Re: SA seedling
- Subject: Re: SA seedling
- From: C* D* <c*@videotron.ca>
- Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 21:28:43 -0400
|
Mike,
The main problem here is over exposure. This
washes out what I consider to be a VERY striking flower. With digital,
you lose the lighlights like the old slide film and they're lost
forever. As for the bloom itself, it appears to be monster sized. I
have to hand it to you because my seedlings look very dated compared to the
magnificent form you have produced with your seedlings. It shows that
you've been working hard in the Space Age field and I take my hat off to you in
an era where interest in SA Irises seems to have been reduced to almost nothing.
Am I wrong with this assumption ?
Just out of curiosity, are SA's still selling well
? People seem to either love them or absolutely despise them. I've
kind of lost touch with the Iris mailing lists over the years so I don't really
know what the sentiments are these days towards Space Agers. My feeling
however, is that the interest is very low.
I still grow some Sutton intros up here in the
Laurentians after a decade of torture and some of them still hang in there
very nicely. FRENCH HORN continues to bloom on short stalks but is
consistent with appendage production. Another survivor is DOCTOR NO but
it's appendage shy but a wild grower. The sporadic and eratic HONEY SCOOP
continues to the the merry prankster of the garden playing its little
shenanagans in terms of appendage production. I used it with STAIRWAY to
produce a wonderful SA seedling the resembles STH but it has greenish standards
with consistant horns on each bloom.
Chris
|
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SA seedling
- From: M* S* &*
- Re: SA seedling
- References:
- SA seedling
- From: M* S* &*
- SA seedling
- Prev by Date: Re: [SPAM] Input for intros
- Next by Date: Re: Input for intros
- Previous by thread: RE: SA seedling
- Next by thread: Re: SA seedling