Garden Design
Chris Kenway
I am looking for garden design software/planner to help me design and plan
the garden in my new home also some books that might help. My new garden is
laid to lawn (I use the term lightly) and is about 2 acres in size with a
few odd trees thrown in. I want to have different 'themes' in the garden
like a wild garden area, water features, formal garden area etc.
I know nothing about gardening, have trouble telling a weed from a plant
most of the time. Any help will be most welcome.
Rodger Whitlock
Artistic vision is what you need, not plantsmanship. A 2-acre
garden is large enough to indulge in Capability Brown-like
landscape design that is impossible in a smaller space. No
program is capable of the imagination and vision you need, even
if the cyber-idiots at Microsoft think otherwise. So let your
garden software be the servant: use it to plot existing features
and keep track of your proposed design, but don't even think of
letting it make any design decisions.
As for themes: It's all very well to have themes within the
garden, but the trick lies in tying the themed areas together. My
own garden is pretty much single-themed, in your sense: mostly
perennials, some trees and shrubs, with some large areas of lawn.
It's 0.4 acres (big for a suburban lot here, but only one-fifth
the size of your place).
It seems to me that in these larger gardens, you want to have
variety of vista, to coin a phrase. That is, in some places you
want to have the sense of a private, enclosed, even confined,
space, but in others you want long, spacious, open vistas. You
accomplish this by planting trees and large shrubs to divide up
the garden into rooms and corridors, so to speak. Within each
room or corridor, you can then focus on a theme; perhaps at that
point garden software might help you figure out appropriate
plantings on the smaller prevailing scale.
Those "few odd trees" you mention need careful consideration.
Without seeing your place, I can't say if they are (a) ancient,
decadent specimens beyond salvage that should be removed
forthwith or (b) mature specimens that can be incorporated into
the backbone of the new landscape. Or maybe they are immature
specimens lacking both presence and distinction -- in that case,
you may want to retain some and get rid of others. The thing is,
you can't grow a mature tree at all quickly -- it takes a decade
or two at the least -- so don't go hacking these down without a
*lot* of careful thought first.
Let me assume that these "few odd trees" are in fact mature
specimens in good condition, reasonably shapely, not too crowded
together, etc etc. IOW, worth preserving.
Were I in your shoes, I'd try to identify a suitable location for
at least one very long vista; in a two-acre place, this would be
(at a guess) about 300 feet long. I have a 200-foot vista at one
point (my lot is a very odd shape), and it gives an incredible
sense of spaciousness. The vista need not be uninterrupted; mine
is broken in two by a parrotia and a cytisus battandieri on
either side that meet; you can see through their branches but
only when you physically pass through do you realize just how
long the vista really is. I think this makes my garden, at least
as far as the macro-layout is concerned.
A few shorter vistas (corridors) at angles to the main line will
divide up the place nicely and within that framework you can then
develop themed areas.
One important point: two acres is a *big* garden. Unless you have
deep pockets and can pay for regular help, be very cautious lest
you end up with a garden that you are unable to maintain.
Somewhere I've read that a single full-time gardener can maintain
five acres of trees and shrubs (I suppose lawn counts in this
too), but it takes five full-time gardeners to maintain a single
acre of rock garden, which is at the other end of the scale.
In my own garden, a lot of the perennials are woodlanders and I
mulch heavily with leaves, conifer needles, etc. Leaves that fall
on the lawn are simply raked straight onto the adjoining beds.
Only by doing this can I keep the place from going to the dogs.
Those areas with a more classic grouping of perennials take
endless hand weeding to look good and demand a disproportionate
amount of my time.
I hope these rather disconnected thoughts give you some help.
--
Rodger Whitlock
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Chris Kenway
"JennyC" <Jen...@chello.nl> wrote in message
news:aca820$o3utj$1...@ID-91345.news.dfncis.de...
>
SNIP
> Hi Chris,
> Welcome to the wonderful world of gardening and URG :~)
>
> You will get loads of reply's here telling you not to bother with
> computer design progs - none of them are much good !
>
> Go down the library - get a load of books
> Go look at lots of other peoples gardens
> Look at the URG webring sites :
> http://www.tmac.clara.net/urgring/urgring1.htm
> Buy some large pieces of paper, several pencils and a rubber
> Ponder................
> Design it yourself :~)
>
> Here's a couple of handy sites that might inspire you:
>
> British garden design (history - examples) :
> http://www.gardenvisit.com/t/c0.html
> Garden Design : http://www.ukgardening.co.uk/design.asp
> Marshalls (nice pictures!) : http://www.gardenliving.co.uk/
> Dairmund Gavins before/after pictures :
> http://www.bbcamerica.com/genre/home_living/homefront_in_the_garden/hf
> _before.jsp
> Decking : http://www.universal-decking.co.uk/design.htm
>
> Hope that helps :~)
> Jenny
>
>
Many thanks for the above info, I shall enjoy browsing the websites and 'the
ring'.
The reason for the software is to enable me to chose plants etc and be able
to get a rough idea what it will look like. I think the final design will be
transcribed onto paper from which I will then work. I rather liked the idea
with some of the programs that you can 'walk' through the garden in 3D and
then see how the sun casts it's shadow at different times of the day.
Once again many thanks.
Chris
Chris Kenway
news:aca92h$pb0$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
>
> "Chris Kenway" <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:ac9do4$r79$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
Snip
>
> Best advice for a garden of that size if you are truly a novice gardener
is
> to use the services of a Garden Designer.
> Either, find a designer known to someone you know/trust or contact the
> society of Garden Designers who will provide you with a list of Full
> Members. If you have a sizeable budget, you should interview several
> designers from the list provided. If you have a big budget you should pay
a
> shortlist of three to produce concept designs and choose the
design/designer
> you prefer. If following the latter route, a two acre garden would justify
a
> commercial survey to be used by each designer.
>
> If you really do want to do the job yourself, I would still advise using a
> Designer - not to produce a design but for a day or half day consultancy
to
> asses the site with you and talk you through the possibilities.
>
> In selecting a designer do be careful to use one who has experience of
your
> size of site, there are a number of people who specialise in the large
> country garden of the type you describe.
>
> None of the software available will do the job for you - at best they are
an
> inadequate drafting tool.
>
Many thanks for your reply. I have to come clean a bit and tell you that the
garden is in France, South of France to be exact. Whilst I am learning
French I am not that good as to be able to talk compidently to a French
landscape gardener and I will be on a limited budget. I do expect to take
several years developing the garden so it will be a long project.
In one of my other replies I have mentioned the reason for wanting the
software and the type of features I am looking for. Comments I have seen
against these packages in amazon.co.uk have not numbered many so it is a
little difficult to work out which is the better one. I really want to use
it as a aid rather than a tool if you know what I mean.
Thanks again
Chris
Chris Kenway
news:aca9qn$vao$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Hi,
>
> I have purchased three different software packages and none of them are as
> good as pencil and paper for design, but what they do have is plant
> encyclopaedias which have filters so that you can select plants according
to
> colour, flowering time, height etc That is quite a useful feature.
>
> regards
>
> robin
>
Which ones did you buy and if forced into a corner which would you recomend.
Chris
Chris Kenway
news:3ce946f7....@news.newsguy.com...
> On Sun, 19 May 2002 23:50:28 +0000 (UTC), "Chris Kenway"
> <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>
> Artistic vision is what you need, not plantsmanship. A 2-acre
> garden is large enough to indulge in Capability Brown-like
> landscape design that is impossible in a smaller space. No
> program is capable of the imagination and vision you need, even
> if the cyber-idiots at Microsoft think otherwise. So let your
> garden software be the servant: use it to plot existing features
> and keep track of your proposed design, but don't even think of
> letting it make any design decisions.
I rather see it as a group of small gardens each on a theme the joined
together with a central thems if you know what I mean. I have read some
comments that some packages can't deal with big gardens so I thought I would
use it to assist me with each individual theme. Some have walk through
facilities combined with sun movement with shadows which could be handy. I
only intend to use it as an aid rather than a complete design tool.
>
> As for themes: It's all very well to have themes within the
> garden, but the trick lies in tying the themed areas together. My
> own garden is pretty much single-themed, in your sense: mostly
> perennials, some trees and shrubs, with some large areas of lawn.
> It's 0.4 acres (big for a suburban lot here, but only one-fifth
> the size of your place).
Hit the nail on the head there. It's joining them together thats the clever
bit.
> It seems to me that in these larger gardens, you want to have
> variety of vista, to coin a phrase. That is, in some places you
> want to have the sense of a private, enclosed, even confined,
> space, but in others you want long, spacious, open vistas. You
> accomplish this by planting trees and large shrubs to divide up
> the garden into rooms and corridors, so to speak. Within each
> room or corridor, you can then focus on a theme; perhaps at that
> point garden software might help you figure out appropriate
> plantings on the smaller prevailing scale.
Yes we are on the same path here although I don't want it to be to
clinically seperated rather a gentle flow from one bit to the next.
> Those "few odd trees" you mention need careful consideration.
> Without seeing your place, I can't say if they are (a) ancient,
> decadent specimens beyond salvage that should be removed
> forthwith or (b) mature specimens that can be incorporated into
> the backbone of the new landscape. Or maybe they are immature
> specimens lacking both presence and distinction -- in that case,
> you may want to retain some and get rid of others. The thing is,
> you can't grow a mature tree at all quickly -- it takes a decade
> or two at the least -- so don't go hacking these down without a
> *lot* of careful thought first.
There are two or three ancient trees the others are about 15 years old. I
don'y want to remove any if I can avoid it.
> Let me assume that these "few odd trees" are in fact mature
> specimens in good condition, reasonably shapely, not too crowded
> together, etc etc. IOW, worth preserving.
Absolutly
> Were I in your shoes, I'd try to identify a suitable location for
> at least one very long vista; in a two-acre place, this would be
> (at a guess) about 300 feet long. I have a 200-foot vista at one
> point (my lot is a very odd shape), and it gives an incredible
> sense of spaciousness. The vista need not be uninterrupted; mine
> is broken in two by a parrotia and a cytisus battandieri on
> either side that meet; you can see through their branches but
> only when you physically pass through do you realize just how
> long the vista really is. I think this makes my garden, at least
> as far as the macro-layout is concerned.
Ah sorry your losing me here, bit to technical, I am only a beginner. Can
you explain more simply please.
> A few shorter vistas (corridors) at angles to the main line will
> divide up the place nicely and within that framework you can then
> develop themed areas.
>
> One important point: two acres is a *big* garden. Unless you have
> deep pockets and can pay for regular help, be very cautious lest
> you end up with a garden that you are unable to maintain.
> Somewhere I've read that a single full-time gardener can maintain
> five acres of trees and shrubs (I suppose lawn counts in this
> too), but it takes five full-time gardeners to maintain a single
> acre of rock garden, which is at the other end of the scale.
I shall be reasonably mechanised, ride on mower, cultivator etc and
maintance will be important. Watering it is another consideration and I am
looking at installing a 'pop up' sprinkler system attached to a pump
removing water from the river (20M wide by 1M deep) that boarders the
garden. This will have to be installed at a very early stage and from what I
have read requires a certain amount of serious planing.
> In my own garden, a lot of the perennials are woodlanders and I
> mulch heavily with leaves, conifer needles, etc. Leaves that fall
> on the lawn are simply raked straight onto the adjoining beds.
> Only by doing this can I keep the place from going to the dogs.
> Those areas with a more classic grouping of perennials take
> endless hand weeding to look good and demand a disproportionate
> amount of my time.
I thought of using a membrane to help keep the weeds at bay.
>
> I hope these rather disconnected thoughts give you some help.
>
Many thanks, it has been a help, got any pictures to help esplain your
points raised? remove nospam. from address to e-mail them.
Chris
JennyC
"Chris Kenway" <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> wrote
> I have to come clean a bit and tell you that the
> garden is in France, South of France to be exact.
Ah Ha :~))
Please be careful of making the same mistake as my friend in the
Dordogne.
The weather conditions down in the South of France are totally
different to the UK and she is trying to grow an 'English Country
Garden'. It's not working !!
Too hot in summer and surprisingly wet/cold in winter.
You need to look around in the area an see what thrives for other
people.
Plants are expensive in France and it might be an idea to try and find
a group of gardeners to swap cuttings etc with. There is usually an
active ex-pat group going on :~)
Sounds like a nice project thought :~)
Jenny
PaulK
>> >
> Many thanks for your reply. I have to come clean a bit and tell you that
the
> garden is in France, South of France to be exact. Whilst I am learning
> French I am not that good as to be able to talk compidently to a French
> landscape gardener and I will be on a limited budget. I do expect to take
> several years developing the garden so it will be a long project.
>
> In one of my other replies I have mentioned the reason for wanting the
> software and the type of features I am looking for. Comments I have seen
> against these packages in amazon.co.uk have not numbered many so it is a
> little difficult to work out which is the better one. I really want to use
> it as a aid rather than a tool if you know what I mean.
I know what you mean but from experience, all of the domestic level garden
cad systems are very restricted in what they can do and limit rather than
expand the imagination - remember, CAD = Computer Aided Drafting rather
than Design.
Read the books, go see lots of gardens *in the locality of the garden*, see
some traditional S. France gardens and some modern ones.
Design takes place in your head not on the paper! Do your research then
simply spend time (as long as it takes!) in your garden space. Walk round
it. Create in your head a range of possibilities. Decide what you want,
rough it out on paper and only then go into the CAD package.
I use CAD for some client designs, but only where the design is formal (ie
uses geometric shapes) the package is an ultra basic Student version of a
full CAD package (TurboCad Designer) it is totally non garden specific, has
no 3-d capability but does allow easy paving layout and moduling of paving
areas to the size of paving units used etc.
One word of advice wrt the design itself, please do not try to recreate an
English Garden in the South of France, find the 'genius loci' - the spirit
of the place - and allow your imagination to flow in sympathy with that.
