|
|
Johno 
-
-
Initial post
6 days ago by
MalinH
|
Not Mme Alfred Carrière
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 13 posted
6 days ago by
Nastarana
|
Out of curiosity,, how do you know? What characteristics are you looking at to make your determination?
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 13 posted
6 days ago by
jedmar
|
I agree too with MalinH. See the two photos I just posted:
- Mme AC has not very densely packed blooms, with petals which are more elongated
- The buds are ovoid pointed, not rounded
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#5 of 13 posted
5 days ago by
Nastarana
|
Thank you. I think I am seeing the difference, especially in the buds.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#2 of 13 posted
6 days ago by
Jay-Jay
|
I tend to agree on this.
The photo John took earlier is the real-one. You might compare Yourselves Nastarana.
Rose photo courtesy of Johno
Anglesey Abbey Gardens, UK, 23/6/23.
Uploaded 22 JUL 23
www.helpmefind.com/rose/l.php?l=21.413376
|
REPLY
|
|
It would be interesting to know whether the rose photographed repeat-flowers, which Johno isn't in a position to tell us.
|
REPLY
|
|
Looks like Félicité et Perpétue
|
REPLY
|
|
That was my kneejerk reaction too!
|
REPLY
|
|
Great minds Margaret!
The buds look like my 'White Pet', which of course, is a sport of Félicité et Perpétue.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#9 of 13 posted
4 days ago by
MalinH
Reply
#10 of 13 posted
3 days ago by
Johno
|
I am happy to remove the offending photos. The label was nailed to the post so I would assume the garden was sold an incorrect plant to begin with. I have to admit, I am finding it hard to identify the difference.
|
REPLY
|
|
It's easy if you've grown MME. Alfred. She's quite different.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#12 of 13 posted
3 days ago by
Jay-Jay
|
Hi Johno
Photo wasn't experienced as offending by me.
Maybe someone mixed up the labels.
And I agree with Robert Neil Rippetoe: Once growing this rose, You'll never confuse another rose for it.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#13 of 13 posted
yesterday by
MalinH
|
There are four more photos that you need to remove. Not Mme Alfred Carriere of none of your pictures.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
|
F, m, Kordes; flowers glowing purple, golden stamens , 7 cm., semi-double, shallow cup to flat, borne in large clusters, no fragrance; recurrent; foliage glossy; growth neat (1 m.).
-NO FRAGRANCE.
Man, what a waste of a unique color class.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 3 posted
4 DEC by
jedmar
|
ARS registration says no fragrance, Australian Trial report "moderate" fragrance. What is now correct?
|
REPLY
|
|
If enough people chime in, we might get an idea.
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#3 of 3 posted
5 DEC by
Johno
|
For the perfume assessors to score Purple Glow as they did, the rose definitely has some fragrance. The moderate result is clearly better than none or slight. While fragrance is subjective, I usually find all roses have something, even if it is just vegetative notes. I will check next time Purple Glow crosses my path.
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
1 DEC by
Johno
|
Sport of Peter Brock Foundation Rose (HARencore)
|
REPLY
|
Reply
#1 of 1 posted
1 DEC by
jedmar
|
Parentage added, thank you!
|
REPLY
|
-
-
Initial post
24 NOV by
Johno
|
Discovered by Daniel Knight.
Sport of Bonica.
|
REPLY
|
|
