Posted: 13/06/2013 at 21:44
Brummie Ben; I have been sitting here for 5 minutes, figuring out how to say this without causing offence, but it has to be said; that 'blue' rose is mauve, not blue. I am so fed up with buying aubretia that says 'blue' and it turns out magenta and so on... In every other area of design, colour is described accurately, why is it that plant nurseries get away with mis-describing colour?
This is not an attack on you or your lovely photos, but this whole 'blue rose' thing that has been going on for years does slightly smack of 'emperor's new clothes'
Not at all artjak, this is part of the reason why I posted it, to see what others thought. Personally it's light purple in my book, but the photoshopped pic in the T&M catalogue was definately blue. I'm undecided, but the fragrance is fantastic, I'm hoping once the plants get established, maybe the colour will deepen? I got them cheap as one of the 'you've bought 50 quids worth can we tempt you with these at half price?' deals they put on. There is a reason for garnering opinion, this is the same T&M that I paid £40 for 20 bulbs of replete and 20 of shrike. As my better half loves pink so I got these for mothers day. I'll show you what they all turned out as : 20130524_153542_1
, on Flickr 20130524_153558_2
, on Flickr 20130524_153649_2
, on Flickr
in the last photo I made sure some very light pink tulips were in shot to give a contrast.
now here is what T&M say they should look like :
Replete is a few down and shrike a little bit further. As you can see, shrike looked nothing like what I grew in form or colour, replete are similar 'tissue-paper' daffs, but all 40 of mine were apricot. They are resending entire order again, after I sent them these photos and said the 40 you sent me were in diff bags labelled differently, but they all grew the same? Yes artjak, you certainly won't offend me, old hand at calling a spade, a spade.