Last Summer in southern Spain I was invited to look round a retired
botanist's garden that was a stunning example. Mediterranean terraces facing
the sun, a semi tropical forest with fruiting banana in a valley using
rainwater collected in a sump for irrigation, a Mediterranean (terracotta
and glazed tile) pool garden, plus one small English Garden, hidden away,
stumbled on almost by surprise with Lawn and fruit trees and even English
bedding plants. The garden - as all the best ones are - was an almost
perfect synthesis of the place and the personality of the gardener, making
use of the natural lay of the site to provide a myriad of plant habitats
reflecting the places the botanist had worked. It looked wild and natural,
but every plant was known intimately and matched perfectly to the specific
conditions in each part of the garden.
Hope that helps!
pk
Janet Baraclough
from "Chris Kenway" <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> contains
these words:
> I shall be reasonably mechanised, ride on mower, cultivator etc and
> maintance will be important. Watering it is another consideration and I am
> looking at installing a 'pop up' sprinkler system attached to a pump
> removing water from the river (20M wide by 1M deep) that boarders the
> garden. This will have to be installed at a very early stage and from what I
> have read requires a certain amount of serious planing.
Hi Chris
To extract water from a river, you will need a license from your
local authority...unlikely to be free. I would not recommend buying a
cultivator; they can only be used in the preparation of ground for
planting, not much use longterm after permanent stuff is planted up,
and you won't want to maintain large expanses of bare clean soil. A
ride on mower makes life easy; make sure you get one built for UK
grass conditions, not USA...then design the lawns' curves, accesses
and your grass disposal, so that you can do everything without getting off.
I endorse everything Rodger has said. You can see my 3.6 acre
garden at http://www.tmac.clara.co.uk/janets/ with a brief resume of
the hows and whys.
When I was starting out and at sea like you, I had some very good
advice. The first was, that rabbit-proofing the entire perimeter was
a longterm economy and advantage I would never regret. The second was
to think of large garden design as painting a theatre set with a very
large brush....it's a great help in focussing on the overall effect
of working in a large scale. Copses of birch , groups of pines,
floods of daffodils, great mounds of cornus or rhododendron. Against
that larger backcloth, smaller choruses, individual plants, exotics
etc can have a series of small brilliant cameo roles. The big
planting brushstrokes are in groups of the same or similar species,
all chosen for hardiness, toughness, and the ability to last decades
with minimal help and attention. You can buy such trees and shrubs
bareroot very cheaply from commercial forestry nurseries and bulbs
cheap in quantity from bulb importers etc..prices unrelated to
garden centres :-)
Finally, I've known a number of elderly gardeners who in younger
energetic days, created wonderful high-maintenance gardens on
several acres. Then they had the distress of seeing decades of
devoted work disappear as their ability to maintain that kind of
planting and design declined...avoid that mistake unless your
pension can afford staff. On the other hand, natural landscapes don't
look sad, neglected and jaded if left to their own devices ...they
just get better and better. Natural planting **to your area** fits in
very well with the "big brush" concept. The sets can be varied with
the seasons. Within that larger integrated scheme, there will be
endless opportunity to create smaller amusements, diversions and contrivances.
Rodger mentioned vistas. Trips to parks and large gardens will show
how views are created across spaces, down alleys, between
obstructions. The longest vista across a space is diagonal...on the
website pics, you can see a long diagonal central lawn in mine. (with
black and white washing on the line).The trees have grown
considerably since then, and I have since opened another long vista
north to be seen from the sitting room window; I cheated on the
perspective of a mown grass path that narrows as it recedes into the
distance. Neither of these were apparent to me ten years ago and both
were changed as their developing potential was realised. So, don't
even attempt to make a complete set plan before you start..it's too
overwhelming and intimidating, and it doesn't allow for serendipitous
revelations which will come effortlessly later on. That gradual
unfolding of creativity is part of the joy of creating a garden on
any scale...it's an experience best savoured slowly in person.
Paul Kelly's recommendation that you spend a fortune commissioning a
trio of garden designers etc etc is, imho, best interpreted in
relation to how he makes his living...go on, guess :~}
Janet
PaulK
"Janet Baraclough" <janet.a...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:200205211...@zetnet.co.uk...
> The message <acc1m6$lko$1...@helle.btinternet.com>
> from "Chris Kenway" <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> contains
> these words:
>
>>
> trio of garden designers etc etc is, imho, best interpreted in
> relation to how he makes his living...go on, guess :~}
>
> Janet
Actually, I'm a househusband involved in Garden Design as a part time
business that is little more than a self financing hobby! Kids and chores
take priority.
My advice re using a designer still stands. Prefaced as it was by:
>Best advice for a garden of that size if you are truly a novice gardener is
to use the services of a Garden Designer.
I wouldn't dream of starting to design a house layout or embark on major
renovation & structural change to a house without seeking professional
advice from an architect. Similarly, embarking upon a major landscape design
(2 acres is more landscape than garden) as a novice is unwise. Some people
do it and get away with it. Others plant English Gardens in the Dordogne!
And btw, it would not cost a fortune to take advice from a designer. Daily
consultancy rates for most designers are less than £300. A mere fraction of
a drop in the ocean that developing a 2 acre garden would cost!
Why is it useful to use a designer? I could rabbit on for hours but the
simplest way of thinking of it is that Gardeners see planting in the garden.
Designers see 3 dimensional spaces and aim to integrate the house with its
environment. The best designs (in my view) are those which work as (groups
of linked) spaces independently of the planting that from time to time
inhabits them.
Also, taking as your reference point only books and existing open gardens
misses an awful lot. Someone posted about views, vistas and focal points.
Such design is sound but is very much in the 'traditional mould. Modern
design is much more about a subliminal leading of directions of flow - which
probably sounds a little poncy, but to illustrate, contrast Hidcote,
Sissinghurst or Snows Hill manor with intersecting paths and framed views
with Denman's (John Brookes garden is Sussex, laid out first by Mrs
Robinson) Using a designer is a way of tapping into different ideas.
pk
Natural mystery
> New to this ng, please bear with me.
>
> I am looking for garden design software/planner to help me design and plan
> the garden in my new home also some books that might help.
>>paused<<
Just some information on design software.
I have what is rated as a professionals garden design software. Prior to
getting it I was appalled at what I perceived to be so-called Garden Design
software.
However, even this one has a significant flaw which may concern and
frustrate your budding LandDesigner project, when it comes to concentrating
on the detail of individual areas
I wont pointedly give it's name, though I am tempted because the after sales
service deserves been highlighted.
What I discoverd came about whilst wanting to show someone the exact
layout/pattern of flag stones for a patio.
The package allowed me to draw individul flagstones to scale. eg a 600 X600
stone and pointing gap could be drawn to scale as a square. There is even a
choice of colours/textures to emphasise it from say a 450 X 300. So, if the
patio was 6.1 metres long and only 60cm deep, then firstly I would have
draw that boundry to scale and could then fit in all 600 x 600, i.e. 10 of
them with the gap included in the diemensions of each.
Having made one copy, I could copy and paste each stone and their total
would fit into the pre-set boundry. The problems start when trying to
incorparate various sizes of stone. The software allows you to think each
stone is to scale, but that is evidently wrong and if it can make a mistake
with stone, then other measuremnts of varios totals can also lead to alot of
dissappointment. there were other frustrations, like I couldn't adjust the
depth of an arch (which BTW wasn't an "arch") but I could put it to dangle
several feet up in the air.
In short, don't expect to much. I haven't used mine since! I regard it as
useless, though it could be used as a check list. The individual I wanted to
help out sorted it out himself on Excell.
Janet Baraclough
from "PaulK" <P.G....@btinternet.com> contains these words:
> I wouldn't dream of starting to design a house layout or embark on major
> renovation & structural change to a house without seeking professional
> advice from an architect. Similarly, embarking upon a major landscape design
> (2 acres is more landscape than garden) as a novice is unwise.
You aren't comparing fairly; the structural change to a house risks
damage to what is most peoples'largest investment and security; and
also to their health and safety. A garden/landscape design carries
far fewer such risks.
> And btw, it would not cost a fortune to take advice from a designer. Daily
> consultancy rates for most designers are less than £300. A mere fraction of
> a drop in the ocean that developing a 2 acre garden would cost!
What do you suggest the oceanic cost of developing a 2 acre garden
might actually be? surely, it's unprofessional to make such vague
claims to your own advantage, if they mislead the potential customer?
> Why is it useful to use a designer? I could rabbit on for hours but the
> simplest way of thinking of it is that Gardeners see planting in the garden.
> Designers see 3 dimensional spaces and aim to integrate the house with its
> environment.
I'm astonished that you could even think such patronising rubbish
is true, let alone write it here. Anyone who has visited scores of
private large gardens will have seen plenty which fulfill your
"designers" criteria and more..designed and made by amateur gardeners.
> Also, taking as your reference point only books and existing open gardens
> misses an awful lot.
Who suggested only books and open gardens as a sole reference
point? It's been frequently recommended here as a *starting* point,
for people who haven't had a garden before, have never taken much
interest in gardens, and haven't the faintest idea of the vast range
of possibilities.
Someone posted about views, vistas and focal points.
> Such design is sound but is very much in the 'traditional mould. Modern
> design is much more about a subliminal leading of directions of flow - which
> probably sounds a little poncy, but to illustrate, contrast Hidcote,
> Sissinghurst or Snows Hill manor with intersecting paths and framed views
> with Denman's (John Brookes garden is Sussex, laid out first by Mrs
> Robinson) Using a designer is a way of tapping into different ideas.
You're making the assumption that designers have all the ideas,
plus a wider experience of the great gardens, than gardeners do. Has
it occurred to you, that the kind of people you meet as clients,
those who consult a garden designer, are not representative of all
gardeners' vision and experience?
Janet.
Rodger Whitlock
<chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Rodger Whitlock" <toto...@mail.pacificcoast.net> wrote in message
> news:3ce946f7....@news.newsguy.com...
> > Were I in your shoes, I'd try to identify a suitable location for
> > at least one very long vista; in a two-acre place, this would be
> > (at a guess) about 300 feet long. I have a 200-foot vista at one
> > point (my lot is a very odd shape), and it gives an incredible
> > sense of spaciousness. The vista need not be uninterrupted; mine
> > is broken in two by a parrotia and a cytisus battandieri on
> > either side that meet; you can see through their branches but
> > only when you physically pass through do you realize just how
> > long the vista really is. I think this makes my garden, at least
> > as far as the macro-layout is concerned.
>
> Ah sorry your losing me here, bit to technical, I am only a beginner. Can
> you explain more simply please.
Let me try again. Just about any artistic creation involves
contrasting elements. If there is no contrast -- in whatever
sense -- then there is no art. (This is a sweeping
generalization.)
My words which are quoted above touch on the contrasts of space.
In one point in *my* ideal garden, you should be able to see a
long way (that's the 300 feet), but in another you will be in a
more confined space (say an enclosed garden). As you pass from
one part of the garden to another, you should find yourself in a
series of spaces of contrasting shape and size.
These contrasts are due to the backbone (or skeleton) of the
garden, the permanent plantings of woody material, perhaps also
structures such as walls, fences, and buildings, even a few
natural features. That's why I put so much emphasis on the issue
of the existing trees. It hardly matters what plant material you
use for the backbone.
A good design for the skeleton is important because once in
place, it's very difficult to change this large-scale part of the
design. You might have a small area devoted to, say, herbs, which
you later get bored with. That's easy to change over to, say,
irises. But the framing of the garden is much, much less easy to
alter.
In my experience, this advice is contrary to the way beginners
tend to develop their gardens. There's a strong tendency to rush
out and buy all sorts of small fry, while forgetting the
larger-scale elements. But since you have the wisdom to consult
urg, we can hope that you will avoid the common error and thing
big *first*.
HTH
PaulK
> The message <ace0ui$j4j$2...@knossos.btinternet.com>
> from "PaulK" <P.G....@btinternet.com> contains these words:
>
> What do you suggest the oceanic cost of developing a 2 acre garden
> might actually be? surely, it's unprofessional to make such vague
> claims to your own advantage, if they mislead the potential customer?
>
Pray tell, Janet, what is the point of such of such an accusatory tone?
I simply offered the best advice I could based on my experience. In future I
shan't bother!
pk
JennyC
"Chris Kenway" <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:ac9do4$r79$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
http://www.tmac.clara.co.uk/urgring/faqsoftw.htm
Jenny
Janet Baraclough
from "PaulK" <P.G....@btinternet.com> contains these words:
> "Janet Baraclough" <janet.a...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:200205212...@zetnet.co.uk...
> > The message <ace0ui$j4j$2...@knossos.btinternet.com>
> > from "PaulK" <P.G....@btinternet.com> contains these words:
(your comment which I responded to restored)
PK " Daily
consultancy rates for most designers are less than £300. A mere fraction of
a drop in the ocean that developing a 2 acre garden would cost!
I replied
> > What do you suggest the oceanic cost of developing a 2 acre garden
> > might actually be? surely, it's unprofessional to make such vague
> > claims to your own advantage, if they mislead the potential customer?
> >
> Pray tell, Janet, what is the point of such of such an accusatory tone?
I simply asked you a reasonable question, Paul. It was framed
rather more politely than critical remarks from you to me in other
threads. Your tone and opinions might put posters off trying to
design a 2 acre garden for themselves.
>I simply offered the best advice I could based on my experience. In future I
> shan't bother!
You made a very silly claim which you now can't back up. People
will begin to think that's because it wasn't based on experience at all.
Janet.
PaulK
"Chris Kenway" <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:ac9do4$r79$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
>
> I am looking for garden design software/planner to help me design and plan
> the garden in my new home also some books that might help.
wrt the books. Get the RHS booklist, I recall a number on Mediterranean
gardening. I you are an RHS member the Librarian in the ??Lindley library is
both helpful and very knowledgeable. I *think* it is possible to borrow
books by mail order.
pk
cormaic
<aqua...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk> enriched all our lives with
these words......:
>I wont pointedly give it's name, though I am tempted because the after sales
>service deserves been highlighted.
Come on, name and shame - if you have an opinion of a product,
your experience is worth sharing with other urglers.
>What I discoverd came about whilst wanting to show someone the exact
>layout/pattern of flag stones for a patio.
