Elm,

Your comments are much appreciated. But the one with the more open standards was the one in the top photo. I had no problem the ZxTA seedling in that area. The photos simply didn't pick up the open standards of the (ZxJR)X TA. Nearly all my photos this year were taken under very windy conditions and it's hard to get the inherent form of a bloom when they are blowing about. You just have to settle for what you get. It's true I generally prefer closed standards, but I don't always object to open standards and they are quite often something easy to live with if everything else works. The bigger problem with the (ZxJR) X TA seedlings was really that of coarse texture and too much waving edges on both the standards and falls. Added to the open standards, they all added up to too many negatives. But the bloom also has some good qualities in an area where I've been short on finding something that works, so I was happy to get it and happy to see it sets pods.

But the standard descriptions for ABs are interesting. I'm not a judge and haven't read those. Basically I compare my seedlings to plants I grow that have been officially introduced. Those range from old historics to intros as new as last year. I compare them in terms of growth, habits (snaking, size of bloom in relation to stalk height - that sort of thing), color, markings. All those things. I couldn't tell you how good a seedling of mine is, but I can always say how they compare to what else I've grown or am growing that has been introduced. Always specific to my growing conditions, of course.

I think I'll post that other derivative of the experimental line. You can check out the standards on it. They were interesting.

Donald Eaves
donald@eastland.net
Texas Zone 7b, USA

--- In iris-photos@yahoogroups.com, Elmsterj@... wrote:
>
> Donald,
>
> I see no problem with either of the 2 seedlings you have shown that
> have come from 'Tel Aviv'. Both are lovely and graceful. Yes, the second
> one pictured has somewhat open standards. In my view, however, that is
> permissible because, sometimes, arilbreds have such wide standards that the
> standards have to move out around the stylecrests; otherwise, the standards
> would look too pinched and would twist. Quoting 3 sentences about arilbreds
> from the American Iris Society's Handbook for Judges and Show Officials:
> "Flower forms of these irises are very diverse and different from that of the
> tall bearded irises....Standards are usually rounded or broadly oval and
> may be domed and touching, overlapping slightly, or erect and open. They
> may be tailored, gently waving, ruffled, or reflexed outward on the sides
> (flagging)." p. 123 I know that Lowell Baumunk had some input on this
> section of the judges' handbook. I heard his presentation at one of our fall
> regional meetings, and I remember him stating that fact and stressing these
> points to judges in training as well as to judges. Don't fault that seedling
> for having somewhat open standards. Keep that seedling. It is beautiful.
> And don't be afraid to use it for breeding. I have used arilbreds with
> the same characteristics, for that can be bred out. However, I think that
> is a choice seedling. (Apologies for lecturing you, my friend.)
>
> Elm
>