Re: [PHOTO] Re: Happenstance
- Subject: [PHOTO] Re: [PHOTO] Re: [iris-photos] Happenstance
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 17:38:42 EDT
In a message dated 5/28/2004 12:35:51 PM Central Daylight Time, email@example.com writes:
Bill, here is 'Happenstance' as it blooms here (when it doesn't freeze in the bud over winter). I don't think this matches what you have.
Other than for perhaps the violet infusions that your photo exhibits we likely have the same iris. When I viewed your photo, I went back and checked photos from the previous years of mine. My Apr. 26, 2003 photo is the closest parallel to your photo to my eyes. I'll be happy to send you one with which to check. It was growing under different conditions here each year.
In 2002 Happenstance almost died as do many first bloom season plants here. This is the 2002 photo. The pH was 8.1.
Following is a 2003 photo. A rhizome was moved to this location. It received some fertilizer at the time but I remember not what. Like 13-13-13. Date was Apr. 23.
This is another 2003 photo of a bloom from the same rhizome as the one above taken from a different direction and in afternoon shade.
In the summer of 2004 I added significant amounts of both organic matter and sand to the bed along with 5-20-20 under the rhizomes. The pH was checked at the time and measured about 7.5. The following photo was the result but is still the same plant, in the same location as the two previous 2003 photos.
I guess all this is sayin' little more than I like organic matter, sand, and 5-20-20 added to my native alkaline clay plus both photography skills and irises given opportunity improve with time.
I'll have to ask my wife if the improvement stuff is really true though.
I have no idea if this message is going to post as intended. It may be a little too fat.... Nope, I'll not be makin' another joke about my wife here.
|Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Yahoo! Groups Links
Other Mailing lists |
Author Index |
Date Index |
Subject Index |