>The package allowed me to draw individul flagstones to scale. eg a 600 X600
>stone and pointing gap could be drawn to scale as a square. There is even a
>choice of colours/textures to emphasise it from say a 450 X 300.
This *never* works in the landscape design progs, as they are
incapable of generating truly random layouts with many different sizes
of flags - I know; I've tried them all and even the best of them
relies on using pre-set squares and then relying on human intervention
to randomise.
After 20-odd years, I still haven't found owt better than my
own CAD system and library for random layouts. There's a few shortcuts
one can use, but it's still a labour intensive exercise.
--
cormaic URG faqs/webring - www.tmac.clara.co.uk/urgring/
Culcheth Garden - www.tmac.clara.co.uk/garden/
Warrington Paving - www.pavingexpert.com/
Peoples' Republic of South Lancashire
cormaic CAN BE FOUND AT borlochshall.co.uk
Natural mystery
"cormaic" <u...@SODOFFSPAMcormaic.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ujbneu06fmk70r081...@4ax.com...
> Twas Tue, 21 May 2002 23:15:04 +0100, when "Natural mystery"
> <aqua...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk> enriched all our lives with
> these words......:
>
>
> >I wont pointedly give it's name, though I am tempted because the after
sales
> >service deserves been highlighted.
>
> Come on, name and shame - if you have an opinion of a product,
> your experience is worth sharing with other urglers.
oh, it was there, albeit a very subtle clue. I am hesitant to more pointedly
pour scorn on a product which, though I tired off rapidly, is still far
better than others I've tried. It would feel unbalanced/unfair to do so in
that context.
By comparison....I can remember
one product which boasted 3000 plants etc, but didn't seem to include
independant useable access to them and if the property didn't match the
shape (house or boundry) of the pre-determined shapes.. then too bad because
that bit was unajustable. I can't remember it's name, but I could think of a
few!
> >What I discoverd came about whilst wanting to show someone the exact
> >layout/pattern of flag stones for a patio.
> >The package allowed me to draw individul flagstones to scale. eg a 600
X600
> >stone and pointing gap could be drawn to scale as a square. There is even
a
> >choice of colours/textures to emphasise it from say a 450 X 300.
>
> This *never* works in the landscape design progs, as they are
> incapable of generating truly random layouts with many different sizes
Yes I know (-: I did search 'round for one also, but that's not what I was
expecting the prog to achieve.
Imagine you have several pieces of paper each 610 X 610 (incorporating
pointing gap) And... you have drawn your path/patio which just happens to be
6.1m X 600mm. You might expect to be able to put 10 of those peices in a row
to fit into the area. With the prog I have to assist me in LandDesigner
projects, I have just such a facility and it works by allowing me to
'create' one such flag and than copy -paste them all as you might do with
the pieces of paper.
If you have some 610 X 610 and some other sizes you should still be able to
make your jigsaw work as long as the totals divide into the same area.
That's where my prog falls down. If I'm incorporating 600 X 600s + 300 X
600s + spaces it should also work.. but no. It's as if the accuracy of the
"to scale" differs according to the sizes been detailed.
If you stil haven't guessed which prog it is, then e mail me and I will
reply with it.
Natural mystery
> The message <ace0ui$j4j$2...@knossos.btinternet.com>
> from "PaulK" <P.G....@btinternet.com> contains these words:
>
> > I wouldn't dream of starting to design a house layout or embark on major
> > renovation & structural change to a house without seeking professional
> > advice from an architect. Similarly, embarking upon a major landscape
design
> > (2 acres is more landscape than garden) as a novice is unwise.
> You aren't comparing fairly; the structural change to a house risks
> damage to what is most peoples'largest investment and security; and
> also to their health and safety. A garden/landscape design carries
> far fewer such risks.
******Janet, I think that's very fair. From that view point it was an
unrealistic comparison, albeit I doubt I would have thought of it from that
angle.
>
> > And btw, it would not cost a fortune to take advice from a designer.
Daily
> > consultancy rates for most designers are less than £300. A mere fraction
of
> > a drop in the ocean that developing a 2 acre garden would cost!
>
> What do you suggest the oceanic cost of developing a 2 acre garden
> might actually be? surely, it's unprofessional to make such vague
> claims to your own advantage, if they mislead the potential customer?
>
> > Why is it useful to use a designer? I could rabbit on for hours but the
> > simplest way of thinking of it is that Gardeners see planting in the
garden.
> > Designers see 3 dimensional spaces and aim to integrate the house with
its
> > environment.
>
> ********* I'm astonished that you could even think such patronising
rubbish
> is true, let alone write it here. Anyone who has visited scores of
> private large gardens will have seen plenty which fulfill your
> "designers" criteria and more..designed and made by amateur gardeners.
YES and that too, with regret. I found it somewhat offensive to have garden
designers put on such a pedastal when my experience is quite the contrary.
There are some simple design principles which arhitects are familar with,
yet qulaified garden desiners seem to be entirely ignorant of such matters.
I've sen drwing which did not resemble the property, bamboo indicated to
furnish the perimeter of a bbq and even a tree indicated to go... right in
front of a functional garage door. I've even had to point out that planting
oaks and ash trees within 30 cm (1 foot) of the walls of a house,(with
shallow foundations) was maybe, erm.. not such a great idea. I've
encountered a designer who would instantly gasp as if in horror upon her
first visit to the property (sadly I worked for her). She would deliberately
undermine any value and appreciation the would-be client might have of their
own garden. All for profit. Every thing would have to be whipped out and lo
and behold, some of the "disatorous" previous plant choices would be
re-introduced... straight from the garden centre + massive markup. More to
the point, she was clueless as to the horticultural needs of the plants she
chose. In fact, if they arrived from the garden centre and they were
physically small at the time, then they would go in front of the bed. Gee
genius. Believe it or not, I found her standards quite typical of most
garden designers. To date, I've only met one who is quite good and I deplore
any attempt to elavate their status above any 'ordinary' member of the
public. There is already far to much unnecassary lacks of confidence out
there.
>
> > Also, taking as your reference point only books and existing open
gardens
> > misses an awful lot.
>
> Who suggested only books and open gardens as a sole reference
> point? It's been frequently recommended here as a *starting* point,
> for people who haven't had a garden before, have never taken much
> interest in gardens, and haven't the faintest idea of the vast range
> of possibilities.
>
> Someone posted about views, vistas and focal points.
> > Such design is sound but is very much in the 'traditional mould. Modern
> > design is much more about a subliminal leading of directions of flow -
which
> > probably sounds a little poncy, but to illustrate, contrast Hidcote,
> > Sissinghurst or Snows Hill manor with intersecting paths and framed
views
> > with Denman's (John Brookes garden is Sussex, laid out first by Mrs
> > Robinson) Using a designer is a way of tapping into different ideas.
>
> You're making the assumption that designers have all the ideas,
> plus a wider experience of the great gardens, than gardeners do. Has
> it occurred to you, that the kind of people you meet as clients,
> those who consult a garden designer, are not representative of all
> gardeners' vision and experience?
I find when I'm doing the design bit, I find myself pointing out that it's
not really me who has done it, but the client. All I've done is double check
their brief.
