hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: iris DIGEST V1 #393 Pics of historic iris for judges

Hi all,

I do agree Neil is awesome!

Pics of historic iris for judges  have available at
iris shows -- 

How curious, how bizarre, and what a coincidence  I
too am fiddling around with pictures.  Since our iris
club's past show, I've been wanting to make some kind
of picture list for judges, so they can identify say
the "100 most commonly shown historic iris".  ROOTS
had a great article on this!  

I'm doing a slide show for our iris club next week, on
this, and want to put the 100 (labeled on picture)
pictures in say an album on an internet photo archive
(e.g. Snapfish, PhotoWorks) so people could get the
pictures printed to use at their own shows.  Say 100 x
.30/print (or whatever they charge) would be 30.00,
they could put the pics they have printed out into
photo album pages in a notebook and have that
available at their shows.  Could also put these pics
on a cd to distribute.

We've heard, in shows at many venues, iris judges say
things like "of course no historic iris could possibly
win best of show", and also seen incorrectly-ID'd
historics entered in shows and the judges don't catch
it (not that they're going to know every iris in
existence!  that's where something like this would at
least be a help).  One of my very favorite iris is
ISOLINE, who has very characteristic droopy recurved
falls, which is part of her charm.  People who have
clerked for shows have said that some judges
criticized this part of ISOLINE, rather than judging
her as she is.  I'm hoping that having a photo
available might help this go in a better direction.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005
From: "Neil A Mogensen" <neilm@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [iris] Re: HYB:Product Identity
The idea of a photo (digital!) contributed along with
a registration is something I would greatly
Using a digital Nikon CoolPix 5000, expensive enough
that it should produce quality "accurate" photos has
taught me a lot on how to interpret the handbook.  The
color balance computer element of the camera seems to
be set to interpret the entire visual field as adding
up to 18% neutral gray, so if there's a background of
foliage, I get a pretty accurate color.  If the
background is brick-red rock, our native stone I use
in building  terraces and beds, the colors shift.
Time of day?  Makes a great difference.  The "color
temperature" of  light here, thanks to copious "crud"
in the lower atmosphere, varys greatly through the day
from quite warm to cool in mid-day.  High moderate
overcast in mid-day has given me the most accurate
color renditions of some of the red-violets with which
I work.
All, however, of the warm violet seedlings photograph
as more rose-pink, which they emphatically are not. 
I've had a few exceptions on odd quality days, perhaps
in partial shade, that have given more accurate color.
What would I submit with a registration?  I have no
idea.  The one that shows the branching, but the color
is skewed?  The one that interprets the colors but is
taken from above and gives not indication of scale,
spacing of branches and so on?
I wouldn't want to see *R&I's* or *Check Lists*
published with the photos unless a DVD or its
successor, now in development, were included in a
sleeve in the back of the book, containing the images.
 The online Registry, however, could incorporate a
link to a companion folder or folders for the image
quite easily (in comparison to the print copy) I would
I wonder how Mike Lowe would respond to Dr. Pries'
suggestion.  I would expect Mike and Anne to give
realistic responses to the idea.
In a few years the photo registry will happen anyway. 
That is the direction the world is moving.  We would
even begin filling in the blanks of the ancient and
not so ancient Historics.
Just using my crystal ball (so to speak) 
Neil Mogensen  z 7  Reg 4  western NC mountains
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *    
Sat, 18 Jun 2005
From: Robt R Pries <rpries@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [iris] Re: HYB:Product Identity

Eleanor: Our present system for verifying irises is
weak at best. But many of us buy the various
checklists and R&Is put out by the AIS and the various
sections. Recently I have been promoting the idea of
illustrated checklists. I have a few people that have
given objections to this. 
The main cause for concern is that pictures are
unreliable and different film and different cameras
will give different colors in print. My response to
this criticism is  .Dah .. Do you think we have been
living in the dark ages and just discovered imaging. I
think it would have to be a caveman or native
discovered on some remote island for a person to think
that images, prints whatever could be taking
literally. In fact the word descriptions we have can
not be taken literally, so I guess we should do away
with communication altogether. I get a little
impatient with people who have such a low opinion of
everyone else s intellect that they wish to limit
communication by photos because they think ! they are
the only one who knows the limitations. 
Adding photos to R&Is or checklists could certainly
provide additional information as to pattern of color
etc. that is almost impossible to convey in words. It
also can show elements of the carriage of the flower
that is not mentioned in descriptions. But Hey, I
think that pictures in checklists are something that
is self evident and the curmudgeons that are against
such should have to justify their position. Cost and
extra work are probably the two best excuses but if
these can be overcome why would anyone be opposed? 
Here I am on my soapbox again.

To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement