Some roses from my garden in August, 2011

Scepter’d Isle

 

Wollerton Old Hall

 

Munstead Wood

 

Lady Emma Hamilton

 

James Galway

 

The Lady's Blush

 

Alan Titchmarsh

 

The Alnwick Rose

 

The Ingenious Mr. Fairchild

 

Gentle Hermione

Thanks for looking!
robert

Kasie

Do you have a Lady of Shalott or Teasing Georgia? I'm trying to decide which I might prefer. Photos of real roses in real gardens can be so helpful.

Kate

I have a question. Alan Titchmarch and The Ingenious Mr. Fairchild look very similar to me. Can you describe what the differences are between these two roses? In other words if have TIMF (which I actually do) do I need AT, too?

Robert, thanks for taking the time to post your beauties here!

Christina

Seil, I'm glad you like them, thanks for looking.

Thanks for commenting Kasie!

bgrose, that's Sceptre'd Isle, one of my very favourite Austins. It's nearly perfect in every way, and I agree, the photo reminds me of a lotus. Queen of Sweden is another one that really has that look of a lotus.

Kate, I had Teasing Georgia in California and was completely underwhelmed by it. On the other hand, I've seen Lady of Shalott at Austin's gardens several times and each time I am completely blown away by it. I never thought I'd be tempted by a rose of that colour, but it always looks so energetic and just bursting with flowers, I suspect it might prove to be one of Austin's best over the years. Here are some photos of The Lady...

Teasing Georgia:

Hosenemesis, (love your name!), thank you for the very nice words, I really appreciate it. :)

Christina, I love Scepter'd Isle a lot. It seems to always be in bloom, has a strong scent, forms a nice bush, and I love the shape and colour of the flowers. It's one that goes on my "permanent must own" list.

I bought Alan Titchmarsh and The Ingenious Mr Fairchild at the same time, it will be three years this Autumn. They are very similar, and I'd have a hard time choosing between them. Both have better flowers later in the year, with stronger scents then too, although both put on a very strong first flush. They both tend to ball a bit during the spring flush, Alan more than Fairchild. Alan is a much nicer bush, much fuller with a lot more flowers on him, but I like Fairchild's flowers more, and the scent is, perhaps, slightly stronger. I really don't know which one I would choose if I had to choose between them, on the other hand, neither is at the top of my list of favourites, but I'd be happy to give room to either in my garden in the future. Both seem equally disease resistant as well. Soooooo.... Alan... better bush, more flowers; Fairchild, nicer flowers, stronger scent, but more stick shaped bush with flowers tending towards the end of longish canes.

Thanks again everyone, I'm glad you enjoyed the photos.

robert

My favs are: Alan Titchsmarch and The Ingenious Mr. Fairchild. I also really like The Lady of Shallott. IMO - those three would look sensational together!!!!

That was a real treat!!
Thanks,
Carol

Thanks.

Kate

Out of all these, if I had to grow only one it would be Scepter'd Isle, for all the reasons mentioned above.

Others that would be high on my list:
Princess Alexandra of Kent: Huge blooms, good scent, healthy.
Sharifa Asma: The best smelling of all. Lovely blooms too. Gets some blackspot, but doesn't slow her down.
Eglantyne: Beautiful flowers, medium scent, if it was stronger she would be a contender for highest spot.
Strawberry Hill: Wants to climb. Great flowers, good repeat, strong scent, healthy.
Gentle Hermione: Lovely flowers, as Austin says... at all stages. Really beautiful rose. Healthy, fragrant, but slowish to repeat.
Queen of Sweden: Like Eglantyne, really incredibly beautiful and delicate, but even lighter on the scent (to my nose at least). This bush is very upright with the flowers at the top opening like waterlilies. If it was stronger scented, it would be very high on my list.
James Galway. I just got this rose and wonder why I overlooked it for so many years? It has an incredible scent for me, very strong old rose and I really like the frayed petals. If it keeps doing what it is doing for me now, it will climb high on the list.

Ones that I wouldn't buy again:
Heritage: In California it was absolutely covered in rust and mildew like no other rose I know. I loved it when it was healthy, but it became completely out of control, and I'm an organic no spray gardener, so it had to go.
Gertrude Jekyll: For some, this scent is amazing. For me, it's just okay and the flowers weren't that becoming. Blah.
The Wedgewood Rose: It just droops it's flowers. Weak, not enough fragrance, a mistake so far.. but who knows... it is still young and may make it off this list.
Cottage Rose: Another rusty rose without enough redeeming qualities to keep it.

If you'd consider an off pink, I'd highly recommend St Cecilia which brings me great joy every time I see the bush or smell the flowers. One of my very favourite Austins.

Cheers,
robert

The photos of Lady of Shallot are irresistible lovely! She has a color that I wouldn't consider normally, but this one could get me to make an exception.

What you have to say about Heritage doesn't sound good. That is very interesting for me since I have a Heritage waiting in my pot ghetto to be planted. I wanted to put her in a very prominent spot, but I may reconsider my decision, since my rose has mildew and does not look to good right now. But I was thinking it is due to her pot live, hmmm...

Thanks for all your input here, Robert!

Christina

Ingrid

Seil, to clarify, Gertrude wasn't bad for disease, I just didn't like her. I didn't like the flower shape, I didn't like the bush shape (I tried her on a pillar and that helped), and ultimately, while I liked her scent enough, it wasn't the overpowering thing so many others seem to smell with her. I don't think my nose it tuned to the "portland" scent, it doesn't knock me over like bourbons or most of the Austins, so I think I must prefer the sweet scents. I just didn't like Gert enough to ever wish to grow her again.

Ingrid, lovely to see you. I hope you enjoy your Mr. Fairchild. Right now he has a great scent in my garden, definitely a rose that does better for me later in the season.

cheers!
robert

Mantis, well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I much prefer the close up shots and the photos of the entire bush rarely appeal to me. Usually, I'm not posting to try to inform someone of what the bush looks like; my own goal is to try to capture the beauty that I see in the blooms. I challenge myself by trying to take nice photos, emphasising the colours and shapes of the flowers, and usually trying to blur out the backgrounds using an open aperture so the focus is just where I want it. That's the challenge and joy for me, and why I post here, it's more than a photo of a rose, it's an expression of what I find so beautiful in them, and hopefully, also an expression of my particular view as a photographer.

cheers,
robert

Take your Lady shots, for example. The first close-up pic suggests a very orangey tone. The full bush shot reveals a more yellow impression, while pic 3 & especially 4 suggest a strong pinkish impression. Apparently, there is coloration change as the blossom ages, and the blossom clearly has multi-faceted hues. But I would never know that pictures 1 and 4 are of the same flower. All are artistically satisfying, but I suspect that the full bush shot best represents reality. Perhaps they are taken at different locations or under different light conditions. Also, if there were only the first pic of the Lady, I would have little idea of the size of the rose.

I once had a friend who had a photographer friend of hers take a series of pictures of her garden as a record of that season's blooms. He produced a beautiful series of close-ups, many of very tiny flowers; but she was disappointed, because although the pictures were artistically satisfying, they completely lacked context.

I don't say there isn't a place for close-ups; they can convey details that even an intermediate shot misses. I just wish more posters would give us more context in their shots and try to convey the garden impression of the flower (including size). There seems to be a general approach of taking a photo as close up as possible in an effort to "wow" us or to imitate the often misleading photos of hybridizers.

Carol

Cheers,
robert