I tell them, they've indicated where they'd like the patio and why, ditto to
many other area of design. They're not stupid and have thought things out,
so why would they think someone else has done it for them?
>
> Janet.
>
>
>
>
>
PaulK
"Natural mystery" <aqua...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:acgnnc$ajh$2...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>
> >
> > > I wouldn't dream of starting to design a house layout or embark on
major
> > > renovation & structural change to a house without seeking professional
> > > advice from an architect. Similarly, embarking upon a major landscape
> design
> > > (2 acres is more landscape than garden) as a novice is unwise.
> > *****************
> > You aren't comparing fairly; the structural change to a house risks
> > damage to what is most peoples'largest investment and security; and
> > also to their health and safety. A garden/landscape design carries
> > far fewer such risks.
>
> ******Janet, I think that's very fair. From that view point it was an
> unrealistic comparison, albeit I doubt I would have thought of it from
that
> angle.
The point was *not* structural integrity, it was use of space. Joe Public
(me!) cannot see the real potentials of the internal space of a property. I
think it a good use of my money to tap into the experience of someone who
does. On the two occasions I have done so, my basic concept design has been
immeasurably improved by the Architect - who subbed out to a Structural
Engineer the number crunching to make sure his ideas would stand up. In each
case the concept I had would have been buildable had I gone direct to a
building firm with an in-house surveyor: but the end product would have been
far below the potential. (A simple example, moving a kitchen doorway,
doubled the potential work/storage space)
I simply counsel any novice gardener looking to invest several years and or
large amounts of cash in a 2 acre garden to do the same thing. Consult an
expert.
.
>
> YES and that too, with regret. I found it somewhat offensive to have
garden
> designers put on such a pedastal when my experience is quite the contrary.
All industries have Cowboys who aim to rip off the punter. And all
industries have people who operate outside their area of competence. Cormaic
is a landscaper, an industry that has at least its fair share of both. I
would not dream of tarring Cormaic with the same brush, but I am sure there
are some in here who could wax lyrical about the incompetence and shady
practice of Landscapers - and over a pint I'm sure Cormaic could tell a
merry tale about jobs he has had to rebuild when brought in pick up the
pieces after a cowboy landscaper.
> There are some simple design principles which arhitects are familar with,
> yet qulaified garden desiners seem to be entirely ignorant of such
matters.
> I've sen drwing which did not resemble the property, bamboo indicated to
> furnish the perimeter of a bbq and even a tree indicated to go... right in
> front of a functional garage door. I've even had to point out that
planting
> oaks and ash trees within 30 cm (1 foot) of the walls of a house,(with
> shallow foundations) was maybe, erm.. not such a great idea.
Incompetence personified. You will have noted my recommendation to seek
guidance from the Society Of Garden Designers before selecting a designer?
> I've
> encountered a designer who would instantly gasp as if in horror upon her
> first visit to the property (sadly I worked for her). She would
deliberately
> undermine any value and appreciation the would-be client might have of
their
> own garden. All for profit. Every thing would have to be whipped out and
lo
> and behold, some of the "disatorous" previous plant choices would be
> re-introduced... straight from the garden centre + massive markup.
Shady and unprofessional practice. Most designers I know use trade nurseies
and worh either to normal retail mark up, or give some discount on retail
prices.
Normal retail mark up (ie what garden centre charge) is 100% on ex nursery
price (excluding vat) which approximates to 1.75*vat inclusive nursery
price.
Any designer who charges above retail price (other than for specially
sourced material where retail is the only source and a finders fee is
appropriate) is ripping off the client.
I normally work to 1.5*ex nursery vat inclusive price, which gets you hand
selected stock (by me!) from nurseries supplying the top garden centres.
> More to
> the point, she was clueless as to the horticultural needs of the plants
she
> chose. In fact, if they arrived from the garden centre and they were
> physically small at the time, then they would go in front of the bed. Gee
> genius.
Incompetence again. No different from employing a cowboy builder!
> Believe it or not, I found her standards quite typical of most
> garden designers. To date, I've only met one who is quite good and I
deplore
> any attempt to elavate their status above any 'ordinary' member of the
> public. There is already far to much unnecassary lacks of confidence out
> there.
> >
You clearly associate with the wrong type of designer! I would not dream of
lumping all landscapers in with the cowboys I regularly see plying their
trade in SW19, I think it unfortunate that your experiences lead you to do
this for all designers.
>
> I find when I'm doing the design bit, I find myself pointing out that it's
> not really me who has done it, but the client. All I've done is double
check
> their brief.
> I tell them, they've indicated where they'd like the patio and why, ditto
to
> many other area of design. They're not stupid and have thought things out,
> so why would they think someone else has done it for them?
At last, something I agree with! I too see my role as assisting the client
to design for themselves. A designer's job is essentially problem solving,
applying knowledge, information and analysis to be selective with/on behalf
of the client. Listening and interpretation are the designers most important
skills.
To bring the discussion back to a perennial URG topic - there would be far
fewer Leylandii hedges planted if garden owners who do not know what to do
about the bad view consulted a designer first. Manipulation of internal
spaces and axes of view plus an inward (as oppose to outward) focus can
often achieve the same objective as planting a 20 foot green wall.
pk
Robin Young
Designer, BBC Gardeners World, Data Becker 3D Dream Garden and Perfect
Plants.
The one I usually go to first is the DataBecker one as its plant database is
the most extensive.
Natural mystery
I take your point that the point was *not* structural.
Ditto the other industries cowboys, though they don't usually come with
instruments of qualification, be that educational or associate membership.
Oh, actually.. they can do! Darn!
However, in my experience, the people I've dealt with (clients) have a good
grasp on the whole use of space thing. I would say that their intellectual
contribution makes up about 90% + of the result. That -10% I apply through
listening and suggestion is appreciated, but I still see it as their
project, their garden. I'm good, actually, I'm very good, I've been called a
garden Picasso and I am aware of the odd road accident due to the
optical-emotional impact of what I can do, yet I'm not going to claim it was
all my design.
Question...
Perhaps it's word play, but if someone asks for this, that and the other,
incorporating locations, limiting other possibilities of lesser priority,
have they not pretty much designed it?
If their contribution is workable but the end product has been enhanced
through design, without any alteration to the requested brief, then who is
the primary designer?
What I do is like what your architect did for you. Often the solution I
offer is not work I can take on myself. Normally, I can keep to their
brief, albeit tweaking it a bit for its maximum advantage. When there's a
dispute within the client base as to conflicting ideas../expectations, then
I tend to resolve it with known design theory and math.
Whereas the "Designers" I've encountered were... well let's just say, a tad
over imaginative and quite bluntly... delusional. BTW, they are not people I
associate with as you implied, they are people I *encounter* and do not
invite via myself . I know there are good ones who I've not met, but even if
you buy John Brook's latest book on garden design the information is not
really backed up with solid information. He gives many views which seem
opaque through being unsupported with any reference to known design
techniques such as the golden mean etc. On the other hand I'm very well
acquainted with one of his earlier landscape projects and "impressive" seems
like an understatement. He is not the one I previously referred to
positively. I've never met him.
