Betty and Dana,
I've been to a couple of judges training sessions in the past few years,
and I too was told that the standards and falls had to be of equal
length. Drawn sketches to further illustrate the point were used. As a
result - - I look to see if it is balanced and I won't grow the iris if it
looks lopsided. I've noticed that some newer introduction in the past
several years more seem to be being introduced.
But, this iris different, it is almost like a "novelty" (if I can use
that term), because the standards were about half the length of falls (as I
remember) and more of a bubbled-look to the lacy standards. It gave the word
"iris" an all new look about it. (At least it did to me) Is it
possible this would/or could be considered a "novelty"?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 5:51
shorter lacy standards seemed to make this one quite
This quote is from Margie V's comment about Mid-America #12. I
agree that it is an absolutely gorgeous iris.
Several recent introductions appear to have shorter standards than
falls. I was taught, 20 years ago, that the standards and falls should
be of equal length. A plant was inferior if there was a noticeable
I've quickly scanned my judges training book and can't find this under
either balance or form. (garden section) Is there anything in the book about
short standards? Something I'm missing?
Yahoo! Groups Links