Because you gave us no ID-clues except its prior bush-height and a photo, I'll just say it "looks" a lot like the hybrid-tea rose Tiffany.

An ID-clue for Tiffany is that its fragrance-level is legendary. One of the strongest-smelling HTs.

Another ID-clue for Tiffany: its blooms quickly fade to a much lighter pink.

Another ID-clue: Tiffany has a much larger area of yellow at the petal-base than most pink roses with yellow at the petal-base.

Another ID-clue: The ARS says Tiffany has an average of 28 petals per bloom. The Tiffany in my yard tends to have fewer, usually in the 22-25 range.

Regards,
JohnReb

I would agree with JohnReb completely. The form, reported fragrance, and the yellowing at the petal bases is a
"lock": Tiffany.

I'm going to have to agree with you. After looking up a lot of pictures on "Tiffany" it does look a lot like my rose.

As for all those little "ID-tags". . . I never noticed a strong scent as it barely put out any blooms until after its transplant. It also looked like it was on death row until I pruned it way down to the ground so I couldn't have done much "IDing" on it until it bloomed a few days ago. Sheesh!

Tiffany or Pristine. I have both and they look identical colorwise just before the bud opens. Tiffany's petals open in layers just like the one above and so does Pristine. They both are highly fragrant. Thats where their similarity ends. Once fully open, you can see the difference.

Please forgive me vinelover, I have both roses, too - for many years. Pristine is not even a close guess.

I can think of a logical explanation for Vinelover's (surprising) guess of Pristine.

Like Vinelover and Rosetom, I grow both Pristine and Tiffany in my yard.

When I read Vinelover's post (above), my reaction was the same as Rosetom's ..."Pristine is not even a close guess."

First:
Vinelover says his/her Pristine blooms are "highly fragrant." But we know Pristine is NOT "highly fragrant." Not even close. (The ARS description of Prisitne says it has "slight" fragrance. HMF says "mild.")

Second:
Vinelover says he/she has both Tiffany and Pristine, and "they look identical colorwise just before the bud opens." But we know that even as an opening bud Pristine does not have Tiffany's big yellow petal-bases.

So... why is Vinelover reporting characteristics for Pristine that it does not have? I think the logical answer can only be... Vinelover's Pristine is a mis-labeled rose.

If that is the case, then what rose does Vinelover actually have? To me, it sounds like Vinelover is describing the blooms of Secret. It is highly fragrant rose, it has a lot of yellow at the petal-base, and its barely-opened buds CAN (in certain climates) look very similar to Tiffany.

When you look at a bunch of photos of a rose-variety at HelpMeFind, sometimes you see one photo that is "not even close" to what the rest of the photos look like. For a long time I have wondered why that happens. I think the answer is:
someone UN-KNOWINGLY contributed a photo of a mis-labeled rose.

Approximately ten days ago, in another thread, I mentioned that I insisted for two years in these forums that Oklahoma has mild fragrance and only about 25 petals - because I was describing the "Oklahoma" I had bought and planted in my yard. Then in 2004 I discovered my "Oklahoma" was actually a mis-labeled bodybag bareroot. Color me dark-red with embarrassment!

I'm just glad I never contributed a photo of it into HelMeFind's collection of Oklahoma photos!

But (quite obviously in some cases), other people have done that - because they innocently believed the INCORRECT paper identification-label on the "Oklahoma" (or "Pristine") rosebush they bought.

Regards,
JohnReb

JohnReb,

Your considerate thought makes me embarassed (although, I did say, "Please forgive me ..."). You are most likely correct, of course. The only reasonable explanation is that vinelover has a rose mislabeled as Pristine.

I spent several years agreeing with people how tall Folklores can grow!!;-)

LOL, Rosetom!

No worries, bro. The "please forgive me" was due-ly noted at the time you said it. : )

And, it's kinda comforting to hear I'm not the only "rose-ID detective" here who has given firm testimony about the ID-characteristics of what he later learns is a mis-labeled rose. ;-)

Regards,
JohnReb