard to really capture the range of colors you might see in
> person. I'm thinking the "blue" shades in some of these orchids must be
> the same.
Remember...opal and mother-of-pearl are not colored in the traditional
sense...they get their color from thin films that end up amplifying
certain light wavelengths and de-amplifying others, whereas "true"
color involves a molecule absorbing light and then re-emitting a portion
of the light spectrum. Many incandescent bird feathers, like those of
peacocks and hummingbirds work by the same principle of light
interference, rather than being truly "colored".
> What do you think of the Maui idea as brought forth in another part of
> this thread? Pick out your swatch and I'll see if I can come up with a
> travel agent and a babysitter-we'll all head out to ponder "blue" :)!
>
Why Maui? I'd vote for meeting in south Floria, near the Redlands
area...lots of greenhouses to raid down there after we compare color
swatches. There's also a pretty good bunch in the Orlando area as well...
AWOO, Tropic 1, and a few others.
Ken Woodward
thousands of different orchids named red that aren't really red, but some
shade of pink. Should "Lava Burst" imply fiery red? Granted, there are
more good reds than there are good blues. Alba doesn't always mean white.
The only thing that's fairly certain is that green is green... or is it?
Growers may as well tell people that the only way to be sure of the color is
to see it in bloom and even then the color may change as the flower ages and
may not be quite the same the next time it blooms.
_________________
__ Ken Woodward ___
____Newton, MA___
Prem Subrahmanyam <pr...@noblestar.net> wrote in message
news:37F23F4E...@noblestar.net...
> knis...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
knis...@my-deja.com
> The only thing that's fairly certain is that green is green... or is
it?
I questioned someone recently about the "alba" issue and was directed
to p.75 of Rebecca Northern's Home Orchid Growing, Forth Ed. This says
that, although there was for a while a tendency to call white orchids
with purple lips "alba's", albas are, in fact, *all white* with no trace
of color. So, technically, *alba* does in fact mean white, although
everyone may not use the term correctly.
Ok, I am now prepared for some of you experts to jump in :).
I do, however, agree with the statements concerning *red* and *green*.
Maybe we could have swatch parties for these colors when we're through
with *blue*...
Wendy
<knis...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7t12c3$vou$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Alba doesn't always mean white.
> > The only thing that's fairly certain is that green is green... or is
> it?
>
> to p.75 of Rebecca Northern's Home Orchid Growing, Forth Ed. This says
> that, although there was for a while a tendency to call white orchids
> with purple lips "alba's", albas are, in fact, *all white* with no trace
> of color. So, technically, *alba* does in fact mean white, although
> everyone may not use the term correctly.
>
> Ok, I am now prepared for some of you experts to jump in :).
> I do, however, agree with the statements concerning *red* and *green*.
> Maybe we could have swatch parties for these colors when we're through
> with *blue*...
>
> Karen
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Good idea Karen, but red could be dangerous! Green now here's a chance for
all the novices. *grin* Cheers Wendy
knis...@my-deja.com
> area...lots of greenhouses to raid down there after we compare color
> swatches. There's also a pretty good bunch in the Orlando area as
well...
> AWOO, Tropic 1, and a few others.
>
> --> Prem
Prem,
Why Maui? Just because someone recently suggested it as a good place
to study the color "blue". South Fla. could work, I imagine.....
Alynne7725
>Was just watching the Packers vs the Vikings and thought ... "What if I
>tweaked
>the hue thingy on the TV just a little bit..." Yeah, there it is! A lovely
>shade
>of coerulea on those "other" guys... LOL That would be Minnesotia vikingii
>var.
>coerulea... :)
sure. not a football fan, myself--but will admit that I enjoy watching "Fawlty
Towers" with all the people turned green....(makes it just that much funnier!)
of course, I have noticed that photos of my orchids dont always come out to
look exactly like the colors--and do scanned photos look the same as the photos
on my monitor or on my webbrowser? not always!
BTW--I've noticed the same thing about photos of me! I KNOW I look better than
that! ;) (and I dont just mean the color!)
Alynne
"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and
get used to the idea." -- Robert A. Heinlein
Alynne7725
>area...lots of greenhouses to raid down there after we compare color
>swatches.
true enough--I'll go for that. now, if we can just get rid of the rain clouds
around So. Fla. we might be able to discern the "true colors".
knis...@my-deja.com
rain clouds
> around So. Fla. we might be able to discern the "true colors".
> Alynne
You know, I've been thinking about this Maui vs. S. Fla. issue and it
occurs to me that if I'm going to hope and dream of getting away to an
idyllic, blue hued locale someday, S. Fla. just isn't gonna cut it.
Maui or bust....:)