Usually I find designers are good at thinking up the pretty pictures, like
the bbq closely surrounded by a semi-circle of bamboo. Regularly, they
haven't really thought things through, but had no problem working out a
price for their 'talents' and acting like a pre-Madonna.
As far as going to an association. In my experience and I can not comment on
Society Of Garden Designers in specific. Associations are usually in the
business of making money (fees) and not protecting Jo public. Hell, I've
been in a few and in one *non-gardening* related occupation, I was accepted
on the merits of been qualified, yet, even *I* know the qualification in
question is not worth the paper it's written on!
Thank you for your reply. It contains a considerable public value. For those
considering a designer you highlight conformation as to identifying
unacceptable practices and added information as to what to expect price
wise. It matches my own.
P.J.
Natural mystery
> <aqua...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk> enriched all our lives with
> these words......:
>
>
> >I wont pointedly give it's name, though I am tempted because the after
sales
> >service deserves been highlighted.
>
> Come on, name and shame - if you have an opinion of a product,
> your experience is worth sharing with other urglers.
>
jenny wrote;
>Has anyone mentioned the URG garden software FAQ yet ?
http://www.tmac.clara.co.uk/urgring/faqsoftw.htm
>
It looks that I was mistaken in my hesitancy to name and shame. I had not
wanted to reward a product, albeit inadaquate, that has made an effort over
an above others, with a negative comment. It felt a bit like shooting the
messenger.
However, given that I'm obviously not the only one with difficulty and it
isn't my puter illiteracy, ... The product in question was Sierra
landDesigner.
In general these products are nothing more than toys and should really be
honestly marketed as such.
e.g....If you're the type to go jogging and decided for inspirational
encouragement you'd bring along a football to tap along and follow. Let's
say it was a beautifull football. Nice colour, texture, balanced bounce and
even gave an appealing sound. You jog along and suddenly the ball is nicked
by a large, somewhat tempermental dog. The dog races off with it, returns
and teases you. When you approach it snarls. It's owner think it looks
really cute. You've been nobbled into playing a game. That's what garden
design software is like.
As far as books, PK's suggestion to borrow from the library is perticularily
apt. I have an array of such books and for the most part they are
repetative. Borrowing such books will save you room and money, whilst
affording you the chance to see much the same thing expressed in different
ways.. Unless, like me you're a sucker for pretty pictures. Much of it will
read as blatantly obvious. Put it this way, If Merryl lynch (spelling??) who
sponsored The Chelsea FG this year, were to spend ＃＃ on a review of pub
life and the results amounted to one sentence "Pubs have a tendancy to sell
alcholic drinks", then I doubt is M L would feel their ＃＃ was well spent .
The riches of information concerning the illusive secret mysteries of
garden design can usually be just as basic.
In a nut shell, Location and it's restrictions, alterable or not. Money,
Aspirations,/ needs, Style choices. Ideas.
It can be a bit like thinking an architect must be a genius for having
remembered to include an entrance/exit to the building.
So, yes, the library idea is a very good one.
Jane
Whitlock" <toto...@mail.pacificcoast.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2002 23:50:28 +0000 (UTC), "Chris Kenway"
> <chris....@nospam.btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> New to this ng, please bear with me.
>>
>> I am looking for garden design software/planner to help me design and plan
>> the garden in my new home also some books that might help. My new garden is
>> laid to lawn (I use the term lightly) and is about 2 acres in size with a
>> few odd trees thrown in. I want to have different 'themes' in the garden
>> like a wild garden area, water features, formal garden area etc.
>>
>> I know nothing about gardening, have trouble telling a weed from a plant
>> most of the time. Any help will be most welcome.
>
> Artistic vision is what you need, not plantsmanship.
That is just so untrue! You can be as artistic as you like, but if you have
no idea of plants and the way they grow or what conditions they need your
garden will certainly not thrive. That's the trouble these days. Too many
arty farty progs on TV about gardens where the emphasis is on everything but
the art of plantsmanship which, essentially, is what a garden is.
Jane
Whitlock" <toto...@mail.pacificcoast.net> wrote:
Sorry, but trying to explain the concept of garden design to a person who
doesn't know a thistle from an artichoke (!) is a bit rich. Let alone
considerations about soil, situation, humidity, frost etc. And a two acre
site? Please.
Not all garden designers are Diamud whateverhisnameis charging extrortionate
amounts for what is, in my opinion, a load of cobblers. If you didn't know
anything about dressmaking you wouldn't buy a sewing machine.
Jane
"cormaic" <u...@SODOFFSPAMcormaic.co.uk> wrote:
> Twas Tue, 21 May 2002 23:15:04 +0100, when "Natural mystery"
> <aqua...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk> enriched all our lives with
> these words......:
>
>
>> I wont pointedly give it's name, though I am tempted because the after sales
>> service deserves been highlighted.
>
> Come on, name and shame - if you have an opinion of a product,
> your experience is worth sharing with other urglers.
>
>> What I discoverd came about whilst wanting to show someone the exact
>> layout/pattern of flag stones for a patio.
>> The package allowed me to draw individul flagstones to scale. eg a 600 X600
>> stone and pointing gap could be drawn to scale as a square. There is even a
>> choice of colours/textures to emphasise it from say a 450 X 300.
>
> This *never* works in the landscape design progs, as they are
> incapable of generating truly random layouts with many different sizes
> of flags - I know; I've tried them all and even the best of them
> relies on using pre-set squares and then relying on human intervention
> to randomise.
>
> After 20-odd years, I still haven't found owt better than my
> own CAD system and library for random layouts. There's a few shortcuts
> one can use, but it's still a labour intensive exercise.
Isn't that what makes gardening so wonderful. Some things work, some don't.
And we live to try again next seaon and improve and move and learn.
Computers are great for some things (like urgling), but get out there,
learn, read, try, grow, make mistakes and do it all again next year.
Anything else is not gardening, it's Ground Force.
Jane
mystery" <aqua...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> is true, let alone write it here. Anyone who has visited scores of
>> private large gardens will have seen plenty which fulfill your
>> "designers" criteria and more..designed and made by amateur gardeners.
>
> YES and that too, with regret. I found it somewhat offensive to have garden
> designers put on such a pedastal when my experience is quite the contrary.
> There are some simple design principles which arhitects are familar with,
> yet qulaified garden desiners seem to be entirely ignorant of such matters.
Sweeeeeeeeping generalisation, what? Like as if all architects are good!
>>
Jane
<P.G....@btinternet.com> wrote:
Not only that, but must be a very stupid 'designer'. No reputable garden
designer or plantsperson sets foot inside a garden centre. 1. Plants are
often crap. 2. Range is limited. 3. Prices extortionate so mark-up is
limited. Any sensible one has a close relationship with local, specialist
nurseries whom, as it has been said, offer a discount and expert advice (and
respect to designers who they know are good).
>
> To bring the discussion back to a perennial URG topic - there would be far
> fewer Leylandii hedges planted if garden owners who do not know what to do
> about the bad view consulted a designer first. Manipulation of internal
> spaces and axes of view plus an inward (as oppose to outward) focus can
> often achieve the same objective as planting a 20 foot green wall.
>
Amen.
Jane
mystery" <aqua...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> However, in my experience, the people I've dealt with (clients) have a good
> grasp on the whole use of space thing. I would say that their intellectual
> contribution makes up about 90% + of the result. That -10% I apply through
> listening and suggestion is appreciated, but I still see it as their
> project, their garden. I'm good, actually, I'm very good, I've been called a
> garden Picasso and I am aware of the odd road accident due to the
> optical-emotional impact of what I can do, yet I'm not going to claim it was
> all my design.
1. You contradicted yourself. You said you were good, very good, but
actually your client did the design anyway. So it is your client who is
good, very good.
2. I thought this group was for amateur gardeners?
3. You are incredibly pretentious.
4. I would prefer to work for people who don't really know what they want,
speak to them and work with them to give them something amazing. You just
take someone's idea and implement is, tarting it up somewhat. I wouldn't
find that very satisfying.
5. The gardens that I've worked on are SO good that people have had cardiac
arrest passing by. Several women had multiple orgasms and one's triplets
were born 3 months premature. Honest! :-)
PaulK
"Jane" <ja...@the-summerhouse.tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:B92821BD.14B3%ja...@the-summerhouse.tiscali.co.uk...
> On 22/5/02 23:43, in article ach6u9$r1l$1...@knossos.btinternet.com, "PaulK"
> <P.G....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > > Shady and unprofessional practice. Most designers I know use trade
> > and worh either to normal retail mark up, or give some discount on
retail
> > prices.
> >
> Not only that, but must be a very stupid 'designer'. No reputable garden
> designer or plantsperson sets foot inside a garden centre. 1. Plants are
> often crap. 2. Range is limited. 3. Prices extortionate so mark-up is
> limited. Any sensible one has a close relationship with local, specialist
> nurseries whom, as it has been said, offer a discount and expert advice
(and
> respect to designers who they know are good).
And you must be a very stupid person who does not understand what they read.
Where did I say I (or any designer I know) use garden centres (other than in
extremis!). I wrote about
using trade nurseries and retail mark up. I work to a discount on retail
prices.
I suggest more care before tossing around insults next time.
pk
Janet Baraclough
from Jane <ja...@the-summerhouse.tiscali.co.uk> contains these words:
> 2. I thought this group was for amateur gardeners?
Maybe you don't yet know much about this group, or about usenet :-)
There's an abc for newcomers post every week which will help you. That
post will give you a link to the charter which describes the group's
remit.
The group includes, and welcomes, every kind of gardener from the person
who has just acquired their first windowsill potplant, to highly skilled
professional growers, nursery owners, head gardeners of large estates,
garden writers, designers, a hardlandscape expert, and some "amateur"
gardeners in their 70's and 80's. Some of them have been here many years
and others are new.
The thread you have responded to in a succession of posts was born and
laid to rest three weeks old...old history, in usenet terms, and old
threads are seldom revived after they stopped breathing. Also, you have
quoted the entirety of some extremely long posts in order to add a
couple of lines..please don't. Nobody wants ro download or read huge
ancient posts again (no insult to their authors). It's better to
abbreviate the post you're replying to, to just the points you're
addressing, as above.
Until new posters get the hang of everything, it's advisable to hang
back from controversial and personal remarks...they are likely to get
some sharp answers otherwise, which can be a bit disconcerting for those
unused to usenet.
Best wishes
Janet.
PaulK
> The message <B9282495.14B6%ja...@the-summerhouse.tiscali.co.uk>
> from Jane <ja...@the-summerhouse.tiscali.co.uk> contains these words:
>
> > 2. I thought this group was for amateur gardeners?
>
> Maybe you don't yet know much about this group, or about usenet :-)
> There's an abc for newcomers post every week which will help you. That
> post will give you a link to the charter which describes the group's
> remit.
snip
Janet,
Having in the past been critical of your robust treatment of some posts, may
I congratulate your excellent post and advice.
pk
Natural mystery
snip... way too much to wade through.
> >
> > However, in my experience, the people I've dealt with (clients) have a
good
> > grasp on the whole use of space thing. I would say that their
intellectual
> > contribution makes up about 90% + of the result. That -10% I apply
through
> > listening and suggestion is appreciated, but I still see it as their
> > project, their garden. I'm good, actually, I'm very good, I've been
called a
> > garden Picasso and I am aware of the odd road accident due to the
> > optical-emotional impact of what I can do, yet I'm not going to claim it
was
> > all my design.
>
> 1. You contradicted yourself. You said you were good, very >good, but
At my 10% . Sometimes more. (-:
You seem to have missed that bit.
> actually your client did the design anyway. So it is your client who is
> good, very good.
Not all clients and btw, there's been more than one.
But yes, I have encountered such excellence amongst clients. It meant their
abilities were at such a level that it was a doddle to raise the stakes.
You've been a tad selective in your intrepretation. You repeated what I said
exactly, yet evidently did not listen to "yet I'm not going to claim it was
all my design."
You also selected to snip a question I raised. In case you missed it...
"If their contribution is workable but the end product has been enhanced
through design, without any alteration to the requested brief, then who is
the primary designer?"
I'm good, but not so brilliant as to think I could answer that question,
simple though it may at first appear. It gets difficult. Answers have
consequences!
> 2. I thought this group was for amateur gardeners?
Yet you say;
> "4. I would prefer to work for people................"
Amateurs .. meaning not getting paid, as distinct from the wrong meaning
akin to the blind leading the blind?
But why direct that question at me?
There are 'professionals' whose presence is highly valued and their
commercial contactability displayed. I have not posted any form of business
contact. Not even my own url.
> 3. You are incredibly pretentious.
meaning; showy self-important
hmm. following pretension. Meaning
; The assertion of a claim to something. Like say;
>" It is
so successful that if I wish I could sell the idea and, like Del Boy, be a
miwllionaire."
Not something I would have said, especially when the idea (of spending money
on a positive venture outlay), had already been raised and worse, earlier in
the very same thread!
Perhaps all this angst you display relates to my follow up, inspite of my
being most complimentary on your advancement?
> 4. I would prefer to work for people who don't really know what they want,
> speak to them and work with them to give them something amazing.
What was that about pretentious (-:
I too experience such circumstances, but in that instance, I find their
grasp of options/ideas and subsequent desicions evolves as much with time,
as with immediate information. Otherwise, pretty much anything seems amazing
to them in the short term.
> You just
> take someone's idea and implement is, tarting it up somewhat. I wouldn't
> find that very satisfying.
If there is a 'perfect' idea, then what matter if it's theirs. If I can
develop/enchance it's effect it for them... all the better.
But you presume that I just implement what I am instructed.
That would be boring. I don't. If I disagree with a porposal, meaning
something they ask for does not sound aesthetically correct, then *I have to
prove it*. Prove it, meaning pre-implementation. If I can't, then it is
there is a possibility that the disagreeablness is purely a matter of taste
and it is *their* garden.
> 5. The gardens that I've worked on are SO good that people have had
cardiac
> arrest passing by. Several women had multiple orgasms and one's triplets
> were born 3 months premature. Honest! :-)
I've known areas of Natural Beauty to become accident blackspots. I've not
heard of other negative medical outcomes. such as you claim. You can't be
using the right formula (-:
p.j.